Lee et al v. United States Department of Agriculture et al
Filing
12
ORDER DIRECTING Plaintiff to Submit USM-285 Forms Within Thirty (30) Days, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 9/19/2011. Service is approrpiate for United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Summons Form, # 2 USM Civil Instructions). (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
KEE LEE dba CHIN’S MARKET AND
KITCHEN,
10
Plaintiff,
11
v.
12
13
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
14
Defendants.
15
) 1:11cv0881 AWI DLB
)
)
) ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF
) TO SUBMIT USM-285 FORMS
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
16
Plaintiff Kee Lee dba Chin’s Market and Kitchen (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and
17
informa pauperis, filed this action on March 31, 2011. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on
18
August 15, 2011, requesting judicial review of an administrative decision by the United States
19
Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) permanently disqualifying Plaintiff from participating in
20
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (“SNAP”).
21
DISCUSSION
22
A.
Screening Standard
23
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the court must conduct an initial review of the
24
complaint for sufficiency to state a claim. The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof
25
if the court determines that the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim
26
upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
27
from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). If the court determines that the complaint fails to state
28
1
1
a claim, leave to amend may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the complaint can be
2
cured by amendment.
3
In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the Court must accept as true the allegations
4
of the complaint in question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, 425 U.S. 738, 740
5
(1976), construe the pro se pleadings liberally in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, Resnick
6
v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and resolve all doubts in the Plaintiff’s favor,
7
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969).
8
B.
Plaintiff’s Allegations
9
Plaintiff operates a retail business in which the majority of his customers are SNAP
10
participants. By a final agency decision, the USDA permanently disqualified Plaintiff from
11
participating in SNAP. Plaintiff alleges that the USDA’s actions were unlawful, arbitrary,
12
capricious, discriminatory and denied him due process.
13
14
15
It appears that Plaintiff’s amended complaint is adequate to state a cause of action.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.
16
17
United States of America
2.
18
19
Service is appropriate for the following Defendant:
The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff one USM-285 form, one summons, an
instruction sheet and a copy of the amended complaint filed August 15, 2011.
3.
Within THIRTY (30) DAYS from the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall complete
20
the attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the completed
21
Notice to the Court with the following documents:
22
a.
One completed summons;
23
b.
One completed USM-285 form for each Defendant; and
24
c.
Three (3) copies of the amended complaint filed on August 15, 2011.
25
4.
Plaintiff need not attempt service on Defendant and need not request waiver of
26
service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the Court will direct the
27
United States Marshal to serve the above-named Defendant pursuant to Federal
28
Rule of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs.
2
1
5.
2
3
4
The failure to comply with this Order will result in a Recommendation that this
action be dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
3b142a
September 19, 2011
/s/ Dennis L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?