Bloch v. Facebook Inc.

Filing 6

ORDER dismissing 1 Complaint, filed by Marilyn Bloch, with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall file a first amended complaint or dismissal by 8/31/2017. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 8/7/2017. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/7/2017)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

MARILYN BLOCH,
Plaintiff,

6
7
8

v.

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
Re: Dkt. No. 1

FACEBOOK INC.,
Defendant.

9
10

Case No.4:17-cv-03803-KAW

The Court has received Plaintiff's complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

both filed in this Court on July 3, 2017. The Court may authorize a plaintiff to file an action in

12

federal court without prepayment of fees or security if the plaintiff submits an affidavit showing

13

that he or she is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). On July 7,

14

2017, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed IFP, but decided that the issuance of

15

summons and service would be determined separately.

16

The in forma pauperis statute provides that the Court shall dismiss the case if at any time

17

the Court determines that the allegation of poverty is untrue, or that the action (1) is frivolous or

18

malicious, (2) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief

19

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

20

Here, Plaintiff appears to be claiming that Facebook infringed on her copyrights by

21

suspending her Facebook account, and is seeking monetary damages and the restoration of her

22

account. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1 at 3.) Copyright infringement, however, requires an allegation of

23

infringement rather than preventing access to allegedly copyrighted works uploaded via a social

24

media platform, in which user rights are outlined in a Terms of Service Agreement. There is no

25

such allegation here, nor does it appear that, based on the facts described, that such an actionable

26

claim exists.

27
28

Thus, Plaintiff has failed to set forth "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that
the pleader is entitled to relief" as required by Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

1

Accordingly, pursuant to its authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court hereby dismisses

2

plaintiff's complaint with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint no later than

3

August 31, 2017 or the case will be dismissed with prejudice.

4

In amending her complaint, Plaintiff may wish to contact the Federal Pro Bono Project’s

5

Help Desk for assistance—a free service for pro se litigants—by calling [phone] to make

6

an appointment. While the Help Desk will not represent her, a licensed attorney may assist

7

Plaintiff in determining whether she has a viable claim against Facebook. If no viable claim

8

exists, Plaintiff should file a voluntary dismissal in lieu of an amended complaint, also by August

9

31, 2017.
Plaintiff may also wish to consult a manual the court has adopted to assist pro se litigants

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

in presenting their case. This manual, and other free information for pro se litigants, is available

12

online at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/proselitigants.

13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 7, 2017
______________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

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