Germalic v. Ysursa

Filing 7

ORDER incorporating Initial Review Order by reference 5 Report and Recommendations; denying 6 Motion to Stay; dismissing with prejudice in its entirety 1 Complaint. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

JAMES GERMALIC,
Case No. 1:12-CV-00504-EJL
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
SECRETARY OF STATE OF IDAHO,
BEN YSURSA,
Defendant.

On January 4, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge Larry M. Boyle issued an
Initial Review Order in this matter. (Dkt. 5.) Because Plaintiff had not consented to
proceed before a magistrate judge, the Initial Review Order was drafted as a
recommendation to the District Court. The Plaintiff was advised he had fourteen days to
file any objections to the Initial Review Order. On January 16, 2013, Plaintiff filed a
Motion for Abeyance (Dkt.6). The Court has reviewed the pleading and will deem the
motion as an objection to the Initial Review Order. The matter is now ripe for the Court’s
consideration.

ORDER - 1

DISCUSSION
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings and recommendations made by the magistrate judge. Where
the parties object to a dispositive order of a magistrate judge, this Court shall make a de
novo determination of those portions of the report which objection is made. Id.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff James Germalic filed his action alleging Idaho’s Secretary of State makes
the requirements for having a name placed on the ballot for President of the United States
too onerous and the restrictions are in violation of his constitutional rights to run for
President.

DISCUSSION
The Court reviews the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Because Plaintiff
is appearing pro se, this court will liberally construe his pleadings. Eldridge v. Block, 832
F.2d 1132, 1137 (9th Cir.1987) (“The Supreme Court has instructed the federal courts to
liberally construe the ‘inartful pleading’ of pro se litigants.” (citing Boag v. MacDougall,
454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982) (per curiam)). Even construing Plaintiff’s Complaint liberally,
the Court agrees with Judge Boyle that the over 60 page Complaint is primarily a lengthy
discussion of Plaintiff’s religious, political, historical and personal views. Pro se litigants
ORDER - 2

are held to same procedural rules as counseled litigants. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565,
567 (9th Cir. 1987). The Court finds the Complaint does not meet the requirements of
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Nor does the Complaint set forth a claim that is facially plausible.
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). Mere conclusory statements by
Plaintiff are insufficient establish the elements for a constitutional challenge to Idaho’s
ballot requirements for candidates running for President. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662
(2009). Therefore, the Complaint must be dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiff’s motion for abeyance does not set forth good cause to hold this matter in
abeyance to allow Plaintiff further time to respond. Plaintiff had the opportunity to
respond to the Initial Review Order and such notice was set forth at the end of Judge
Boyle’s Order.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Initial Review Order of Judge Boyle (Dkt. 5) is incorporated by reference
as this Court’s own analysis of Plaintiff’s Complaint.
2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Abeyance (Dkt. 6) is DENIED.

ORDER - 3

3. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE IN ITS ENTIRETY
based on a failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and failure to state a plausible claim
upon which relief can be granted. No motions for reconsideration will be entertained by
the Court.

DATED: April 4, 2013

Honorable Edward J. Lodge
U. S. District Judge

ORDER - 4