Wayne A. Taylor v. William Robinson Jr. et al

Filing 115

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION by Judge Dean D. Pregerson. See order for details. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (jy)

1
2

JS-6

3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

WAYNE A. TAYLOR,

Case No. CV13-6981-DDP (PJWx)

Plaintiff,

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

13
14

vs.

WILLIAM ROBINSON, JR.;
EVERLAST/SPARRING PARTNER;
16 CENTURY MARTIAL ARTS; TKO,
INC./SPARRING PARTNER,
15

17
18

Defendants.

19
20
21

This Court issued an Order to Show Cause why this action should not be

22

dismissed to Plaintiff on February 12, 2015 [Dkt. 107]. Plaintiff was directed to file a

23

brief within fourteen days, not to exceed ten pages, explaining why the action should

24

not be dismissed. Plaintiff filed a brief on March 11, 2015.

25

Having reviewed Plaintiff’s brief and the files in this action, the Court finds that

26

Plaintiff’s original Complaint does not comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8,

27

which requires that a complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim

28

showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Naked assertions,
CEN04-01:Dismissal [Proposed Order].DOCX:6-29-16

-1ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

1

conclusions, or mere recitations of the elements of a cause of action are not sufficient.

2

See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-678 (2009). The court is not persuaded that

3

Plaintiff’s original Complaint meets these requirements and Plaintiff’s explanation in

4

his March 11, 2015 brief does not address this Court’s concerns.

5

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s action is hereby dismissed, this matter is closed.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

Date: June 29, 2016

10

_________________________________
Hon. Dean D. Pregerson
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CEN04-01:Dismissal [Proposed Order].DOCX:6-29-16

-2-