Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 5, 2025

Garcia v. Social Security Administration

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:25-cv-04618
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Garcia v. Social Security Administration, Judge Abrams ordered Samantha Garcia to pay $405 or correct her request to proceed without fees.

Who this affects

Samantha Garcia and the minor child, S.S.; the order requires Garcia to pay the filing fees or submit a corrected fee-waiver application.

What happened

In Garcia v. Social Security Administration, Samantha Garcia brought an action without a lawyer on behalf of her minor child, S.S. She asked to proceed without paying the filing fees, but answered the financial questions about her child rather than herself.

The court said it could not decide the request because Garcia had not provided enough information about her income, expenses, and how she pays those expenses. The court ordered her, within 30 days, either to pay $405 or submit a corrected request explaining why she cannot pay.

Judge Ronnie Abrams stated that the action will be dismissed if Garcia does not comply. The court also denied permission to proceed without fees for an appeal from this order, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Garcia v. Social Security Administration · No. 1:25-cv-04618
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
June 5, 2025

Background

Samantha Garcia brought this action without a lawyer on behalf of her minor child, S.S. To start a federal civil action, a plaintiff generally must pay $405 in fees, consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $55 administrative fee, or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying the fees. That application is commonly called an IFP application.

Garcia submitted an IFP application, but she answered the financial questions about S.S.'s finances rather than her own. Because she is bringing the action on behalf of her child, the court said she must provide information about her own financial situation.

Court’s Action

The court did not rule on the IFP application because Garcia had not supplied enough information about her income, expenses, and how she pays those expenses. Within 30 days of the order, she must either pay the $405 in fees or submit an amended IFP application labeled with docket number 25-CV-4618 (RA). The amended application must provide facts showing that she cannot pay the filing fees.

The court stated that if Garcia does not comply within the permitted time, the action will be dismissed. The court also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. This order did not decide the underlying claims against the Social Security Administration.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.