Sandoval v. Americredit Financial

Filing 4

ORDER granting Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis 2 ; denying as moot Plaintiff's Request for Appointment of Counsel 3 and dismisses the complaint with prejudice 1 . Signed by Judge Irma E. Gonzalez on 12/16/09. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(tkl) (av1).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Grace L. Sandoval, proceeding pro se, has filed a complaint [Doc. No. 1], along with a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis ("IFP") [Doc. No. 2] and a Request for Appointment Counsel [Doc. No. 3]. Based on the information provided by Plaintiff, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's IFP motion, solely for the purpose of the motions currently before the Court. The Court is obligated to review a complaint filed IFP sua sponte and must dismiss the action if it determines that the complaint is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim for relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). After careful review, the Court finds that Plaintiff's complaint is frivolous and void of any plausible claims for relief. Because "it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by amendment," the Court DISMISSES the complaint with prejudice. Franklin v. Murphy, 245 F.2d 1221, 1228 n.9 (9th Cir. 1984).
AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL, Defendant. vs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
GRACE L. SANDOVAL, Plaintiff, CASE NO. 09-CV-02768-IEG (WMc)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS [Doc. No. 2]; DENYING AS MOOT REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL [Doc. No. 3]; DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE [Doc. No. 1].

09-cv-02768

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Accordingly, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff's Request for Appointment of Counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: December 16, 2009 IRMA E. GONZALEZ, Chief Judge United States District Court

09-cv-02768