Mathew-Allen McCaster v. Franchise Tax Board, et al.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MATHEW-ALLEN McCASTER, No. 2:24-cv-03161-TLN-SCR 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 13 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD, et al., 14 Defendants. 15

16 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action. This matter was accordingly referred to the 17 undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff filed an incomplete motion for leave to 18 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 2). Plaintiff was directed to supplement the motion 19 for IFP within 14 days in a June 4, 2025 Order and Findings and Recommendation (“F&R”). 20 ECF No. 6 at 8. Plaintiff was advised that if he did not supplement the motion or pay the filing 21 fee within 14 days “the Court will recommend the IFP motion be denied.” Id. Plaintiff did not 22 file a supplement or pay within 14 days, but 21 days later filed objections to the June 4, 2025 23 order and a declaration re: IFP status. ECF No. 7 and 8. On July 7, 2025, Judge Nunley issued 24 an Order adopting the F&R which directed Plaintiff to file a Second…