Legal Opinion

Frith v. Kijakazi

District Court, S.D. California

Decided November 30, 2020No. 3:20-cv-02213Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Gabriel F., Case No.: 3:20-cv-02213-AHG 12 Plaintiff, ORDER: 13 v. (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 14 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of MOTION FOR LEAVE TO Social Security, PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, 15 Defendant. 16 (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF 17 COUNSEL, and 18 (3) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 19 MOTION TO AWARD BENEFITS 20 [ECF Nos. 2, 3, 4] 21 22 Before the Court are three motions filed by Plaintiff Gabriel F. (“Plaintiff”): 23 1. Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. 24 §…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Adkins v. E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API