Von Karl v. Rosenblum et al

Filing 4

OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in forma pauperis 1 is DENIED and the Complaint 2 is DISMISSED, without service of process. Signed on 03/06/2017 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (rs) Modified on 3/7/2017 (rs).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION GIA VON KARL, No. 3:17-cv-00288-MO Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. OREGON, et al., Defendants. MOSMAN, J., Plaintiff, through a purported “Authorized Representative” named Jayasri Bhalla El, filed a Complaint [2] against multiple defendants based on allegations that they have violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and that they have harassed, extorted, and threatened to convict Plaintiff for a traffic violation. Plaintiff also filed an Application to Proceed in forma pauperis [1], which also appears to be signed by Jayasri Bhalla El. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), a complaint filed in forma pauperis must be dismissed before service of process if it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Plaintiff may not be represented in Federal Court by an “authorized representative” who is not an attorney. Thus, Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in forma pauperis [1] is DENIED and the 1 – OPINION AND ORDER Complaint [2] is DISMISSED, without service of process IT IS SO ORDERED. 6th DATED this _______ day of March, 2017. /s/ Michael W. Mosman ____________________________ MICHAEL W. MOSMAN Chief United States District Judge 2 – OPINION AND ORDER

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?