Raker v. United States Department of Health and Human Services et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Edward Raker,
Plaintiff,
v.
United States Department of Health and
Human Services, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-26-02938-PHX-JAT
ORDER
Previously this Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP”) but required Plaintiff to amend his application. Specifically, the Order stated:
A. Ability to Pay
“There is no formula set forth by statute, regulation, or case law to
determine when someone is poor enough to earn IFP status.” Escobedo v.
Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1235 (9th Cir. 2015). “An affidavit in support of
an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the
court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” Id. at 1234 (citing Adkins
v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948)).
… Here, Plaintiff states that he receives $2,600.00 per month in social
security benefits and has $1,970.00 per month in expenses. (Doc. 3). Plaintiff
does not specify what expenses (like taxes or Medicare part b) are deducted
from his monthly benefit. If Plaintiff actually has $630.00 per month in
discretionary funds after expenses, he can afford the filing fee. However, it
appears that the application is incomplete.
The Court will grant in forma pauperis status, but require Plaintiff to
file an amended application to determine if in forma pauperis status should
be revoked after consideration of all expenses. In the amended application,
Plaintiff must specify how much discretionary income he has monthly after
all expenses. If Plaintiff fails to file the amended application, or pay the filing
fee, within the deadline set below, the Court will revoke in forma pauperis
status and dismiss the complaint in this case without prejudice.
(Doc. 6).
Case 2:26-cv-02938-JAT Document 10 Filed 05/07/26 Page 1 of 3

- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
As required in the prior order, Plaintiff filed an amended IFP application. (Doc. 8).
Plaintiff’s expenses in the new application exceed his income because he reduced his
monthly social security benefit to $150.00 (from $2,600). (Id.). This Court is supposed to
deny or revoke IFP status if the allegation of poverty is untrue. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
Here, the Court does not believe, in a broad sense, that the allegation of poverty is untrue;
however, the Court seriously questions whether the amended IFP application is fully
truthful. In other words, the Court is doubtful that 94% of Plaintiff monthly social security
benefit is taken out for taxes and Medicare expenses.
Nonetheless, because in the broad sense the Court does not believe the allegation of
poverty is untrue, the Court will not continue to go around with Plaintiff attempting to get
him to file a fully accurate IFP application. If Defendants so choose, they may move for
sanctions, up to seeking dismissal of this case, if they believe inaccuracies in the IFP
application warrant sanctions.
Plaintiff has also requested service by the U.S. Marshals. The Court will grant this
request. See Boudette v. Barnette, 923 F.2d 754, 756–57 (9th Cir. 1991).
Based on the foregoing,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s amended motion to proceed in forma pauperis
(Doc. 8) is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s motion for service by the U.S.
Marshals. (Doc. 9). Thus, service by waiver or service of the summons and complaint
shall be at government expense on the Defendants by the U.S. Marshal or his authorized
representative. The Court directs the following:
(1) The Clerk of Court must send Plaintiff a service packet including the
Complaint, this Order and the Order at Doc. 6, USM form 285, and both summons and
request for waiver forms for each of the two Defendants.
(2) Plaintiff must complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court
within 14 days of the date of filing of this Order. The United States Marshal will not
provide service of process if Plaintiff fails to comply with this Order.
Case 2:26-cv-02938-JAT Document 10 Filed 05/07/26 Page 2 of 3

- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(3) If Plaintiff does not obtain either a waiver of service or complete service on
Defendants by July 28, 2026, this action may be dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
(4) A Defendant who agrees to waive service of the Summons and Complaint
must return the signed waiver forms to the United States Marshal, not the Plaintiff.
Dated this 7th day of May, 2026.
Case 2:26-cv-02938-JAT Document 10 Filed 05/07/26 Page 3 of 3