Brunken v. Tuto Incorporated

1 WO 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Maxwell Brunken, No. CV-25-02952-PHX-KML 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Turo Incorporated, 13 Defendant.

15 Plaintiff Maxwell Brunken requested permission to place this case and all filings (including an application to proceed in forma pauperis) under seal. The court denied that request and explained that if Brunken wished to “pursue this case he must file the complaint and all other documents on the public docket within ten days” of August 22, 2025. (Doc.

19 9 at 3.) On August 25, 2025, Brunken filed a motion he had not filed previously: a “Motion for Declaratory Judgment.” And on September 2, 2025, he refiled his complaint. (Doc. 10, 11.) Despite the court’s order, Brunken has not refiled his application to proceed in forma pauperis, nor has Brunken paid the filing fee.

23 Brunken is given a final opportunity to pay the filing fee or refile his application to proceed in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C § 1914(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). If Brunken fails to do either, this case will be dismissed. See Olivares v. Marshall, 59 F.3d 109, 112 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal for failure to pay filing fee).

27 The legal basis for Brunken’s “Motion for Declaratory Judgment” is not clear but it likely is an attempt to prevent defendant Turo Incorporated from enforcing an arbitration || agreement between the parties. (Doc. 10.) If that is Brunken’s intent, his motion is premature. Once he pays the filing fee or applies for and receives permission to proceed in || forma pauperis, Brunken may renew his motion. But Brunken should not do so before Turo 4|| has been served and he has discussed with Turo whether it believes a valid arbitration || agreement exists. In other words, Brunken should not file such a motion until he knows it 6|| is legally and factually appropriate.

7 Finally, Brunken must ensure his filings are legible. His motion for declaratory || judgment appears to have been damaged and is difficult to read. Because that motion is || denied Brunken is not required to take corrective action.

10 IT IS ORDERED no later than September 22, 2025, plaintiff shall either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk of Court is directed || to enter a judgment of dismissal without prejudice in the event Brunken fails to do so. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion for Declaratory Judgment (Doc. 10) is DENIED.

15 Dated this 8th day of September, 2025.

17 Vy, op A. Gf 18 LAA ALAA Woe Honorable Krissa M. Lanham 19 United States District Judge _2-