Collazo-Perez v. Estado Libre Asociado de P.R. et al

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: See attached. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. Signed by Judge Pedro A. Delgado-Hernandez on 6/5/2017.(LMR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
JULIO COLLAZO-PEREZ,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL NO. 14-1648 (PAD)

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE
PUERTO RICO, et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Delgado-Hernández, District Judge.
Plaintiff initiated this action filing a Spanish-language Petition on August 27, 2014 (Docket
No. 2), requesting to appear in forma pauperis (Docket No. 7). On August 31, 2015, the court
denied as unsupported the request to proceed in forma pauperis; and granted plaintiff until
September 18, 2015 to refile a correct and complete version of the request, and file a certified
translation in the English language of the complaint and an informative motion plaintiff had filed
(Docket No. 8). It expressly warned that otherwise, the complaint would be stricken from the
record. Id. To date, plaintiff has failed to comply with the order.
Pursuant to 48 U.S.C. § 864, “[a]ll pleadings and proceedings in the United States District
Court for the District of Puerto Rico shall be conducted in the English language.” Similarly, Local
Rule 5(g) requires in part, that “[a]ll documents not in the English language which are presented
or filed, whether as evidence or otherwise, must be accompanied by a certified translation into
English prepared by an interpreter certified by the Administrative Office of the United States
Courts.”

Julio Collazo-Pérez v. Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico, et al.
Civil No. 14-1648 (PAD)
Memorandum and Order
Page 2

The First Circuit requires strict enforcement of the English-language requirement where
the untranslated document is key to the outcome of the proceedings. Puerto Ricans for Puerto Rico
Party v. Dalmau, 544 F.3d 58, 67 (1st Cir. 2008). As the First Circuit has explained, allowing the
outcome to turn on a non-English document would be “at odds with the premise of a unified and
integrated federal courts system.” Id.

Therefore, district courts should not consider such

documents. González-De-Blasini v. Family Department, 377 F.3d 81, 89 (1st Cir.2004).
Against this standard, the need for dismissal is apparent. The Complaint provides the
foundation for the action, subsequent developments, and ultimate disposition. Here, it was filed
in Spanish (Docket No. 2). And to date, no English-language translation has been submitted.
Besides, plaintiff has not submitted the document as ordered, has not proffered any explanation
for failure to do so, nor asked for an extension of time to file the required documents.
Consequently, in accordance with the order at Docket No. 8, the Spanish language complaint is
stricken from the record. There being no complaint, dismissal is warranted.
Judgment shall be entered accordingly.
SO ORDERED.
In San Juan, Puerto Rico, 5th day of June, 2017.
s/Pedro A. Delgado-Hernández
PEDRO A. DELGADO-HERNÁNDEZ
United States District Judge