Rebecca Wu v. Bill McGuire, et al.

Opinion

REBECCA WU, Case No. 2:24-cv-2827-TLN-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER BILL MCGUIRE, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking electronic filing privileges, and two motions for an extension of time to file an amended complaint and to merge this case with another case pending in this district. For the following reasons, I will deny plaintiff’s request for electronic filing privileges and to merge but will grant plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint. Motion for Electronic Filing Privileges Generally, “any person appearing pro se may not utilize electronic filing except with permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge.” E.D. Cal. L.R. 133(b)(2). “Requests to use paper or electronic filing as exceptions from these Rules shall be submitted as stipulations as provided in L.R. 143 or, if a stipulation cannot be had, as written motions setting out an explanation of reasons for the exception.” E.D. Cal. L.R. 133(b)(3). Plaintiff seeks electronic filing privileges because she has limited financial resources. ECF No. 8 at 1. However, her motion does not demonstrate good cause to depart from the normal filing procedure for unrepresented litigants. The motion is denied. Motions to Merge and for an Extension of Time Plaintiff has filed two motions to merge this case with Wu v. Kerestenzis, 2:24-cv-3353- DJC-JDP. Plaintiff argues that these cases should be merged because a single trial considering all of her claims would enhance efficiency. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) permits a court to consolidate actions involving common questions of law or fact. When considering whether to consolidate actions, courts weigh “the interest of judicial convenience against the potential for delay, confusion and prejudice caused by consolidation.” Southwest Marine, Inc., v. Triple A. Mach. Shop, Inc., 720 F. Supp. 805, 807 (N.D. Cal. 1989). Here however, because plaintiff has not filed an operative complaint in this case, I cannot determine whether the actions contain common questions of law or fact. Accordingly, plaintiff's motions to merge, ECF Nos. 9 & 10, are denied with respect to plaintiff's request to merge. However, good cause appearing, plaintiffs requests for additional time to file an amended complaint will be granted. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiffs motion for electronical filing privileges, ECF No. 8, is DENIED. 2. Plaintiffs motions to merge this action, ECF Nos. 9 & 10, are DENIED. 3. Plaintiff’s motions for an extension of time, ECF Nos. 9 & 10, are GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within thirty days from this order’s issuance. Should plaintiff fail to file an amended complaint within thirty days, this action may be dismissed for failure to state a claim, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to prosecute. ( 1 Sp. — Dated: _ November 7, 2025 ———- JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE