From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Turner v. L. A. Gen. Med. Ctr.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Mar 19, 2024
23-cv-03689-DMR (N.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2024)

Opinion

23-cv-03689-DMR

03-19-2024

TERRANCE TURNER, Plaintiff, v. LOS ANGELES GENERAL MEDICAL CENTER, et al., Defendants.


REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT TO DISTRICT JUDGE AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PAY THE FILING FEE

DONNA M. RYU, CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Self-represented Plaintiff Terrance Turner filed a complaint and an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). [Docket Nos. 1, 2.] Since all parties have not consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the court issues this Report and Recommendation and reassigns this case to a district judge for final disposition, with the recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee.

On January 16, 2024, the court issued an Order to Show Cause in which it noted that Turner had filed three cases before the undersigned in a six-week period and filed IFP applications in all three cases. See Case Nos. 23-cv-3380 DMR; 23-cv-3689 DMR; and 23-cv-4059 DMR. The court described the ways in which Turner's IFP applications were inconsistent and confusing and noted that his responses were part of a troubling pattern of IFP applications filed by him in this district. [Docket No. 8 (“OSC”).] The court ordered Turner to show cause in writing why his IFP applications should not be denied. Id.

Turner timely responded to the OSC on January 19, 2024. [Docket No. 9.] His submission was confusing and hard to follow and did not directly respond to the concerns raised in the court's OSC. See id. On February 26, 2024, the court denied Turner's IFP applications in all three cases before the undersigned and ordered him to pay the entire filing fee by March 15, 2024. [Docket No. 11.] The court warned Plaintiff that failure to pay the filing fee by the deadline would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. Accordingly, the court recommends that Plaintiff's action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee. The Clerk is directed to reassign this case to a district judge. Any party may file objections to this report and recommendation with the district judge within 14 days after being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a); N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 72-2.

The court refers Plaintiff to the link entitled “Representing Yourself” on the Court's website, located at http://cand.uscourts.gov/proselitigants, as well as the Court's Legal Help Centers for unrepresented parties. Parties may schedule an appointment by calling 415-782-8982 or emailing FedPro@sfbar.org.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Turner v. L. A. Gen. Med. Ctr.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Mar 19, 2024
23-cv-03689-DMR (N.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2024)
Case details for

Turner v. L. A. Gen. Med. Ctr.

Case Details

Full title:TERRANCE TURNER, Plaintiff, v. LOS ANGELES GENERAL MEDICAL CENTER, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Mar 19, 2024

Citations

23-cv-03689-DMR (N.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2024)