Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- 1:20-cv-10534
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Gardephe ordered payment or an IFP application by February 8, 2021, or dismissal.
Maria Diaz Sanchez was required to pay the $402 filing and administrative fees or submit a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees by February 8, 2021. The action would be dismissed if she did not comply.
What happened
In Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security, Maria Diaz Sanchez filed a complaint without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them. The court said she was proceeding without a lawyer.
The court ordered Sanchez to pay $402 or submit a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees by February 8, 2021. If she did not comply, the action would be dismissed. No answer was required at that time.
Judge Gardephe also denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The court directed the Clerk to vacate Docket No. 4.
The detailed version
- Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-10534
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- Jan. 7, 2021
Background
Maria Diaz Sanchez brought the action without a lawyer. She submitted the complaint without paying the required filing and administrative fees and without an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.
Order
The court explained that filing a civil action in the Southern District of New York generally requires payment of $402: a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee. Instead, Sanchez could request permission to proceed without prepaying those fees by submitting a signed and completed IFP application.
The court ordered Sanchez, by February 8, 2021, to either pay the $402 or submit a completed IFP application labeled with docket number 20-CV-10534. If the court granted the application, she would be permitted to proceed without prepaying the fees. If she did not comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed.
Other Directions and Disposition
No answer was required at that time. The court stated that, after payment or a grant of IFP status, it would issue a new order concerning service and scheduling. The Clerk of Court was directed to vacate Docket No. 4.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. This order addressed filing requirements and did not decide the merits of Sanchez's Social Security claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.