Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Godifay v. Berryhill, 22:17-cv-01433-JAD-CWH. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170703c87 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 30, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 30, 2017
Summary: MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE AN AMENDED APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND/OR FILING FEE C.W. HOFFMAN, Jr. , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Haileslassie Godifay hereby moves the Court for an extension of time by seven (7) days from June 29, 2017 to July 6, 2017, for Plaintiff to pay the $350.00 filing fee, plus the $50.00 administrative fee, or an amended application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court denied Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis on May 30,
More

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE AN AMENDED APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND/OR FILING FEE

Plaintiff Haileslassie Godifay hereby moves the Court for an extension of time by seven (7) days from June 29, 2017 to July 6, 2017, for Plaintiff to pay the $350.00 filing fee, plus the $50.00 administrative fee, or an amended application to proceed in forma pauperis.

The Court denied Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis on May 30, 2017 due to what appeared to be a total monthly income of $7,000.00. Plaintiff informed Counsel that this was incorrect as the approximately $7,000.00 came in the form of two loans, against a separate lawsuit, over the course of several months, rather than a monthly income. Counsel requested that Plaintiff provide Counsel with all evidence related to the loans, including information related to the liens, in order to ensure complete accuracy in any amended application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has provided Counsel with all but one document, which Plaintiff has requested and anticipates receiving within seven (7) days. Plaintiff respectfully requests more time to pay the filing fee or file an amended application to proceed in forma pauperis.

Counsel sincerely apologizes to the Court for any inconvenience this request may have caused.

FootNotes


1. Nancy A. Berryhill, the new Acting Commissioner of Social Security, should be substituted as the defendant in this suit per F.R.C.P. Rule 25(d). No further action need be taken pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer