Smith v. Microsoft Corporation

Filing 17

ORDER dismissing case without leave to amend Smith's amended complaint by Judge Richard A Jones. (RS) cc plaintiff

Download PDF
HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 CHARMANE SMITH, Plaintiff, 10 11 12 v. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ORDER MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant. 13 14 Case No. C16-1771-RAJ This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. For the reasons that follow, the Court DISMISSES pro se Plaintiff Charmane Smith’s complaint without leave to amend. On November 14, 2016, Smith filed this action alleging “serious security flaws” in computer software designed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation. Dkt. # 5. In doing so, Smith filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. # 1. Judge Theiler granted Smith’s application, but recommended that the Court review Smith’s action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). On November 21, 2016, the Court dismissed Smith’s complaint. The Court did so 23 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), which requires the Court to dismiss the complaint 24 of an in forma pauperis plaintiff if that complaint fails to state a claim. In dismissing 25 Smith’s complaint, the Court granted leave to amend. Smith has since filed an amended 26 complaint. Dkt. # 10. 27 28 The Court’s authority to grant in forma pauperis status derives from 28 U.S.C. ORDER – 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 § 1915. The Court is required to dismiss an in forma pauperis plaintiff’s case if the Court determines that “the action . . . (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). A complaint is frivolous if it lacks a basis in law or fact. Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2005). A complaint fails to state a claim if it does not “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 568 (2007). In Smith’s amended complaint, Smith alleges unsafe design defects in Microsoft’s products that occurred as a result of “criminal exploitation of security flaws in Microsoft Operating System Products by Black Hat Hackers.” Dkt. # 10 at 2. Among other things, these design defects have allegedly enabled criminals to disable vehicles, buildings, telephones, ambulances, and police departments and to remotely set fires and explosions. Id. at 3. Smith requests damages between $96 million and $3.2 billion. Id. at 9. These allegations lack any conceivable basis in fact and fail to state a plausible claim. Accordingly, Smith’s complaint is frivolous and fails to state a valid claim for relief. For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES without leave to amend Smith’s amended complaint. Dkt. # 10. 18 19 DATED this 28th day of April, 2017. 20 22 A 23 The Honorable Richard A. Jones United States District Judge 21 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER – 2

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?