Fatani v. Arnet et al

Filing 18

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 3 Complaint, filed by Mafoa E.L. Fatani. The Court recommends this case be dismissed. Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells no longer assigned to case. Objections to R&R due by 3/10/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells on 2/24/2009. (rlr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION MAFOA E.L. FATANI, Plaintiff, v. Civil No. 2:08 cv 303 DB THOMAS ARNET et al., Defendants. Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells Judge Dee Benson REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Mafoa Fatani filed a pro se civil rights complaint 1 on April 21, 2008, under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1985. Previously, the Court granted Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma paurperis. 2 Plaintiff now seeks official service of process 3 and appointment of counsel. 4 Having reviewed Plaintiff's complaint and the record in this case, 5 the Court recommends that Plaintiff's case be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915. Plaintiff's Complaint makes reference to losing "properties in both medical brain injuries and personal injuries" 6 and therefore Mr. Fatani must come to this Court to "claim my properties." 7 Plaintiff goes on to state that "they gave me medicines to take, they sell my own solely properties [and] people buying and using my own properties." 8 1 2 Docket no. 3. Docket no. 2. 3 Docket no. 6. 4 Docket no. 5. 5 The Court construes Mr. Fatani's pleadings liberally. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972). 6 Complaint p. 3. 7 Id. 8 Id. at p. 5. After an initial review of Plaintiff's Complaint, the Court afforded Mr. Fatani an opportunity to supplement or amend his Complaint in hopes that enough information would be presented to determine whether Mr. Fatani has a cognizable claim. 9 Mr. Fatani's response, however, failed to provide any additional information that would translate into any basis to assert a Civil Rights Complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1985. Additionally, due in part to Mr. Fatani's medical condition, the Court appointed Mr. Fatani pro bono counsel, Seth Mott, for the limited purposes of reviewing his case and determining whether Plaintiff had a cognizable claim. 10 Mr. Mott has now met with Mr. Fatani and provided him advice. Because Mr. Fatani was granted permission to proceed in forum pauperis, the provisions of the in forma pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. 1915, apply. Under 1915 the Court shall, at any time, sua sponte dismiss the case if the Court determines that the Complaint is frivolous or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 11 The Court has carefully reviewed Plaintiff's filings, and made every effort to try and determine a claim or cause of action from the file, but has been unable to do so. Accordingly, the Court recommends that this case be DISMISSED. Finally, Plaintiff's Motion for Service of Process should be DENIED. And Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel should be deemed MOOT because counsel has already assisted Plaintiff in this case. RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing, the court recommends this case be dismissed. Copies of this report and recommendation are being mailed to all parties who are hereby notified of their right to object. Any objection must be filed within ten days after receiving this Report and 9 10 11 See Order dated December 4, 2008; see also Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). Docket no. 17. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). 2 Recommendation. Failure to object may constitute a waiver of objections upon subsequent review. DATED this 24th day of February, 2009. Brooke C. Wells United States Magistrate Judge 3

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?