Firsov v. JetBlue Airways Corporation

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: May 8, 2025
• Docket: 3:25-cv-03387
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 SERGEY FIRSOV, Case No. 25-cv-03387-TSH

9 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 10 v.

11 JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION, 12 Defendant.

13 14 Plaintiff Sergey Firsov initiated this lawsuit by filing a complaint (ECF No. 1) and 15 application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2). On April 18 the Court denied Plaintiff’s in 16 forma pauperis application and directed him to pay the $405 filing fee by May 6, 2025. ECF No. 17 6. The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to pay the filing fee by the deadline would likely result 18 in the dismissal of this action. Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee. 19 The Court possesses the inherent power to dismiss an action sua sponte “to achieve the 20 orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-33 21 (1962); see also Cruz v. Calderon, 2023 WL 2505623, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 21, 2023), appeal 22 dismissed sub nom. Trujillo v. Calderon, 2023 WL 10366331 (9th Cir. Sept. 27, 2023) (dismissing 23 case for failure to pay filing fee). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff Sergey Firsov to 24 show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court deadlines. If Plaintiff wishes to attempt to proceed with this action, he must either 25 respond to this order or pay the $405.00 filing fee by May 22, 2025. Notice is hereby provided 26 that failure to file a written response will be deemed an admission that you do not intend to 27 1 prosecute, and this case will likely be dismissed. Thus, it is imperative the Court receive a written 2 || response by the deadline above. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: May 8, 2025 TAA. | □□ THOMAS S. HIXSON 7 United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11

14 Sey

15 16

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28