Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00043/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00043-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHARROD MOTEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

THERESA CISNEROS, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:24-cv-00043 GSA (PC)

ORDER DISREGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

RESPONSE TO SHOWING OF CAUSE

ORDER

(ECF No. 7)

PLAINTIFF’S SHOWING OF CAUSE 

REMAINS DUE FEBRUARY 26, 2024

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 

has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1, 

6. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1)(B).

Before this Court is Plaintiff’s response to the Court’s January 26, 2024, order directing 

him to file a showing of cause. ECF No. 7. For the reasons stated below, Plaintiff’s response to 

the showing of cause will be disregarded.

I. RELEVANT FACTS

On January 26, 2024, the Court determined that Plaintiff is likely a three strikes litigant 

within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). ECF No. 5. As a result, Plaintiff was ordered to 

show cause why his application to proceed in forma pauperis should not be denied and he be 

Case 1:24-cv-00043-JLT-GSA Document 8 Filed 02/16/24 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

required to pay the filing fee.1 Id. at 7. He was given thirty days to respond to the Court’s order. 

See id. On February 12, 2024, a document entitled “Order to Show Cause” filed by Plaintiff was 

docketed. ECF No. 7. The Court considers it herein.

II. DISCUSSION

Although the named Defendants in the case caption of Plaintiff’s “Order to Show Cause” 

document and the case number in the case caption of it are correct, the document fails to address 

the showing of cause Plaintiff was ordered to file regarding why his application to proceed in 

forma pauperis should not be denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See generally ECF No. 7. 

Instead, Plaintiff’s fifteen-page filing appears to be a motion requesting that federal judges in 

another district – presumably before whom Plaintiff also has pending matters – recuse themselves 

from those cases. See generally id.

For this reason, Plaintiff’s filing will be disregarded as improperly filed. Plaintiff is 

reminded that there still remains time for him to file a proper response to the Court’s order to 

show cause on the Section 1915(g) matter. Plaintiff is again cautioned that failure to timely 

respond to the Court’s order to show cause may result in a recommendation that this matter be 

dismissed.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s response to the Court’s order to show cause (ECF No. 7) is 

DISREGARDED as unresponsive, and

2. Plaintiff may still file a proper showing of cause in response to the Court’s order 

issued January 26, 2024 (ECF No. 5), by February 26, 2024.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 16, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

 A duplicate of the order to show cause was also filed in Moten v. Cisneros, No. 1:24-cv-0022 

GSA.

Case 1:24-cv-00043-JLT-GSA Document 8 Filed 02/16/24 Page 2 of 2