Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00706/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00706-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bank of America
Defendant
Sukit N. Kumvachirapitag
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

SUKIT N. KUMVACHIRAPITAG,

Plaintiff,

v.

BANK OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-00706-JST 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: ECF No. 30

On April 25, 2016, the Court granted a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for failure 

to state a claim, noting that the complaint was difficult to discern and contained “no factual 

allegations, causes of action, or requests for relief.” ECF No. 26 at 1-2. The Court gave Plaintiff 

leave to file an amended pleading within fourteen days. Id. at 3.

Plaintiff has since filed three documents. Two appear to be motions, entitled “Motions to 

Amended Pleading Plaintiff’s Complaints,” ECF No. 27, and “Motions to Mandate My 

Complaints,” ECF No. 29. The third document is entitled “Complaints, Et. Al.” and has been filed 

as an Amended Complaint on CM/ECF. ECF No. 30. The Amended Complaint, however, 

appears to be identical in substance to the complaint previously dismissed by the Court, see ECF 

No. 1, and again contains no factual allegations, causes of action, or requests for relief. Similarly, 

the two motions filed by Plaintiff contain no factual allegations or legal claims. Plaintiff therefore 

has not attempted to remedy the deficiencies identified by the Court in its April 25, 2016 order.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why this case 

should not be dismissed with prejudice in light of his failure to plead a plausible claim. Any 

///

///

///

Case 3:16-cv-00706-JST Document 31 Filed 05/13/16 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

response to this order must be filed within fourteen (14) days of its issuance. If no response is 

filed, the Court will dismiss the case with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 13, 2016

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-00706-JST Document 31 Filed 05/13/16 Page 2 of 2