Yuriy V. Vasilchuck v. J. Doerer, et al.
Trial Court Opinion
5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 YURIY V. VASILCHUCK, No. 1:25-cv-00792-JLT-SAB (PC) 9 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION 10 SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED v. (ECF No. 8) 11 J. DOERER, et al., 12 Defendants.
14 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown | Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
16 On July 31, 2025, the Court screened Plaintiff complaint, found no cognizable claims, and | granted Plaintiff the opportunity to amend the complaint. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff has not filed an | amended complaint or otherwise communicated with the Court and the time to do so has passed.
19 | Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall show cause within fourteen (14) days | from the date of service of this order why this action should not be dismissed for failure to state a | cognizable claim. Plaintiffs failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation to | dismiss the action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24 Af 35 Dated: _ September 9, 2025 STANLEY A. BOONE 26 United States Magistrate Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.