Opinion
2:21-cv-1120-WBS-KJN
06-25-2021
CALVIN RUSH, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF FAIRFIELD, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING IFP REQUEST
(ECF, 2.)
KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiffs requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), and the motion was referred to the undersigned by the assigned district judge. (ECF Nos. 2, 3.) Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1915 authorizes the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees or security” by a person that is unable to pay such fees. Plaintiffs' affidavits make the required showing, and so their request to proceed IFP is GRANTED. See, e.g., Ketschau v. Byrne, 2019 WL 5266889, *1 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 17, 2019) (“A person is eligible if they are unable to pay the costs of filing and still provide the necessities of life . . . This generally includes incarcerated individuals with no assets and persons who are unemployed and dependent on government assistance.”). This matter is referred back to the assigned district judge. =