Opinion
CV 21-7564-GW (KS)
12-06-2021
YOUNG YIL JO, Plaintiff, v. SIX UNKNOWN NAMES AGENTS, et al., Defendants.
KAREN L. STEVENSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
GEORGE H. WU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On September 20, 2021, Plaintiff, a California state resident proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (the “Complaint”). (Dkt. No. 1.) The Complaint is difficult to comprehend, consisting entirely of pre-printed pages that do not state any legal claims with multiple handwritten annotations in the margins. (Id.)
As such, the Complaint violates Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8; United States ex rel. Cafasso v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc., 637 F.3d 1047, 1059 (9th Cir. 2011) (complaint violates Rules 8 if a defendant would have difficulty understanding and responding to it).
On September 22, 2021, the Court notified Plaintiff that he had failed to pay the filing fee and had not filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. No. 2.) On October 13, 2021, after three weeks had passed and Plaintiff had not responded to the Court's notification, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause, no later than November 3 2021, why the action should not be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee or obtain authorization to proceed without prepayment of the fee (“OSC”). The Court also expressly warned Plaintiff that his failure to timely comply with the OSC “will result in a recommendation of dismissal of this case.” (Dkt. No. 4.)
To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the OSC, paid the filing fee, or requested to proceed in forma pauperis. In light of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED.
This is Plaintiff's seventh action in which he filed the same incoherent complaint against the same defendants, the Court notified him about the defects in the complaint and his failure to either pay the filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court's orders. See Young Yil Jo et al. v. Six Unnamed Agents, CV 20-1377-GW (KS) (Apr. 22, 2020); Young Yil Jo v. Six Unknown Names Agents, CV 20-3368-GW (KS) (June 18, 2020); Young Yil Jo v. Six Unnamed Agents et al, CV 20-7210 GW (KS) (Oct. 13, 2020); Young Yil Jo v. Six Unknown Names Agents et al., CV 20-11160-GW (KS) (Feb. 9, 2021); Young Yil Jo v. Six Unknown Names Agents et al, CV 21-2213-GW (KS) (May 10, 2021); Young Yil Jo v. Six Unknown Names Agents et al., CV 21-4745-GW (KS) (July 29, 2021).