Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Soto v. Nielsen

United States District Court, D. Montana, Missoula Division

January 29, 2019

PAMELA SOTO, Plaintiff,
v.
KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, Defendant.

          ORDER

          JEREMIAH C. LYNCH, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         I. Introduction

         Plaintiff Pamela Soto, proceeding pro se, filed an application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Soto submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Because it appears she lacks sufficient funds to prosecute this action IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Soto's application is GRANTED. This action may proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, and the Clerk of Court is directed to file Soto's lodged complaint as of the filing date of her request to proceed in forma pauperis.

         The federal statute under which leave to proceed in forma pauperis is permitted - 28 U.S.C. § 1915 - also requires the Court to conduct a preliminary screening of the allegations set forth in the litigant's pleading. The applicable provisions of section 1915(e)(2) state as follows:

(2) Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that-
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal-
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

         The Court will review Soto's pleading to consider whether this action can survive dismissal under the provisions of section 1915(e)(2), or any other provision of law. See Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1138, 1142 (9th Cir. 2005).

         II. Background

         Soto worked for the Transportation Security Administration at the Missoula International Airport for 14 years prior to July 2016. At some point prior to July 2016 Soto was “diagnosed [with an] age[-]related vision disability[.]” (Doc. 2 at 9 of 13.) Apparently as a result of her vision problem, Soto did not pass the “IMA” test after taking it three times. Soto references a Transportation Security Administration policy which provides that if an employee fails an assessment test three times, the employee is subject to removal. And the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.