Marin v. Ross Jr.
Marin v. Ross Jr.
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MEL MARIN, Case No.: 23CV2083
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND 14 LARRY DALE ROSS, JR. AND REOPENING THE CASE ROADRUNNER SCOOTERS LLC, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19
20 As the Court previously explained, because Plaintiff failed to establish “good cause” 21 why the contents of his application should be shielded from public view, his motion to seal 22 his application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) was DENIED. Dkts. 2, 3, 4, 5; see Ctr. 23 for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC,
809 F.3d 1092, 109698, 1102(9th Cir. 2016). 24 Plaintiff must either (1) file an IFP motion or (2) pay the civil filing fee by April 1, 2024. 25 The Court cautions Plaintiff that failure to do either by April 1, 2024 will result in dismissal 26 of this case. 27 28 1 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to reconsider dismissal of the 2 || case and ORDERS the clerk of the court to reopen Plaintiff's case because Plaintiff notified 3 Court that he never received notice of the Court’s January 3, 2024 minute order. 4 5 ISSO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: March 12, 2024 8 ? Ho orgbfe Tinsook Ohta 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown