Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-03739/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-03739-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Wells Fargo Bank
Defendant
ZMH
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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 California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ZMH,

Plaintiff,

v.

WELLS FARGO BANK,

Defendant.

Case No. 19-cv-03739-DMR 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

Pro se minor Plaintiff ZMH filed a complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis 

(“IFP”). [Docket Nos. 1, 2.] The case was filed by his “next friend,” Regional Advocacy Group. 

“[A] ‘next friend’ who is neither an attorney nor represented by one may not bring a lawsuit on

behalf of minor or incompetent plaintiffs.” Roe v. Suter, 165 F.3d 917 (9th Cir. 1998) (dismissing 

a complaint brought by a non-attorney “next friend” of minor plaintiffs); see also Johns v. Cty. of 

San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding that “a parent or guardian cannot bring an 

action on behalf of a minor child without retaining a lawyer”). Here, Regional Advocacy Group 

purports to bring this action on behalf of Plaintiff, a minor. Nothing in the record indicates that 

Regional Advocacy Group is a law firm or is represented by an attorney. Because Plaintiff is a 

minor, his claims may only proceed if he is represented by qualified counsel.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff is ordered to respond in writing to explain why this case 

should not be dismissed. Plaintiff’s response is due by September 30, 2019.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 16, 2019

______________________________________

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Donna M. Ryu

Case 4:19-cv-03739-DMR Document 7 Filed 09/16/19 Page 1 of 1