Sandoval v. Security Officer Training Center

Filing 5

ORDER Granting Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; Denying Reqeust for Appointment of Counsel as Moot; and Dismissing Complaint with Prejudice. Signed by Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz on 12/6/2010. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jer)

-WVG Sandoval v. Security Officer Training Center

Doc. 5

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 Honorable Barry Ted Moskowitz United States District Judge 1
10cv2479 BTM(WVG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
GRACE L. SANDOVAL, v. SECURITY OFFICER TRAINING CENTER, Defendant. Plaintiff Grace L. Sandoval, proceeding pro se, has filed a Complaint, along with a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis ("IFP"), and a Request for Appointment Counsel. Based on the information provided by Plaintiff, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's IFP motion. 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. The Complaint is but one in a series of frivolous complaints filed by Plaintiff. 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, 745 F.2d 1221, 1228 n.9 (9th Cir. 1984). As such, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff's Request for Appointment of Counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: December 6, 2010 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 10cv2479 BTM(WVG) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS; DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AS MOOT; AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE

Dockets.Justia.com