United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ENTRY GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS, SCREENING COMPLAINT, AND DIRECTING SERVICE OF
Jane Magnus-Stinson, Chief Judge.
before the Court are Plaintiff Brenda Lynn White's
Complaint, [Filing No. 1], and Motion for Leave to
Proceed In Forma Pauperis, [Filing No. 2].
This Order addresses Ms. White's Motion, screens her
Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and
directs service of process.
to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
U.S.C. § 1915(a) permits the Court to authorize a
plaintiff to file a lawsuit “without prepayment of
fees” if the plaintiff “submits an
affidavit” demonstrating that she lacks the assets to
pay the filing fee at this time. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
Ms. White's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis, , meets this standard and is therefore
GRANTED. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
Court notes that, while in forma pauperis status
allows the plaintiff to proceed without pre-payment
of the filing fee, the plaintiff remains liable for the full
fee. Robbins v. Switzer, 104 F.3d 895, 898 (7th Cir.
1997) (Every in forma pauperis litigant is liable
for the filing fee; “all [18 U.S.C.] § 1915(a)
does for any litigant is excuse the pre-payment of
fees”) (emphasis in original). The Court does not have
the authority to waive the filing fee, and it remains due
despite plaintiff's in forma pauperis status.
Fiorito v. Samuels, 2016 WL 3636968, *2 (C.D. Ill.
2016) (“The Court does not have the authority to waive
a filing fee”); McDaniel v. Meisner, 2015 WL
4773135, *5 (E.D. Wis. 2015) (same principle). The filing fee
for in forma pauperis litigants is $350.
See USDC Fee Schedule at
(stating that the $400 filing fee includes a $50
administrative fee, but that the administrative fee
“does not apply to…persons granted in forma
pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915”).
Immediate payment is not required; however, the $350 balance
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court shall dismiss a
case brought by a plaintiff proceeding in forma
pauperis “at any time if the court determines that
. . . the action . . . is frivolous or malicious; . . . fails
to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or . . .
seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from
such relief.” In determining whether a complaint states
a claim, the Court applies the same standard as when
addressing a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6). See Lagerstrom v. Kingston, 463
F.3d 621, 624 (7th Cir. 2006). To survive dismissal:
[the] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim for relief that is
plausible on its face. A claim has facial plausibility when
the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to
draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable
for the misconduct alleged.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
White checked a box on her Complaint indicating her intent to
invoke the Court's diversity jurisdiction. [Filing
No. 1 at 3.] She alleges that she is a citizen of
Indiana and that Defendant American Family Mutual Insurance
Company (“American Family”) is
incorporated under the laws of Wisconsin with its principal
place of business in Wisconsin. [Filing No. 1 at
3-4.] She further ...