Karen Edmon v. Benjermine Schuler et al

Filing 7

ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL by Judge John F. Walter. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (iv)

1
2

JS-6

3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

) NO. EDCV 20-1428-JFW (KS)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
) ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
)
BENJERMINE SCHULER, et al,
)
Defendants.
)
_________________________________ )
KAREN EDMON,

16
17

On July 16, 2020, Plaintiff, a California resident proceeding pro se, filed a complaint

18

(the “Complaint”) against the County of Riverside and others in connection with the death of

19

her daughter. (Dkt. No. 1.) It is wholly unclear from the Complaint and its attachments what

20

actions any defendant took that caused Plaintiff’s daughter’s death, and the Court cannot

21

determine the date or cause of Plaintiff’s daughter’s death or the number of, and legal basis

22

for, Plaintiff’s claims. (See generally id.) Accordingly, the Complaint is subject to dismissal

23

for failure to state a claim and comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

24

See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 1996) (pleading violates Rule 8 if “one

25

cannot determine from the complaint who is being sued, for what relief, and on what theory”);

26

United States ex rel. Cafasso v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc., 637 F.3d 1047, 1059 (9th Cir.

27

2011) (a complaint violates Rule 8 if a defendant would have difficulty understanding and

28

responding to it).

1

1
2

Additionally, on July 20, 2020, the Court notified Plaintiff that she had failed to pay

3

the filing fee and had not filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. No. 4.) On

4

August 10, 2020, after more than three weeks had passed and Plaintiff had not responded to

5

the Court’s notification, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause, no later than August 24,

6

2020, why the action should not be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee or obtain

7

authorization to proceed without prepayment of the fee. (Dkt. No. 6.)

8
9

More than two months have now passed since the Court issued its July 10, 2020

10

notification, and three weeks have passed since Plaintiff’s August 24, 2020 deadline for paying

11

the filing fee or filing a request to proceed without prepayment of the fee. To date, Plaintiff

12

has neither paid the filing fee nor requested to proceed in forma pauperis. In light of the

13

foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED.

14
15

DATED:

September 15, 2020

16

________________________________
JOHN F. WALTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20

Presented by:

21
22
23
24

KAREN L. STEVENSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26
27
28

2