Eberwein et al v. Davis

Filing 4

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND DEFERRING IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION. Plaintiffs must file an amended complaint on or before July 26, 2013.(Illston, Susan) (Filed on 7/2/2013) Modified on 7/2/2013 (ysS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

ROBERT EBERWEIN, et al.,

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

No. C 13-2740 SI

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND
DEFERRING IN FORMA PAUPERIS
APPLICATION

v.
TRACEY DAVIS,
Defendant.

/

13
14

On June 14, 2013, plaintiffs filed a complaint and a request to proceed in forma pauperis in this

15

Court. For the reasons stated below, the Court DISMISSES plaintiffs’ complaint with leave to amend.

16

Because the Court has dismissed the complaint, it DEFERS ruling on the in forma pauperis application.

17

The primary portion of plaintiffs’ complaint consists of a single handwritten page, stating:

18

20

To the Court this Complaint involves my employer General Motors filing Bankruptcy
in 2009 Giving Notice Going out of mortgage Business Sept 2008. GMAC is my
employer, Lender, Debt Collector, and they sold our loans to Pite Duncan, Executive
Trustee Services, U.S. Trustee Office Retaliated 2005-2013 have not paid our proof of
of cliams [mistakes in original]

21

This explanation is insufficient to notify either the Court or defendants what the factual basis

22

underlying the complaint is. More importantly, it is unclear under what law or laws plaintiffs assert

23

their claims. Attached to the complaint are multiple documents from other court cases that appear to

24

involve the parties. These cases are in various courts: the United States Bankruptcy Court for the

25

Southern District of New York, this District, the Contra Costa County Superior Court of California, and

26

the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. However, it is unclear how

27

any of these documents relate to the instant case.

19

28

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court must review complaints filed in forma pauperis

1

to determine whether they are frivolous or fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See

2

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii). In this instance, the Court finds that it must dismiss plaintiffs’

3

complaint because the complaint fails to state a federal claim as it is currently written. Plaintiffs fail to

4

allege any violations of federal law or clearly state a factual basis for their complaint.

5

If plaintiffs wish to proceed in federal court, they must file an amended complaint that makes

6

the basis for federal court jurisdiction more explicit. Plaintiffs must describe to the Court in greater

7

detail the actions defendant took that caused their claim, and the laws under which they seek relief.

8

Plaintiffs must file an amended complaint on or before July 26, 2013. If plaintiffs fail to file

9

an amended complaint by that date, the matter will be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiffs’ application

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

to proceed in forma pauperis is deferred for decision after filing of an amended complaint.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Dated: July 2, 2013
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2