(PS) Clay v. Transworld Systems Inc. et al
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 10/13/2020 DIRECTING the Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE within 14 days of the date of this order as to why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. (Tupolo, A)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JEROME A. CLAY,
No. 2:19-cv-2221 JAM DB PS
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS INC., et al,
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiff Jerome Clay is proceeding in this matter pro se. Accordingly, this action was
referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
On November 4, 2019, plaintiff filed a complaint and motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF
Nos. 1 & 2.) On April 10, 2020, the undersigned granted plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis and screened plaintiff’s complaint. (ECF No. 5.) In screening plaintiff’s
complaint, the undersigned found that the complaint stated a claim against defendant Transworld
World Systems, Inc., (“Transworld”) but failed to state a claim against defendants Transunion
LLC, (“Transunion”), and Experian Information Solutions Inc., (“Experian”). (Id. at 4-5.)
Accordingly, plaintiff was offered a choice.
Plaintiff could elect to proceed against defendant Transworld and pursue the complaint’s
claims against only that defendant. Alternatively, plaintiff could forgo immediately proceeding
against defendant Transworld and attempt to amend the complaint by filing an amended
complaint within sixty days. (Id. at 4.) If plaintiff elected to proceed immediately against
defendant Transworld plaintiff was to file a short statement stating that election within thirty
days, in which case the court would construe plaintiff’s filing as consent to the dismissal of all
claims against defendants Transunion and Experian without prejudice.
Plaintiff, however, did neither. Instead, on August 5, 2020, plaintiff filed a stipulated
dismissal of defendant Transworld, which was entered on August 6, 2020. (ECF Nos. 6 & 7.)
Plaintiff has taken no further action since that filing. It appears that plaintiff considers this matter
closed. Nonetheless, in light of plaintiff’s pro se status, and in the interests of justice, the court
will provide plaintiff with an opportunity to show good cause for plaintiff’s conduct along with an
opportunity to clarify plaintiff’s intentions with respect to this action.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff show cause in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order as to why
this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution 1 ; and
2. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in a
recommendation that this case be dismissed.
DATED: October 13, 2020
/s/ DEBORAH BARNES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Alternatively, if plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this civil action, plaintiff may comply with
this order by filing a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?