Mousavi v. University of New Mexico Hospital

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
BEHNAM KHEYRADDINI MOUSAVI,
Plaintiff,
v. 	No. 1:25-cv-01326-SCY
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HOSPITAL,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS,
GRANTING MOTION TO FILE ELECTRONICALLY
AND FOR SERVICE
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff’s Complaint for a Civil Case
Alleging Negligence, Doc. 1, filed December 31, 2025 (“Complaint”), Plaintiff’s Application to
Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs, Doc. 3, filed December 31, 2025, and
Plaintiff’s Motion for Electronic Filing, Doc. 4, filed December 31, 2025.
Order Granting Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
The statute for proceedings in forma pauperis, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), provides that the Court
may authorize the commencement of any suit without prepayment of fees by a person who submits
an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets the person possesses and that the person is unable
to pay such fees.
When a district court receives an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis,
it 	should 	examine 	the 	papers 	and 	determine 	if 	the 	requirements 	of
[28 U.S.C.] § 1915(a) are satisfied. If they are, leave should be granted. Thereafter,
if the court finds that the allegations of poverty are untrue or that the action is
frivolous or malicious, it may dismiss the case[.]
Menefee v. Werholtz, 368 Fed.Appx. 879, 884 (10th Cir. 2010) (citing Ragan v. Cox, 305 F.2d 58,
60 (10th Cir. 1962). “The statute [allowing a litigant to proceed in forma pauperis] was intended
Case 1:25-cv-01326-DHU-SCY Document 7 Filed 01/07/26 Page 1 of 5

2
for the benefit of those too poor to pay or give security for costs....” 	Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de
Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 344 (1948). While a litigant need not be “absolutely destitute,”
“an affidavit is sufficient which states that one cannot because of his poverty pay or give security
for the costs and still be able to provide himself and dependents with the necessities of life.”
Id. at 339.
The Court grants Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying
Fees or Costs. Plaintiff signed an affidavit stating he is unable to pay the costs of these proceedings
and provided the following information: (i) Plaintiff’s average monthly income amount during the
past 12 months is $600.00; (ii) Defendant’s monthly expenses total $550.00; and (iii) Defendant
has $0.00 in cash and $1,517.26 in bank accounts. The Court finds that Plaintiff is unable to pay
the costs of this proceeding because he signed an affidavit stating he is unable to pay the costs of
this proceeding and because his monthly expenses are approximately equal to his low monthly
income.
Order Granting Motion to File Electronically
Plaintiff filed a CM/ECF Pro Se Account Registration Form which the Court construes as
a Motion to File Electronically. The Court grants Plaintiff permission to file electronically in this
case only. See Guide for Pro Se Litigants at 13, District of New Mexico (October 2022) (“approval
to electronically file documents within a case must be granted by the presiding judge for each case
in which the pro se litigant wishes to file using their CM/ECF account”). The Court will revoke
permission to file electronically if Plaintiff abuses his electronic filing privilege or fails to comply
with the rules and procedures in the District of New Mexico’s Guide for Pro Se Litigants and the
District of New Mexico’s CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Manual. 	Account registration
forms, procedure manuals, and other information can be obtained at the Court’s website at
Case 1:25-cv-01326-DHU-SCY Document 7 Filed 01/07/26 Page 2 of 5

3
http://www.nmd.uscourts.gov/filing-information. 	This Order only grants Plaintiff permission to
participate in CM/ECF; Plaintiff is responsible for registering to become a participant. 	See
CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Manual, District of New Mexico (Revised June 2024).
Plaintiff may contact the Court regarding CM/ECF registration by phone at (505) 348-2075 or via
email at cmecf@nmd.uscourts.gov.
Order for Service
The Court has authorized Plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states the Court must order that “service be made
by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed by the court” “if
the 	plaintiff 	is 	authorized 	to 	proceed 	in 	forma 	pauperis 	under 	28 	U.S.C. 	§ 1915.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). The Court orders the United States Marshals Service to serve Defendant
University of New Mexico Hospital with a summons and a copy of the Complaint, Doc. 1, filed
December 31, 2025.
Case Management
Generally, pro se litigants are held to the same standards of professional
responsibility as trained attorneys. It is a pro se litigant’s responsibility to become
familiar with and to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local
Rules of the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico (the “Local
Rules”).
Guide for Pro Se Litigants at 4, United States District Court, District of New Mexico (October
2022). The Local Rules, the Guide for Pro Se Litigants and a link to the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure are available on the Court’s website: http://www.nmd.uscourts.gov.
Failure to comply with Court Orders and the Federal and Local Rules of Civil Procedure
interferes with the judicial process and may result in monetary and non-monetary sanctions
including filing restrictions and dismissal of this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff
Case 1:25-cv-01326-DHU-SCY Document 7 Filed 01/07/26 Page 3 of 5

4
fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss
the action”); Gustafson v. Luke, 696 Fed.Appx. 352, 354 (10th Cir. 2017) (“Although the language
of Rule 41(b) requires that the defendant file a motion to dismiss, the Rule has long been
interpreted to permit courts to dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute or
comply with the rules of civil procedure or court's orders.”) (quoting Olsen v. Mapes,
333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)).
Compliance with Rule 11
The Court reminds Plaintiff of his obligations pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. See Yang v. Archuleta, 525 F.3d 925, 927 n. 1 (10th Cir. 2008) (“Pro se status
does not excuse the obligation of any litigant to comply with the fundamental requirements of the
Federal Rules of Civil and Appellate Procedure.”). Rule 11(b) provides:
Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written
motion, or other paper--whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating
it--an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's
knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the
circumstances:
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law
or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law
or for establishing new law;
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified,
will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further
investigation or discovery; and
(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if
specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b). Failure to comply with the requirements of Rule 11 may subject Plaintiff to
sanctions, including monetary penalties and nonmonetary directives. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c).
Case 1:25-cv-01326-DHU-SCY Document 7 Filed 01/07/26 Page 4 of 5

5
IT IS ORDERED that:
(i) 	Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without repaying Fees or Costs,
Doc. 3, filed December 31, 2025, is GRANTED.
(ii) 	Plaintiff’s Motion for Electronic Filing, Doc. 4, filed December 31, 2025, is
GRANTED.
(iii) 	The United States Marshals Service shall serve Defendant University of New
Mexico Hospital with a summons and a copy of the Complaint, Doc. 1, filed
December 31, 2025, via the address provided in the Complaint (Doc. 1 at 2):
University of New Mexico Hospital
Public Teaching Hospital / Health Care Provider
2211 Lomas Blvd NE
Albuquerque, Bernalillo County
New Mexico 87106
SO ORDERED.
_____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 1:25-cv-01326-DHU-SCY Document 7 Filed 01/07/26 Page 5 of 5