Kuuriraya v. Houston Independent School District

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
NKOZI KUURIRAYA,
Plaintiff,
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
v. 	CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:25-cv-3283
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
ON THIS DAY the Court1 has considered Plaintiff Nkozi Kuuriraya’s
(“Plaintiff”) 	Motion 	to 	Proceed 	In 	Forma 	Pauperis 	(“IFP”). 	(ECF 	No. 	6).
Plaintiff filed an application and declaration under penalty of perjury in
support of the Motion. (Id.).
“A plaintiff is allowed to proceed in civil cases without the payment of
fees or costs if the Court finds that such person is unable to pay such costs or
give security therefor. 	42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)-5(f)(1)(a).” 	Voss v. Kijakazi, No.
6:22-cv-173, 	2022 	WL 	20209828, 	at 	*1 	(E.D. 	Tex. 	May 	10, 	2022). 	“In
determining whether to grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, a court
considers only an applicant’s economic status.” 	Id. 	“To qualify for in forma
1 This case was referred to the Undersigned for all purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72. (ECF No. 15).
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
December 04, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-03283 Document 16 Filed 12/04/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 6

2 / 6
pauperis status, a party need not be absolutely destitute but must be unable
to pay the legal costs and still provide for herself and her dependents.” 	Id.
(citing Bright v. Hickman, 96 F. Supp. 2d 572, 575 (E.D. Tex. 2000)). 	“An
affidavit supporting a motion to proceed in forma pauperis suffices if it states
that due to poverty the movant cannot afford to pay the costs and still provide
for himself and his dependents.” 	Id. (citing Mitchell v. Champs Sports, 42 F.
Supp. 2d 642, 648 (E.D. Tex. 1998)). “The district court exercises discretion in
determining whether to extend the privilege of IFP status to plaintiffs who are
unable to pay filing fees.” 	Hauptrief v. Telford, No. 24-cv-00281, 2024 WL
2871444, at *1 (W.D. Tex. May 3, 2024).
In Plaintiff’s application, he states he works for Nubia Maya Religious
Assembly, earning $26,600.00 a year, and that his take-home pay or wages are
$1,300.00. 	(ECF No. 6 at 1). 	Plaintiff claims he does not own any items of
value. (Id. at 2). Plaintiff does not list any dependents in his application (id.)
but states he has four children in a revised declaration he filed in support of
his application (ECF No. 5 at 3). Plaintiff states his expenses total $832.00 per
month but he does not describe what these expenses cover. 	(ECF No. 6 at 2).
However, he later states that he spends $1,272.00 total per month on his motel
stay, food, and cell phone. 	(Id. at 8). 	As for debts or financial obligations,
Case 4:25-cv-03283 Document 16 Filed 12/04/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 6

3 / 6
Plaintiff states “$44,449 Department of Education, Comcast and Credit One
Bank.” (Id. at 2).
Plaintiff also attached documents to his application. 	(See id.). 	One
document appears to show earnings from a temporary position with Houston
Independent School District where the listed annual salary was $64,000.00.
(Id. at 3). According to that document, it appears Plaintiff was paid $2,209.70
for the pay period of December 9, 2024–December 22, 2024. 	(Id.). 	The other
documents allegedly show student loan balances (id. at 4), other debt balances
(id.), a hotel receipt that appears to have been paid for (id. at 5), a photo of a
computer 	screen 	that 	shows 	a 	checking 	account 	with 	a 	balance 	of
approximately $4,000.00 (id. at 6), and a photo of a retirement savings account
(id. at 7) containing $7,536.57.
Lastly, Plaintiff attached a document that states he currently serves as
a minister, his annual income is approximately $26,600 or about $1,300 per
month, and that his income is primarily used for religious purposes and church
start-up costs rather than personal use. 	(Id. at 8). 	Plaintiff also states he is
currently homeless and residing temporarily in a motel. 	(Id.). 	For his motel
stay, food, and cell phone, Plaintiff states he spends $1,272.00 total per month.
(Id.).
Case 4:25-cv-03283 Document 16 Filed 12/04/25 in TXSD Page 3 of 6

4 / 6
If 	Plaintiff 	spends 	between 	$832.00 	and 	$1,272.00 	per 	month 	on
expenses, that appears to encompass most of his monthly income. However,
the 	Court 	notes 	that 	Plaintiff 	indicates 	he 	has 	additional 	resources 	of
approximately $4,000.00 in a checking account and $7,536.57 in a retirement
savings account. (ECF No. 6 at 6–7).
It is also unclear whether Plaintiff has dependents. 	(See ECF No. 5 at
3; ECF No. 6 at 2). Ultimately, it is Plaintiff’s burden to show he is entitled to
proceed IFP, and any confusion cuts against his application. 	See Linwood v.
Fin. Am., LLC, No. 3:24-cv-1963, 2024 WL 3682299, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 6,
2024). 	Assuming 	Plaintiff 	does 	not 	have 	any 	dependents, 	he 	would 	be
considered a family of one. The applicable poverty guideline for a family of one
is $15,650. 	U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Office of the
Assistant 	Secretary 	for 	Planning 	and 	Evaluation, U.S. 	Federal 	Poverty
Guidelines Used to Determine Financial Eligibility for Certain Programs,
https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines (last
visited December 2, 2025). 	Based on his sworn application, Plaintiff’s annual
household income totals $26,600, which is well above the poverty guideline for
a family of one.
Based on his income as a family of one, combined with the additional
resources 	of his 	checking and retirement accounts, 	the 	Court finds that
Case 4:25-cv-03283 Document 16 Filed 12/04/25 in TXSD Page 4 of 6

5 / 6
Plaintiff's application shows he has resources to pay the $405.00 filing fee. See
Moates v. Biden, No. 6:22-cv-626, 2022 WL 3566451, at *1 (W.D. Tex. June 29,
2022), 	report 	and 	recommendation 	adopted, 	No. 	6:22-cv-626, 	2022 	WL
18110176 (W.D. Tex. Oct. 18, 2022) (finding a plaintiff over the poverty line
and with $122 in a checking account showed he had enough resources to pay
the applicable filing fee).
Based on the foregoing, the Court RECOMMENDS Plaintiff’s Motion to
Proceed IFP (ECF No. 6) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Should this Memorandum and Recommendation be adopted by the
District Court Judge, Plaintiff must pay the full filing fee of $405.00 or submit
a clarifying motion to proceed IFP showing that he is entitled to proceed
without 	payment 	of 	fees 	within 	21 	days 	of 	the 	Order 	adopting 	the
Memorandum and Recommendation. 	Failure to comply may result in this
Court recommending the case be dismissed without prejudice under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
The Clerk shall send copies of this Memorandum and Recommendation
to the respective parties who have fourteen days from the receipt thereof to file
written objections thereto pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)
and General Order 2002-13. Failure to file written objections within the time
Case 4:25-cv-03283 Document 16 Filed 12/04/25 in TXSD Page 5 of 6

6 / 6
period mentioned shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking the factual
findings and legal conclusions on appeal.
SIGNED in Houston, Texas on December 4, 2025.
Richard W. Bennett
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 4:25-cv-03283 Document 16 Filed 12/04/25 in TXSD Page 6 of 6