Reybol

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ARCELIO JOSEPH REYBOL, Case No. 24-cv-00389-TSH

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

9 v.

10 ONTRAC LOGISTICS, et al., 11 Defendants.

12 13 Plaintiff Arcelio Joseph Reybol filed this action and an application to proceed in forma 14 pauperis (“IFP”) on January 23, 2024. ECF Nos. 1, 2. However, Plaintiff’s IFP application is 15 incomplete and incomprehensible. For example, in response to Question No. 2, Plaintiff appears 16 to indicate he receives money from a business, profession, or self-employment as well as income 17 from stocks, bonds, or royalties, but he did not “describe each source of money and state the 18 amount received from each.” In response to Question 8, Plaintiff indicates his only monthly 19 expenses are “Halloween Chocolate <$100.00.” As it was unable to evaluate Plaintiff’s assets or 20 otherwise assess his application, the Court denied the application without prejudice and directed 21 him to file either a complete IFP application or pay the filing fee by February 21,…