(PS) Card v. BMW of North America, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DARNELL CARD, No. 2:20–cv–1213–KJM–KJN (PS) Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO

DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

v. (ECF No. 3) BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, Defendant. 16 On June 17, 2020, plaintiff filed a complaint and accompanying motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF Nos. 1, 2). On June 23, the court denied the IFP request without prejudice, finding plaintiff’s IFP affidavit insufficiently detailed, as well as facially contradictory to assertions made in the complaint. (ECF No. 3.) See, e.g., Rhym v. Bank of Am., 2007 WL 852039, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2007) (denying IFP motion with leave to amend where the plaintiff submitted an incomplete affidavit in support of his application to proceed in forma pauperis). The court granted plaintiff leave to amend his IFP request with a sufficiently detailed affidavit, but informed him that he could pay the filing fee instead if he so chose. (Id.) The court warned…