Walker v. CA Employment Development Dept.

Filing 16

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why in forma pauperis status should not be revoked for purposes of appeal. Response due by 8/16/2017. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero on August 2, 2017. (jcslc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/2/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

COLLEEN DENISE WALKER,

Case No. 17-cv-00071-JCS

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
CA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY IN
FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS SHOULD
NOT BE REVOKED ON APPEAL

Defendant.

12

Plaintiff Colleen Denise Walker, pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this action alleging

13

discrimination by her former employer. The Court reviewed Walker’s first amended complaint

14

sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state a

15

claim, holding that, among other deficiencies, no factual allegation of that complaint plausibly

16

supported the conclusion that the employer took any adverse action because Walker was a

17

member of a protected class. Walker filed a second amended complaint, but the Court held that

18

she once again failed to include such allegations, and dismissed without leave to further amend.

19

Walker has filed a notice of appeal of the Court’s order dismissing the action and seeks to

20

maintain her in forma pauperis status on appeal. The Ninth Circuit referred the matter to this

21

Court to determine “whether in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal or whether

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith.” Walker v. Emp’t Dev. Dep’t, No. 17-16486, ECF
Doc. No. 2 (9th Cir. Aug. 1, 2017) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Hooker v. Am. Airlines, 302
F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002)).
There is no indication of bad faith. As for whether the appeal is frivolous, the Court is not
aware of any error or basis for disagreement in its previous order that would support an appeal, but
without knowing the arguments that Walker intends to raise, the Court hesitates to presume that
any such argument would be frivolous. Walker is therefore ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why

1

her in forma pauperis status should not be revoked for the purpose of her appeal, by filing a short

2

statement of the arguments she intends to raise on appeal (not exceeding five pages) no later than

3

August 16, 2017. The Court finds the matter suitable for resolution without oral argument and

4

declines to set a hearing.

5

Walker, who is not represented by counsel, is encouraged to consult with the Federal Pro

6

Bono Project’s Legal Help Center in either of the Oakland or San Francisco federal courthouses

7

for assistance. The San Francisco Legal Help Center office is located in Room 2796 on the

8

fifteenth floor at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California. The Oakland office is

9

located in Room 470-S on the fourth floor at 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Appointments can be made by calling [phone] or signing up in the appointment book
located outside either office, and telephone appointments are available. Lawyers at the Legal Help
Center can provide basic assistance to parties representing themselves but cannot provide legal
representation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 2, 2017
______________________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
Chief Magistrate Judge

18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2