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).

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 [phone] 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