Robi v. Microsoft Corporate Office HQ.
ORDER Directing Plaintiff To File An Amended Complaint, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 08/11/14. (nmarb, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-02117-BNB
HAILU BEKELE ROBI,
MICROSOFT CORPORATE OFFICE HQ,
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE
AN AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Hailu Bekele Robi, currently resides in Denver, Colorado. Plaintiff
initiated this action by filing pro se a Complaint and was granted leave to proceed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 on August 7, 2014. The Court must construe the
Complaint liberally because Plaintiff is not represented by an attorney. See Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir.
1991). The Court, however, should not act as a pro se litigant’s advocate. See Hall,
935 F.2d at 1110. For the following reasons, the Court will direct Plaintiff to file an
Generally, Plaintiff’s Complaint contains only copies of what appear to be federal
statutes. The only claim Plaintiff asserts against Microsoft is that it stole his intellectual
property through the use of the internet bonding system and that the storage of such
information in the Microsoft internal storage is theft.
The Court finds that the Complaint does not comply with the pleading
requirements of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The twin purposes of a
complaint are to give the opposing parties fair notice of the basis for the claims against
them so that they may respond and to allow the court to conclude that the allegations, if
proven, show that the is entitled to relief. See Monument Builders of Greater Kansas
City, Inc. v. American Cemetery Ass’n of Kansas, 891 F.2d 1473, 1480 (10th Cir. 1989).
The requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 are designed to meet these purposes. See TV
Communications Network, Inc. v. ESPN, Inc., 767 F. Supp. 1062, 1069 (D. Colo. 1991),
aff’d, 964 F.2d 1022 (10th Cir. 1992).
Specifically, Rule 8(a) provides that a complaint “must contain: (1) a short and
plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, . . . (2) a short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for
the relief sought . . . .” The philosophy of Rule 8(a) is reinforced by Rule 8(d)(1), which
provides that “[e]ach allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.” Taken
together, Rules 8(a) and (d)(1) underscore the emphasis placed on clarity and brevity
by the federal pleading rules. Prolix pleadings violate the requirements of Rule 8.
Plaintiff fails to set forth the basis for jurisdiction and what relief he is requesting.
In the Jurisdiction section of the form, Plaintiff has written, “Boulder” and “Colorado
Springs.” In the Request for Relief section, Plaintiff refers to what appears to be federal
statutes. Plaintiff also fails to state why the information that allegedly was stolen should
be considered intellectual property and how Microsoft has used the information to his
A decision to dismiss a complaint pursuant to Rule 8 is within the trial court’s
sound discretion. See Atkins v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 967 F.2d 1197, 1203 (8th Cir.
1992); Gillibeau v. City of Richmond, 417 F.2d 426, 431 (9th Cir. 1969). The Court,
however, will give Plaintiff an opportunity to cure the deficiencies in the Complaint by
submitting an Amended Complaint that meets the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8.
To state a claim in federal court Plaintiff must explain (1) what a defendant did to
him; (2) when the defendant did it; (3) how the defendant’s action harmed him; and (4)
what specific legal right the defendant violated. Nasious v. Two Unknown B.I.C.E.
Agents, 492 F.3d 1158, 1163 (10th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff file an Amended Complaint that complies with the above
directives, within thirty days from the date of this Order. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall obtain the Court-approved Complaint
form, along with the applicable instructions at www.cod.uscourts.gov, to be used in filing
the Amended Complaint. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails to file an Amended Complaint that
complies with this Order within the time allowed, the Court may dismiss this action
without further notice for the reasons discussed above.
DATED August 11, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge
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?