From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bukasa v. The AMC

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 9, 2022
4:22-cv-02861-KAW (N.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2022)

Opinion

4:22-cv-02861-KAW

08-09-2022

LAETICIA BUKASA, Plaintiff, v. THE AMC, et al., Defendants.


SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Re: Dkt. Nos. 6, 7

KANDIS A. WESTMORE United States Magistrate Judge

On May 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed this civil action and application to proceed in forma pauperis. On May 19, 2022, the Court denied Plaintiff's IFP application without prejudice because it was incomplete to the point where the undersigned could not determine whether Plaintiff qualified for IFP status. (Dkt. No. 6 at 1.) Plaintiff was ordered to file an amended IFP application or pay the filing fee by June 10, 2022. Id. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended IFP application or paid the filing fee. In fact, there have been no further filings in this case since the May 19, 2022 court order.

On July 26, 2022, the Court issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, and it ordered Plaintiff to respond by August 5, 2022. (Dkt. No. 7 at 1.) Plaintiff was also ordered to either file an amended IFP application or pay the filing fee. Id. Plaintiff was advised that the “[f]ailure 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.” Id. Plaintiff was also referred to the Federal Pro Bono Project's Help Desk. Id. 1-2.

To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the order to show cause, nor has Plaintiff filed an amended IFP application or paid the filing fee.

Accordingly, on or before August 31, 2022, Plaintiff is ordered to respond to this order to show to explain why Plaintiff did not timely file an amended IFP application or pay the filing fee, and why this case should not be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee or for failure to prosecute. Also, by August 31, 2022, Plaintiff shall file an amended IFP application or pay the filing fee. The failure to respond to the second order to show cause and either pay the filing or file an amended IFP application by the deadline will result in the Court reassigning the case to a district judge with the recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee and/or failure to prosecute.

Plaintiff may wish to contact the Federal Pro Bono Project's Help Desk for assistance-a free service for pro se litigants-by calling (415) 782-8982 to make an appointment. Plaintiff may also wish to consult the manual the court has adopted to assist pro se litigants in presenting their case. This manual, and other free information for pro se litigants, is available online at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/pro-se-litigants.

Finally, the case management conference, set for August 16, 2022, is continued to December 13, 2022, at 1:30 PM. Case management statements are due on or before December 6, 2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Bukasa v. The AMC

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 9, 2022
4:22-cv-02861-KAW (N.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2022)
Case details for

Bukasa v. The AMC

Case Details

Full title:LAETICIA BUKASA, Plaintiff, v. THE AMC, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Aug 9, 2022

Citations

4:22-cv-02861-KAW (N.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2022)