From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramirez v. Val

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 26, 2024
4:24-cv-02969-KAW (N.D. Cal. Jun. 26, 2024)

Opinion

4:24-cv-02969-KAW

06-26-2024

ELIAS TORRES RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. VAL, et al., Defendants.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DKT. NO. 5

JSCANDIS A. WESAIORE United States Magistrate Judge

Plaintiff filed this civil action and two applications to proceed in forma pauperis. On May 30, 2024, the Court considered the second IFP application to be the operative one and denied it without prejudice because it was incomplete to the point where the undersigned could not determine whether Plaintiff qualified for IFP status. (Dkt. No. 5 at 1.) Plaintiff was ordered to file an amended IFP application or pay the filing fee by June 21, 2024. Id. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended IFP application or paid the filing fee.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause, by August 2, 2024, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. In responding, Plaintiff must explain why he did not timely file an amended IFP application or pay the filing fee as ordered. Additionally, by August 2, 2024, Plaintiff is ordered to either file an amended IFP application or pay the filing. Failure to respond to the order to show cause and either pay the filing or file an amended IFP application by the deadline may result in the Court reassigning the case to a district judge with the recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ramirez v. Val

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 26, 2024
4:24-cv-02969-KAW (N.D. Cal. Jun. 26, 2024)
Case details for

Ramirez v. Val

Case Details

Full title:ELIAS TORRES RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. VAL, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jun 26, 2024

Citations

4:24-cv-02969-KAW (N.D. Cal. Jun. 26, 2024)