United States District Court, D. Arizona
Honorable Eileen S. Willett United States Magistrate Judge.
before the Court is Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in
District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. 3). The
Court finds that Plaintiff does not have sufficient means to
pay the Court's fees and will grant the Application.
However, as set forth below, upon screening the
Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) pursuant to 28
U.S.C.§ 1915(e)(2), the Court finds that Plaintiff has
not satisfied the pleading requirements of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and fails to state a cause of action. The
Court therefore dismisses the Complaint (Doc. 1) without
prejudice and grants Plaintiff leave to file a First Amended
Complaint consistent with the finding of the Court set forth
Statutory Screening of In Forma Pauperis Complaint Pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)
Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a
plaintiff has raised claims that are legally frivolous or
malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may
be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who
is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1)-(2).
A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While
Rule 8 does not demand detailed factual allegations,
“it demands more than an unadorned, the
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of
action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not
suffice.” Id. “[A] complaint must
contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.'” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is
plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”
Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a
plausible claim for relief [is] . . . a context-specific task
that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial
experience and common sense.” Id. at 679.
Thus, although a plaintiff's specific factual allegations
may be consistent with a claim, a court must assess whether
there are other “more likely explanations” for a
defendant's conduct. Id. at 681. But as the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has
instructed, courts must “continue to construe pro se
filings liberally.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d
338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010). A “complaint [filed by a pro
se litigant] ‘must be held to less stringent standards
than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.'”
Id. (quoting Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S.
89, 94 (2007) (per curiam)).
Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the
allegation of other facts, a pro se litigant is entitled to
an opportunity to amend a complaint before dismissal of the
action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29
(9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). “It is also clear that
section 1915(e) not only permits but requires a district
court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that
fails to state a claim.” Id. at 1127.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Pleading in Federal Court
state courts, federal courts only have jurisdiction over a
limited number of cases, and those cases typically involve
either a controversy between citizens of different states
(“diversity jurisdiction”) or a question of
federal law (“federal question jurisdiction”).
See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332. The United
States Supreme Court has stated that a federal court must not
disregard or evade the limits on its subject matter
jurisdiction. Owen Equip. & Erections Co. v.
Kroger, 437 U.S. 365, 374 (1978). Thus, a federal court
is obligated to inquire into its subject matter jurisdiction
in each case and to dismiss a case when subject matter
jurisdiction is lacking. See Valdez v. Allstate Ins.
Co., 372 F.3d 1115, 1116 (9th Cir. 2004);
Complaint form is completely devoid of any factual
allegations. Plaintiff fails to set forth any facts regarding
jurisdiction, the nature of her claim(s), or a demand. The
Complaint fails to comply with Rule 8, Fed.R.Civ.P.
Submission of a blank complaint form is not sufficient to
establish subject matter jurisdiction or state a cause of
action against a defendant in U.S. District Court.
conclusion, Plaintiff's Complaint fails because Plaintiff
does not allege any facts or law from which the Court can
find that it has subject matter jurisdiction over her case.
Nor has Plaintiff stated any facts sufficient to state a
claim against the named Defendant for which relief may be
granted. Therefore, the Complaint will be dismissed.
LEAVE TO AMEND
foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Complaint will be
dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may
be granted. Within 30 days, Plaintiff may submit a first
amended complaint to cure the deficiencies outlined above.
Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document
that it is the “First Amended Complaint.”
amended complaint supersedes the original complaint.
Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir.
1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner &
Co.,896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After
amendment, the Court will treat an original complaint as
nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of
action that was raised in the original complaint and that was
voluntarily dismissed or was dismissed without prejudice is
waived if it is not alleged in a first amended complaint.
Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th
Cir. 2012) (en banc). If Plaintiff files an amended
complaint, Plaintiff must write short, plain statements
telling the Court: (1) the law Plaintiff believes Defendant
did not follow; (2) the name of the Defendant who Plaintiff
is suing; (3) exactly what that Defendant did or failed to
do; (4) how the action or inaction of that Defendant is
connected to the violation of Plaintiff's rights; and (5)
what specific injury Plaintiff suffered because of that
Defendant's conduct and the relief Plaintiff seeks.
See Rizzo, 423 U.S. at 377. Plaintiff must repeat
this process for each person or entity she names as a
Defendant. If Plaintiff fails to ...