Jude David Smith v. City of Berkeley, et al.

Background

The court previously granted Jude David Smith permission to proceed without paying the filing fee and screened his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court concluded that the complaint failed to state a legally recognized claim for relief, allowed Smith to amend it, and set a July 1, 2026 deadline. The court later extended that deadline to August 3, 2026.

On June 11, 2026, Smith filed a one-page document titled “Amended Complaint.” It sought to add defamation claims without supporting facts, add “Tony and Rich” at CareBridge Berkeley, Abraham Lincoln University, and San Francisco State University as defendants without alleging conduct by those individuals or entities, and increase the requested damages to $70 million. Because the filing’s timing and content made its purpose unclear, the court deferred further screening. The court told Smith to notify it if he intended that filing to be his amended complaint, or to file another amended complaint.

Order to Show Cause

The August 3 deadline passed without Smith filing another amended complaint or notifying the court that he intended the June 11 filing to serve as his amended complaint. The court found that he had failed to comply with its deadlines and had taken no further action to prosecute the case.

The court issued an order to show cause, meaning an order requiring Smith to explain why the case should not be dismissed. It ordered him to file a declaration by August 26, 2026. The court warned that failing to provide a written response would be treated as an admission that Smith did not intend to continue prosecuting the case and that the case would likely be dismissed.

Judge Thomas S. Hixson also referred Smith to the Federal Pro Bono Project for possible basic legal assistance and to the district’s handbook for litigants without a lawyer. This order did not dismiss the case.