Dunn v. Marclite Electrical Corporation Florida

District Court, E.D. California·Decided July 15, 2025·No. 1:25-cv-00565·Unknown

Opinion

EMMA DUNN and ALANA DUNN, Case No. 1:25-cv-00565-JLT-BAM Plaintiffs, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFFS EMMA DUNN AND ALANA DUNN TO v. SUBMIT APPLICATIONS TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS OR PAY ONE MARCLITE ELECTRICAL FILING FEE WITHIN 21 DAYS CORPORATION, et al., ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT Defendants. TO FORWARD TWO IN FORMA Plaintiffs Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn are each proceeding pro in this action filed on May 12, 2025. Plaintiffs have not paid the $405.00 filing fee nor have they submitted applications to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. To proceed in this action, Plaintiffs must either (1) pay one $405.00 filing fee, or (2) both Plaintiffs may submit applications to proceed in forma pauperis. See Dupont v. Sterling Family Trust, No. 2:23-cv-09785-SVW-AS, 2024 WL 589880, at * 1 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 19, 2024) (noting only one filing fee needs to be paid in a multiple-plaintiff case); Darden v. Indymac Bancorp, Inc., No. CIV S-09-2970 JAM DAD PS, 2009 WL 5206637, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 23, 2009) (“Where there are multiple plaintiffs in a single action, the plaintiffs may not proceed in forma pauperis unless all of them demonstrate inability to pay the filing fee.”) Although Plaintiffs’ recently filed complaint includes statements regarding an inability to proceed in forma pauperis, it is not clear to the Court whether those statements pertain to one or both Plaintiffs. (See Doc. 7.) Further, the purported financial information included in the complaint also is not sufficient for the Court to determine if each Plaintiff is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. (Id.) Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Clerk’s Office shall send to Plaintiffs two applications to proceed in forma pauperis; 2. Within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiffs shall either (1) pay one $405.00 filing fee for this action; or (2) Plaintiffs Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn shall each submit one of the attached applications to proceed in forma pauperis, completed and signed; 3. No requests for extensions will be granted absent a showing of good cause; and 3. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation for dismissal of this action. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 15, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dunn v. Marclite Electrical Corporation Florida, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Dunn v. Marclite Electrical Corporation Florida (Dunn v. Marclite Electrical Corporation Florida) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related