Futch v. United States Department of Health and Human Services et al

Filing 6

ORDER: Plaintiff's request for IFP status 3 is granted. Plaintiff's complaint 1 is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff shall have until December 6, 2013, to file an amended complaint. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action without further notice if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint by December 6, 2013. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 11/15/2013.(ALS)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Darnell Lamont Futch, Plaintiff, 10 11 ORDER v. 12 No. CV13-02163-PHX-DGC United States Department of Health and Human Services, et. al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 Pro se Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) 16 without prepaying fees or costs. Doc. 3. The Court will grant the motion. The Court 17 will screen Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) before it is allowed 18 to be served. Pursuant to that screening, Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) will be dismissed. 19 I. Legal Standard. 20 In IFP proceedings, a district court “shall dismiss the case at any time if the court 21 determines that ... the action ... fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted[.]” 22 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). While much of section 1915 concerns prisoner litigation, section 23 1915(e) applies to all IFP proceedings. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126 n. 7 (9th 24 Cir. 2000) (en banc). “Section 1915(e) (2)(B)(ii) ... allows a district court to dismiss[ ] 25 sua sponte ... a complaint that fails to state a claim[.]” Id. at 1130. A district court 26 dismissing under section 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) “should grant leave to amend even if no 27 request to amend the pleading was made, unless it determines that the pleading could not 28 possibly be cured by the allegation of other facts.” Id. at 1127–29 (citations omitted). 1 Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[a] pleading that 2 states a claim for relief must contain ... a short and plain statement of the claim showing 3 that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). This short and plain statement 4 “need not contain detailed factual allegations; rather, it must plead ‘enough facts to state 5 a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Clemens v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 534 6 F.3d 1017, 1022 (9th Cir.2008) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 7 (2007)). Legal conclusions couched as factual allegations are not given a presumption of 8 truthfulness and “conclusory allegations of law and unwarranted inferences are not 9 sufficient.” Pareto v. F.D.I.C., 139 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir.1998). Dismissal is 10 appropriate where the complaint lacks a cognizable legal theory, lacks sufficient facts 11 alleged under a cognizable legal theory, or contains allegations disclosing some absolute 12 defense or bar to recovery. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept., 901 F.2d 696, 699 13 (9th Cir.1988); Weisbuch v. County of L.A., 119 F.3d 778, 783, n. 1 (9th Cir.1997). 14 II. Plaintiff's Complaint. 15 The one-page complaint in this case names the United States Department of 16 Health and Human Services, the Arizona Healthcare Cost Containment System, the 17 Arizona Department of Economic Security, and the Arizona State Legislature as 18 Defendants. Doc. 1. It contains no factual allegations; it merely quotes two state statutes 19 and demands seven billion dollars. Id. The complaint fails to state a claim against any 20 named defendant. 21 III. Leave to Amend and Plaintiff's Obligations. 22 In this circuit, “[a] pro se litigant must be given leave to amend his or her 23 complaint unless it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint could not be 24 cured by amendment.” Karim–Panahi v. L.A. Police Dep't, 839 F.2d 621, 623 (9th Cir. 25 1988). The Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice and allow Plaintiff to file 26 an amended complaint that properly states a claim for relief. Plaintiff shall have until 27 Friday, December 6, 2013 to file an amended complaint. If an amended complaint is 28 not filed by that date, the Clerk is directed to terminate this action without further order. -2- 1 Plaintiff is advised that he must become familiar with, and follow, the Federal 2 Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of the United States District Court for the District 3 of Arizona (“Local Rules”), which may be obtained in the Clerk of Court's office. For 4 purposes of the amended complaint, Plaintiff is directed to Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of 5 Civil Procedure. Rule 8(a) provides that a complaint “must contain (1) a short and plain 6 statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, ... (2) a short and plain statement of 7 the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for the relief 8 sought.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). These pleading requirements shall be set forth in separate 9 and discrete paragraphs. Rule 8(d) provides that each such paragraph “must be simple, 10 concise, and direct.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(d)(1). 11 The “short and plain statement of the claim” required by Rule 8(a)(2) must not 12 only designate a cause of action, but must also include enough factual allegations to 13 render the claim plausible. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint asserting 14 constitutional violations by federal or state officials, his pleading should include a 15 statement of the constitutional rights Plaintiff believes to have been violated, how each 16 right was violated, how each defendant contributed to the violation, and what injury was 17 caused by each alleged constitutional violation. Such factual allegations must provide 18 enough information to “allow[ ] the court to draw the reasonable inference that the 19 defendant[s are] liable for the misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1149. 20 If Plaintiff fails to prosecute this action or to comply with the rules or any Court 21 order, the Court may dismiss the action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 22 Procedure 41(b). 23 (holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing a pro se plaintiff's 24 complaint for failing to comply with a court order). See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260–61 (9th Cir.1992) 25 IT IS ORDERED: 26 1. Plaintiff’s request for IFP status (Doc. 3) is granted. 27 2. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) is dismissed without prejudice. 28 3. Plaintiff shall have until December 6, 2013, to file an amended complaint. -3- 1 2 3 4. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action without further notice if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint by December 6, 2013. Dated this 15th day of November, 2013. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?