Justin v. Invent Help

Background

Malik M. Justin, who was representing himself, filed a complaint and an application to proceed without paying the filing fee. On July 2, 2025, the court denied that application because Justin had not provided enough information about his assets and liabilities to determine whether he qualified for that status. The court gave him until September 2, 2025, to file a corrected application.

That deadline passed. The opinion states that Justin had not filed a corrected application and had not asked for more time. The court’s earlier order warned that failing to file the corrected application or pay the filing fee could lead to a recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward, or failure to follow court orders.

Order

The court issued an order to show cause, which required Justin to explain why the case should not be dismissed. By November 7, 2025, Justin had to do one of three things: (1) file a corrected application to proceed without paying the filing fee that addressed the deficiencies identified in the July 2 order; (2) give up that fee-waiver request and pay the $405 filing fee; or (3) file a written explanation addressing why the case should not be dismissed. A corrected application filed by the deadline would also count as a response to the order to show cause. If Justin needed more time, he had to explain why and state how much additional time he needed.

The court did not dismiss the case in this order. Instead, it warned that failure to respond by November 7, 2025, would lead to a report and recommendation that the action be dismissed and reassignment of the case to a district judge for consideration of that recommendation. Judge Peter H. Kang signed the order.