Turner v. Stripe Payments Company et al

Filing 12

Order by Judge Jon S. Tigar adopting Report and Recommendations as to 8 Report and Recommendations..(mll, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/13/2023)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TERRANCE TURNER, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Case No. 23-cv-03385-JST ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION v. STRIPE PAYMENTS COMPANY, et al., Re: ECF No. 8 Defendants. 12 13 The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Alex Tse’s report and recommendation to 14 dismiss this action for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). ECF No. 8. 15 In his original complaint against Defendants, Plaintiff Terrance Turner alleged that 16 Defendants are “misusing data in violation of Computer Fraud and Abuse Case Act, Wire Fraud 17 Statutes, and other financial, consumer protection, privacy laws and legal statutes.” ECF No. 7 at 18 4. Judge Tse found that these allegations were legal conclusions “not entitled to the assumption of 19 truth.” ECF No. 6 at 1 (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 680 (2009)). In assessing 20 Turner’s amended complaint—which “add[ed] over a dozen criminal claims under Title 18 of the 21 United States Code,” as well as a “host of incomprehensible allegations”—Judge Tse reasoned 22 that Turner did not have “standing to enforce federal criminal laws.” ECF No. 8 at 1–2. Turner’s 23 Fourth Amendment claim was also dismissed, as the Fourth Amendment only protects “intrusions 24 by government actors, not private actors such as Stripe.” Id. at 2. Judge Tse concluded that 25 “[g]iven that Turner failed to cure the deficiencies previously identified by the Court, granting 26 further leave to amend would be futile.” Id. at 3. 27 28 Turner timely submitted objections to the order. ECF No. 10.1 The Court has reviewed 1 2 the amended complaint, Judge Tse’s recommendation, and Turner’s objections de novo. Turner’s 3 objections fail to address the deficiencies outlined by Judge Tse. Although Turner’s objections 4 raise seven new claims, the Court finds that each lacks merit. The new claims level general 5 criticisms at Defendants without coherently explaining the harm that Turner may have suffered. 6 Turner’s objections also consist largely of ranting and swearing. Accordingly, the Court finds that Judge Tse’s report is well-reasoned, thorough, and adopts 7 8 it in full. Turner’s complaint is therefore dismissed with prejudice. The Court hereby enters 9 judgment against Turner. The Clerk of Court shall close the file in this matter. IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Dated: November 13, 2023 ______________________________________ JON S. TIGAR United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Turner submitted another set of objections on October 21, 2023—ten days after the deadline. ECF No. 11. Because the second set of objections is both untimely and duplicative, the Court will only consider the objections raised in ECF No. 10. 2

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?