Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-01117/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-01117-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROSARIO MARINELLO

Plaintiff(s),

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C07-1117 BZ

FOURTH ORDER REQUIRING

AMENDED APPLICATION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Plaintiff has applied to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Twice before, I have denied plaintiff’s request and ordered

him to file an amended application. Docket Nos. 5, 11.

Following a case management conference, I ordered that

plaintiff submit an amended application by June 20, 2007 if he

wished to proceed in forma pauperis. On June 8, I received a

letter and additional information from plaintiff relating to

his securities trading. While helpful, plaintiff must submit

an completely updated, amended application if he wishes still

to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Case 3:07-cv-01117-BZ Document 21 Filed 06/13/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2

First, the statements contained in plaintiff’s June 8

letter are not made under penalty or perjury. Thus,

plaintiff’s assertions that he has exhausted the funds used to

trade securities is of little help. Moreover, plaintiff now

asserts that he is employed part-time. He fails, however, to

inform the Court of his monthly income, current savings,

current assets and the like. 

 For these reasons, and for good cause appearing, IT IS

HEREBY ORDERED that by no later than Monday, June 25, 2007,

plaintiff shall either file a completely updated and amended

application or pay the normal filing fee of $350.00. Failure

to take one of these actions by that date will result in

dismissal of this action without prejudice. Any amended

application must address the questions raised in this Order. 

Plaintiff is reminded that if he chooses to pay the filing fee

rather than amend his application, he is responsible for

serving his complaint and any amendments or attachments,

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.

Dated: June 13, 2007

 Bernard Zimmerman 

 United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\Marinello\4TH.ORDER.DENY.IN.FORM.PAUP.wpd

Case 3:07-cv-01117-BZ Document 21 Filed 06/13/07 Page 2 of 2