Germani et al v. Safeway Grocery et al

Filing 5

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why case should not be dismissed for failure to pay filing fee, with response due no later than March 8, 2017, and ORDER denying without prejudice 2 MOTION to Compel. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero on February 22, 2017. (jcslc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/22/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/22/2017: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (klhS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 KRISTIAN M. GERMANI, et al., Case No. 17-cv-00742-JCS Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PAY FILING FEE 8 v. 9 10 SAFEWAY GROCERY, et al., Defendants. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION TO COMPEL Re: Dkt. Nos. 2, 3 12 13 Plaintiffs Kristian Germani and Donald Collier, pro se, seek leave to proceed in forma 14 pauperis. Plaintiffs have submitted a single application signed by Germani. See dkt. 3. If 15 Plaintiffs wish to pursue this action without paying the filing fee, each plaintiff must submit a 16 separate application demonstrating his or her inability to pay. Plaintiffs are therefore ORDERED 17 TO SHOW CAUSE no later than March 8, 2017 why the case should not be dismissed for 18 failure to pay the filing fee, by either (1) filing a separate application signed by Collier and 19 addressing his financial circumstances, or (2) paying the filing fee. If Collier files an application 20 demonstrating his inability to pay the filing fee, the Court will then consider the sufficiency of the 21 complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and whether service should be ordered pursuant 22 to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). 23 Plaintiffs have also filed a motion to compel, seeking access to a video recording of the 24 events in question. See dkt. 2. As the Honorable Elizabeth Laporte stated in another case in 25 which Germani filed an early motion to compel: 26 27 28 In general, no discovery is permitted until the parties have engaged in the meet and confer process. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d). Further, a motion to compel is normally only proper after a party fails to respond to discovery requests that have been served on it. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a). Here, it appears that Defendants have not yet been 1 served in this case, and discovery has not opened. Therefore, the motion to compel is denied without prejudice. 2 Germani v. State Farm Ins. Co., No. C-14-03378 EDL, ECF Doc. No. 7 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 3 2014). For the same reasons discussed in that case, Plaintiffs’ present motion to compel is also 4 DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 5 Plaintiffs, who are not represented by counsel, are encouraged to consult with the Federal 6 Pro Bono Project’s Legal Help Center in either of the Oakland or San Francisco federal 7 courthouses for assistance. The San Francisco Legal Help Center office is located in Room 2796 8 on the 15th floor at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102. The Oakland office is 9 located in Room 470-S on the 4th floor at 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612. Appointments can be made by calling (415) 782-8982 or signing up in the appointment book located outside 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 either office. Lawyers at the Legal Help Center can provide basic assistance to parties 12 representing themselves but cannot provide legal representation. 13 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 22, 2017 ______________________________________ JOSEPH C. SPERO Chief Magistrate Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?