Gonzalez v. State of California

Filing 3

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; ORDER GRANTING 2 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees or Costs; and ORDER Directing Plaintiff to Return Consent Form signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 10/2/2015. First Amended Complaint due within thirty (30) days. Consent/Decline Form due by 11/3/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form). (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARCOS ANTHONY GONZALEZ,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 1: 15-cv-01221---BAM
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

v.
(Doc. 1)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

15

Defendant.

16

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO
PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF
FEES OR COSTS
(Doc. 2)

17

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO
RETURN CONSENT FORM

18
19

INTRODUCTION

20
21

On August 6, 2015, Marcos Anthony Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”), appearing pro se, filed an

22

application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2.) A review of his application reveals that

23

Plaintiff is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis and his application is GRANTED. 28 U.S.C. §

24

1915(a).

25

Plaintiff also has filed a complaint naming the State of California as defendant in this

26

action. (Doc. 1.) The Court has screened the complaint and orders that it be dismissed with leave

27

to amend.

28

///
1

1

A.

2

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court must dismiss a case if at any time the Court

Screening Standard

3

determines that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In

4

determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the Court applies the same pleading

5

standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). A complaint must contain “a short and

6

plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P.

7

8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of

8

a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

9

556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

10
11

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007)).
“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to

12

relief that is plausible on its face.’” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570).

13

“[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are ‘merely consistent with’ a defendant’s liability . . .

14

‘stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.’” Iqbal, 556

15

U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Further, although a court must accept as true all

16

factual allegations contained in a complaint, a court need not accept a plaintiff’s legal conclusions

17

as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
Plaintiff’s Allegations

18

B.

19

Plaintiff’s complaint, titled a “First Amended Complaint,” contains a list of allegations

20

identified as “Discrimination,” “Aggravated Assault” and “Terrorist Threats” against Defendant

21

State of California, Tulare County. (Doc. 1 at 2.) Plaintiff seeks 32.5 million in damages.

22

Plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege any facts; therefore, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon

23

which relief can be granted. Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to amend his complaint and is

24

provided with the following pleading and legal standards to assist him with filing an amended

25

complaint.

26
27
28

DISCUSSION
As discussed more fully below, Plaintiff’s complaint fails to comply with Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 8(a) and 10(b). Further, Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which
2

1

relief can be granted and seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such

2

relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), (iii). As Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he will be given an

3

opportunity to amend his complaint. To assist Plaintiff, the Court provides the following

4

pleading and legal standards.

5

A.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8

6

Plaintiff’s complaint does not contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing

7

that he is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Although the Federal Rules adopt a flexible

8

pleading policy, a complaint must give fair notice and state the elements of the claim plainly and

9

succinctly. Jones v. Community Redev. Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). While detailed

10

allegations are not required, a plaintiff must set forth “the grounds of his entitlement to relief [,]”

11

which “requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a

12

cause of action . . . .” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (internal quotations and citations omitted).
In this instance, Plaintiff’s mere labels of purported violations are not sufficient to satisfy

13
14

the pleading requirements of Rule 8. Plaintiff must set forth the facts underlying his claims. If

15

Plaintiff amends his complaint, he must include the factual basis of his allegations. Simply listing

16

the parties or causes of action is not sufficient. Plaintiff must explain his case with specificity.

17

B.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(b)

18

Rule 10(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure also requires a plaintiff to state claims

19

in “numbered paragraphs, each limited as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.”

20

Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Moreover, “[i]f doing so would promote clarity, each claim founded on a

21

separate transaction or occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b).

22

Plaintiff’s complaint style and formatting fails to comply with Rule 10(b). He must do more than

23

simply list his purported causes of action. In Plaintiff’s amended complaint, he must comply with

24

Rule 10(b).

25

C.

Eleventh Amendment Immunity

26

Plaintiff names the State of California as the defendant in this action.1 The Eleventh

27
1

28

The State of California is the sole defendant identified in the caption. In the body of the complaint, Plaintiff
identifies one defendant as the State of California Tulare County. (Doc. 1 at 2.)

3

1

Amendment erects a general bar against federal lawsuits brought against the state. Wolfson v.

2

Brammer, 616 F.3d 1045, 1065-66 (9th Cir. 2010). While “[t]he Eleventh Amendment does not

3

bar suits against a state official for prospective relief,” Wolfson, 616 F.3d at 1066, suits against

4

the state or its agencies are barred absolutely, regardless of the form of relief sought. E.g.,

5

Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 100, 104 S.Ct. 900, 79 L.Ed.2d 67

6

(1984); Buckwalter v. Nevada Bd. of Medical Examiners, 678 F.3d 737, 740 n. 1 (9th Cir.2012).

7

Accordingly, Plaintiff may not bring a monetary damages action against the State of California.

8

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

9

For the reasons set forth above, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s complaint fails to comply

10

with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 10(b). Plaintiff’s complaint also fails to state a claim

11

upon which relief can be granted and inappropriately seeks monetary relief against a defendant

12

who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), (iii). However, in an abundance

13

of caution, and because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he will be given leave to amend the

14

complaint to cure these deficiencies to the extent he can do so in good faith. Accordingly, it is

15

HEREBY ORDERED that:

16

1.

Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed for failure to comply with Federal Rules of Civil

17

Procedure 8 and 10, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for seeking

18

monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

19
20
21

2.

Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a

first amended complaint; and
3.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a Consent to Magistrate Jurisdiction

22

Form to Plaintiff. Plaintiff shall complete the form and advise the Court whether or not he will

23

consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction no later than November 3, 2015.

24
25
26
27

4.

If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order, the Court will dismiss this action

for failure to obey a court order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

October 2, 2015

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
4

1
2
3
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
5