(PC) Storm v. Office of the California Governor
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10 DIMITRI Z. STORM, Case No. 1:24-cv-00917-EPG (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE v. WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE
OFFICE OF THE CALIFORNIA DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR
GOVERNOR, et al.,
FAILURE TO EXHAUST
Defendants.
RESPONSE DUE IN THIRTY DAYS
17 Plaintiff Dimitri Z. Storm is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed the operative complaint on August 8, 2024. (ECF No. 1). 19 Plaintiff generally claims that his phone calls and activities on his tablet were interfered with 20 and disrupted between July 20, 2024 and August 8, 2024. (Id. at 2). 21 Because Plaintiff’s complaint was both signed and filed on August 8, 2024, it appears 22 from the face of the Complaint that Plaintiff did not exhaust his available administrative 23 remedies before filing this action. (Id. at 7; see also docket). 24 Accordingly, the Court will order Plaintiff to file a response within thirty days, 25 explaining why this action should not…