Iegorova v. Johnson

Filing 3

ORDER granting 2 Motion to Proceed IFP signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/2/17: The complaint is DISMISSED. Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LIUDMYLA IEGOROVA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

v.

No. 2:17-cv-02001 MCE AC (PS)

ORDER

JOLANDA JOHNSON,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was accordingly referred to the

18

undersigned by E.D. Cal. 302(c)(21). Plaintiff has filed a request for leave to proceed in forma

19

pauperis (“IFP”), and has submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C.

20

§ 1915(a)(1). The motion to proceed IFP will therefore be granted.

21
22

I. SCREENING
The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally

23

“frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks

24

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

25

Plaintiff must assist the court in determining whether or not the complaint is frivolous, by drafting

26

the complaint so that it complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Fed. R. Civ. P.”).

27
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are available online at www.uscourts.gov/rules28
1

1
2
3

policies/current-rules-practice-procedure/federal-rules-civil-procedure.
Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the complaint must contain (1) a “short and
plain statement” of the basis for federal jurisdiction (that is, the reason the case is filed in this

4
court, rather than in a state court), (2) a short and plain statement showing that plaintiff is entitled
5
6

to relief (that is, who harmed the plaintiff, and in what way), and (3) a demand for the relief

7

sought. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff’s claims must be set forth simply, concisely and directly.

8

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(d)(1). Forms are available to help pro se plaintiffs organize their complaint in

9

the proper way. They are available at the Clerk’s Office, 501 I Street, 4th Floor (Rm. 4-200),

10
11

Sacramento, CA 95814, or online at www.uscourts.gov/forms/pro-se-forms.
A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.

12
13
14

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the
court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they

15

are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations in the light most favorable to the

16

plaintiff, and (3) resolve all doubts in the plaintiff’s favor. See Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327; Von

17

Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasadena, 592 F.3d 954, 960 (9th Cir. 2010), cert.

18

denied, 564 U.S. 1037 (2011).

19
The court applies the same rules of construction in determining whether the complaint
20
21

states a claim on which relief can be granted. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (court

22

must accept the allegations as true); Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974) (court must

23

construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff). Pro se pleadings are held to a

24

less stringent standard than those drafted by lawyers. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520

25

(1972). However, the court need not accept as true conclusory allegations, unreasonable

26

inferences, or unwarranted deductions of fact. Western Mining Council v. Watt, 643 F.2d 618,

27
624 (9th Cir. 1981). A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action does not suffice
28
2

1

to state a claim. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555-57 (2007); Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

2

556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

3

To state a claim on which relief may be granted, the plaintiff must allege enough facts “to

4
state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. “A claim has
5
6

facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the

7

reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at

8

678.  A pro se litigant is entitled to notice of the deficiencies in the complaint and an opportunity

9

to amend, unless the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured by amendment. See Noll v.

10

Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987).

11
12

A. The Complaint

13

Plaintiff has named a defendant who, according to her complaint, appears to be an

14

employee of In-Home Support Services (“IHSS”), a program of the State of California

15

Department of Developmental Services. ECF No. 1 at 2-3. Plaintiff alleges that the defendant,

16

Ms. Johnson, refused to connect a phone call to a supervisor on September 24, 2017 at 1:40 p.m.

17

Id. Plaintiff also appears to allege that her social worker did not come to her apartment on

18

September 26, 2017 because Ms. Johnson did not send her a letter or schedule a new intake

19

interview. Id. Plaintiff alleges that her care provider spoke with Ms. Johnson, and Ms. Jonson

20

harassed the care provider with false, rude information and words. Id. at 3. Plaintiff seeks $55

21

million in damages. Id.

22

B. Analysis

23

The complaint does not contain a “short and plain” statement setting forth the basis for

24

federal jurisdiction, plaintiff’s entitlement to relief, or the relief that is sought, even though those

25

things are required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1)-(3). The exact nature of what happened to plaintiff

26

is obscured by the complaint, which contains apparently disconnected events and circumstances

27

that seem mostly unrelated to the only defendant in this case. The court cannot tell from

28

examining the complaint what legal wrong was done to plaintiff, by whom and when, or how any
3

1

alleged harm is connected to the relief plaintiff seeks.

2
3

II. AMENDING THE COMPLAINT
If plaintiff chooses to amend the complaint, the amended complaint must allege facts

4

establishing the existence of federal jurisdiction. In addition, it must contain a short and plain

5

statement of plaintiff’s claims. The allegations of the complaint must be set forth in sequentially

6

numbered paragraphs, with each paragraph number being one greater than the one before, each

7

paragraph having its own number, and no paragraph number being repeated anywhere in the

8

complaint. Each paragraph should be limited “to a single set of circumstances” where

9

possible. Rule 10(b). As noted above, forms are available to help plaintiffs organize their

10

complaint in the proper way. They are available at the Clerk’s Office, 501 I Street, 4th Floor

11

(Rm. 4-200), Sacramento, CA 95814, or online at www.uscourts.gov/forms/pro-se-forms.

12

Plaintiff must avoid excessive repetition of the same allegations. Plaintiff must avoid

13

narrative and storytelling. That is, the complaint should not include every detail of what

14

happened, nor recount the details of conversations (unless necessary to establish the claim), nor

15

give a running account of plaintiff’s hopes and thoughts. Rather, the amended complaint should

16

contain only those facts needed to show how the defendant legally wronged the plaintiff.

17

The amended complaint must not force the court and the defendants to guess at what is

18

being alleged against whom. See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 1996)

19

(affirming dismissal of a complaint where the district court was “literally guessing as to what

20

facts support the legal claims being asserted against certain defendants”). The amended

21

complaint must not require the court to spend its time “preparing the ‘short and plain statement’

22

which Rule 8 obligated plaintiffs to submit.” Id. at 1180. The amended complaint must not

23

require the court and defendants to prepare lengthy outlines “to determine who is being sued for

24

what.” Id. at 1179.

25

Also, the amended complaint must not refer to a prior pleading in order to make plaintiff’s

26

amended complaint complete. An amended complaint must be complete in itself without

27

reference to any prior pleading. Local Rule 220. This is because, as a general rule, an amended

28

complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Pacific Bell Tel. Co. v. Linkline
4

1

Communications, Inc., 555 U.S. 438, 456 n.4 (2009) (“[n]ormally, an amended complaint

2

supersedes the original complaint”) (citing 6 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice &

3

Procedure § 1476, pp. 556-57 (2d ed. 1990)). Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an

4

original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently

5

alleged.

6
7

III. PRO SE PLAINTIFF’S SUMMARY
The court cannot tell from plaintiff’s complaint what legal harm was done to her. The

8

court is dismissing plaintiff’s complaint, but allowing her to submit an amended complaint within

9

30 days of this order. If plaintiff chooses to submit an amended complaint, it must clearly state

10

who did what to her, and why she believes she should be able to get legal relief. Plaintiff needs to

11

tell the court, in simple terms, what laws she believes were violated, who she believes violated

12

them, and how the violations impacted her. Without this information, the court cannot tell what

13

legal claims plaintiff is trying to bring against the defendant. If plaintiff does not submit an

14

amended complaint by the deadline, her case will be dismissed.

15
16

IV. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

17

1. Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is GRANTED.

18

2. The complaint (ECF No. 1), is DISMISSED because it does not contain the short and

19

plain statement of the claim required by Rule 8(a), and because it names a defendant who

20

is immune from suit.

21

3. Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint that

22

names defendants who are amenable to suit, and which complies with the instructions

23

given above. If plaintiff fails to timely comply with this order, the undersigned may

24

recommend that this action be dismissed.

25

DATED: October 2, 2017

26
27
28
5