Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00904/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00904-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PATRICK LOWAYNE PERRY, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

PERDUE INC, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 16-cv-00904-EDL 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

On February 23, 2016, pro se Plaintiff filed a complaint and application for leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis. On February 29, the Court issued an Order denying Plaintiff’s 

application to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to provide all of 

the required information, and stated that it would re-consider an amended application that 

contained all of the requested information. Dkt. No. 5. Thereafter, the Court ordered Plaintiff to 

either consent to or decline magistrate jurisdiction by no later than April 29, 2016. Dkt. No. 6. 

Plaintiff has not filed an amended application to proceed in forma pauperis and has not responded 

to the Court’s request to consent to or decline magistrate jurisdiction. 

THE COURT hereby issues an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why Plaintiff’s claims should 

not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff shall file a response to this Order by no later 

than May 24, 2016, and a hearing will be held on May 31, 2016 at 3:00 p.m. If plaintiff fails to 

respond, the case may be dismissed for failure to prosecute. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 17, 2016 

______________________________________ 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:16-cv-00904-EDL Document 7 Filed 05/17/16 Page 1 of 1