(PS) Lolmaugh v. County of Sacramento et al Doc.

Case 2:06-cv-00257-GEB-EFB Document 3 Filed 02/10/2006 Page 1 of 2

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11

12 DANA T. LOLMAUGH,

13 Plaintiff, CIV S-06-0257 GEB PAN PS

14 v.

15 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO; COUNTY OF ORDER

SACRAMENTO, SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT;
16 DEPUTY DOES 1-100; DOES 1-100,

17 Defendants.

18 -o0o-

19 On February 6, 2006, plaintiff filed a proposed complaint

20 and an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28

21 U.S.C. § 1915.

22 Plaintiff’s application is incomplete. Plaintiff failed

23 fully to answer Question 3–while he described the sources of

24 money he has received in the past twelve months, he did not

25 “state the amount you receive and what you expect you will

26 continue to receive.” Additionally, plaintiff’s answer to

Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 2:06-cv-00257-GEB-EFB Document 3 Filed 02/10/2006 Page 2 of 2

1 Question 4 is ambiguous–he states he does not have any cash or

2 checking or savings accounts but then provides the amount $450.

3 Accordingly, plaintiff’s application is denied. Within

4 20 days of service of this order, plaintiff may file a complete

5 application for this court’s consideration. If plaintiff fails

6 timely to submit a new application, the Clerk of Court is

7 directed to close this file.

8 So ordered.

9 Dated: February 10, 2006.

10
/s/ Peter A. Nowinski
PETER A. NOWINSKI
11
Magistrate Judge
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26