1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
9
10 BARTHOLOMEW L. JONES,
CASE NO. 3:25-cv-05678-JHC-DWC
11 Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
12
BOB FERGUSON, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15 This action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C § 1983 has been referred to United States
16 Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. Plaintiff Bartholomew L. Jones, proceeding pro se, filed a
17 motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), a letter discussing his financial situation, and a
18 proposed civil rights complaint. Dkts. 4, 4-1.
19 The right to proceed in forma pauperis is not absolute. O’Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614,
20 616 (9th Cir. 1990). Rather, proceeding in forma pauperis is a matter within the sound discretion
21 of the trial court in civil actions. Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598, 600 (9th Cir. 1963). Here,
22 Plaintiff states he has $180 cash on hand and a bank account containing approximately $20,000
23 in settlement funds. Dkt. 4 at 1–3. Plaintiff also states he does not have direct control over his
24
1 finances, including the bank account containing his settlement funds. Id. at 1. However, this
2 circumstance does not impact Plaintiff’s ability to afford the filing fee.
3 Based on the information supplied, the Court concludes Plaintiff can afford to pay the
4 $405.00 filing fee. Accordingly, if he intends to proceed in this action, Plaintiff must accomplish
5 one of the following on or before September 26, 2025:
6 a. Show cause why the IFP motion (Dkt. 4) should not be denied; or
7 b. Pay the $405.00 filing fee.
8 Failure to show cause or pay the stated amount shall be deemed a failure to properly
9 prosecute and may result in a recommendation this action be dismissed.
10 Dated this 27th day of August, 2025.
11
A
12
David W. Christel
United States Magistrate Judge
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.