Blank v. Sacramento Public Library

Filing 3

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/01/2016 ORDERING that Plaintiff shall complete and refile his request for in forma pauperis status within 14 days of the issuance of this Order. Plaintiff shall file an amended Complaint within 30 days. Failure to comply with this Order may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed. (Butolph, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PAUL LOUIS BLANK 12 13 14 15 No. 2:16-cv-02578 GEB GGH PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY, Defendant. 16 17 18 19 This court has jurisdiction to hear the matters that arise in this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(b)(1) and Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff has requested authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) to proceed in forma pauperis. 20 Plaintiff has submitted the affidavit required by 1915(a) but he has failed to complete it insofar as 21 he checked the box in section 3 indicating that he had received money in the last twelve months 22 in the form of disability or workers compensation payments, but has failed to “describe . . . each 23 source of money and state the amount received and what you expect you will continue to 24 receive.” Plaintiff shall, therefore, be ordered to provide an amended Application to proceed in 25 forma pauperis in which he completes this response within 14 days of the issuance of this order. 26 27 28 I. SCREENING Addressing IFP status does not end the court’s inquiry, however. The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to 1 1 state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is 2 immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). 3 Plaintiff must assist the court in making this determination by drafting his complaint so 4 that it contains a “short and plain statement” of the basis for federal jurisdiction (that is, the 5 reason the case is filed in this court, rather than in a state court), as well as a short and plain 6 statement showing that plaintiffs are entitled to relief (that is, who harmed the plaintiffs, and in 7 what way). Plaintiffs’ claims must be set forth simply, concisely and directly. See “Rule 8” of 8 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Fed. R. Civ. P. 8). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9 are available online at www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies/current-rules-practice-procedure/federal- 10 rules-civil-procedure. Forms are also available to help pro se plaintiffs organize their complaint 11 in the proper way. They are available at the Clerk’s Office, 501 I Street, 4th Floor, Sacramento, 12 CA 95814, or online at www.uscourts.gov/forms/pro-se-forms. 13 A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact. 14 Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 15 court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they 16 are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations in the light most favorable to the 17 plaintiff, and (3) resolve all doubts in the plaintiff’s favor. See Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327; 18 Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at 19 Pasadena, 592 F.3d 954, 960 (9th Cir. 2010), cert. denied, 564 U.S. 1037 (2011); Hebbe v. Pliler, 20 627 F.3d 338, 340 (9th Cir. 2010). 21 However, the court need not accept as true, legal conclusions cast in the form of factual 22 allegations, or allegations that contradict matters properly subject to judicial notice. See Western 23 Mining Council v. Watt, 643 F.2d 618, 624 (9th Cir. 1981); Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 24 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir.), as amended, 275 F.3d 1187 (2001). 25 Pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by lawyers. 26 Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Pro se complaints are construed liberally and may 27 only be dismissed if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support 28 of his claim which would entitle him to relief. Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2 1 2014). A pro se litigant is entitled to notice of the deficiencies in the complaint and an 2 opportunity to amend, unless the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured by amendment. 3 See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987). 4 II. THE COMPLAINT 5 Plaintiff purports to state a claim for violation of Title VI, a federal statute, codified at 42 6 U.S.C. § 2000d, against the Sacramento Public Library [hereinafter “Library”] for denying him 7 access to that facility. This statute states that “No person in the United States shall, on the 8 ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits 9 of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial 10 assistance.” Plaintiff has not identified the basis for his exclusion from the Sacramento Public 11 Library. Further, he has not stated facts that would provide a basis for this court to conclude that 12 the Library receives Federal financial assistance. Without such allegations regarding these two 13 qualifying conditions for seeking relief under Title VI, he has failed to state a claim for relief 14 that can be addressed by this court. The court will, however, give plaintiff an opportunity to 15 amend his complaint within 30 days of the issuance of this Order if he can plead these required 16 elements for a viable Title VI claim. 17 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 18 1. 19 20 21 22 Plaintiff shall complete and refile his request for in forma pauperis status within 14 days of the issuance of this Order; 2. Plaintiff shall file an amended Complaint within 30 days of the issuance of this Order that conforms to the requirements discussed. 3. Failure to comply with this Order may result in a recommendation that the action 23 be dismissed. 24 Dated: November 1, 2016 25 26 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?