Walker v. Social Security Administation et al

Filing 7

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that #5 the amended complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, with leave to amend. Amended Complaint deadline: 10/8/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler on 9/8/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)

Case 2:21-cv-01352-RFB-BNW Document 7 Filed 09/08/21 Page 1 of 4

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4
5

Annette D. Walker,
Plaintiff,

6

ORDER
v.

7
8

Case No. 2:21-cv-01352-RFB-BNW

Social Security Administration, et al.,
Defendants.

9
10

Before the Court is pro se plaintiff’s amended complaint (ECF No. 5), filed on August 19,

11
12

2021. Previously, the Court explained to Plaintiff that her complaint was difficult to follow and

13

that the events asserted in the complaint did not support any legal conclusions or even seem to

14

relate to one another. ECF No. 2. The Court dismissed the complaint and gave Plaintiff leave to

15

amend. Id. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint, but it suffers from similar deficiencies. As a

16

result, the Court will dismiss the complaint and give Plaintiff one last chance to file a second

17

amended complaint that comports with this order.

18
19

I.

Background
In the amended complaint, Plaintiff sues the following defendants: the Social Security

20

Administration, Attorney General A. Ford., Housing of Urban Development, “M. Fudge,

21

SNRHA/SNVRHA,” Wells Fargo Bank, and the State of Georgia. ECF No. 5 at 1. Plaintiff

22

alleges: “identity theft/discrimination/slander, defamation,” and domestic terrorism. Id.

23

The amended complaint starts out by explaining she has had black mold for three years

24

and “the landlord SNRHA only filed evictions—2018-2021.” Id. There is also mention of the

25

COVID pandemic. Id. Plaintiff alleges that the landlord was “in violation of rental agreements—

26

discrimination—other resident stayed at hotels or extended stays.” Id. at 2. Plaintiff also sets forth

27

certain statements made by the Social Security Administration, including the different dates she

28

was married and divorced, and the dates she received benefits as a result of being a widow. Id. at

Case 2:21-cv-01352-RFB-BNW Document 7 Filed 09/08/21 Page 2 of 4

1

2-3. In addition, she asserts that the Social Security Administration has barred her from all “SS

2

Bldgs without due process/which has resulted in slander, defamation, loss of business, mpacs

3

RICO, obstruction of justice.” Id. at 3. As to Wells Fargo, she asserts it has “violated,

4

discriminated, denied access to account,” “refuse[d] to change name, under paper reduction act”

5

while men’s names stay the same regardless of their marital status. Id. at 3-4. Wells Fargo also

6

allegedly refused to give Plaintiff a bank card. Id. at 4. All of this resulted in “broken family and

7

friendship, shame, and pain.” Plaintiff asks the Court to stop the “domestic terrorism” and fix her

8

marital rights. Id. at 4-5.

9
10

II.

Analysis
In screening a complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims and dismiss claims that

11

are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seek monetary

12

relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). A complaint is

13

frivolous if it contains “claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless,” such as “claims

14

describing fantastic or delusional scenarios.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-28 (1989).

15

Dismissal for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard for failure to

16

state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108,

17

1112 (9th Cir. 2012).

18

To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as

19

true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,

20

678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints and may only dismiss them “if it

21

appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which

22

would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Iqbal,

23

556 U.S. at 678). Here, even liberally construing plaintiff’s allegations, the Court finds that

24

plaintiff’s allegations once again describe delusional scenarios and lack any meaningful facts to

25

support her legal conclusions. The assertions are disjointed and do not relate to one another. Thus,

26

Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Court, therefore, will

27

recommend dismissal of Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice for the Plaintiff to file an

28

amended complaint.
Page 2 of 4

Case 2:21-cv-01352-RFB-BNW Document 7 Filed 09/08/21 Page 3 of 4

If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, the document must be titled “Amended

1
2

Complaint.” The amended complaint must contain a short and plain statement describing the

3

underlying case, the defendants’ involvement in the case, and the approximate dates of their

4

involvement. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a

5

flexible pleading standard, Plaintiff still must give a defendant fair notice of the Plaintiff’s claims

6

against it and Plaintiff’s entitlement to relief.
The amended complaint also must contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for

7
8

the Court’s jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1). Regarding jurisdiction, Plaintiff is advised

9

that “[f]ederal district courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing only that power

10

authorized by Constitution and statute.” K2 Am. Corp. v. Roland Oil & Gas, LLC, 653 F.3d 1024,

11

1027 (9th Cir. 2011) (quotation omitted). Federal district courts “have original jurisdiction of all

12

civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. §

13

1331. Federal district courts have original jurisdiction over civil actions in diversity cases “where

14

the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000” and where the matter is between

15

“citizens of different States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). “Section 1332 requires complete diversity of

16

citizenship; each of the plaintiffs must be a citizen of a different state than each of the

17

defendants.” Morris v. Princess Cruises, Inc., 236 F.3d 1061, 1067 (9th Cir. 2001).
Additionally, Plaintiff is advised that if she files an amended complaint, the original

18
19

complaint no longer serves any function in this case. As such, the amended complaint must be

20

complete in and of itself without reference to prior pleadings or other documents. The Court

21

cannot refer to a prior pleading or other documents to make Plaintiff’s amended complaint

22

complete.

23

III.

24

Conclusion
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the amended complaint (ECF No. 5) is

25

DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, with

26

leave to amend.

27
28
Page 3 of 4

Case 2:21-cv-01352-RFB-BNW Document 7 Filed 09/08/21 Page 4 of 4

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until October 8, 2021 to file an

2

amended complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint will result in a recommendation that

3

this case be dismissed.

4
5

DATED: September 8, 2021

6
7

BRENDA WEKSLER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 4 of 4