Artem v. State of North Dakota et al

Filing 7

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO AMEND COMPLAINT WITHIN 21 DAYS by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (RS) cc plaintiff

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

5
6
7

GEORGE ARTEM,

8

Plaintiff,

9
10
11

v.
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13
14
15

)
) CASE NO. C17-0798 RSM
)
) ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO
) AMEND COMPLAINT
)
)
)
)
)

Pro Se Plaintiff George Artem, a Seattle resident, filed his Complaint on June 16, 2017.
Dkt. #6. Summonses have not yet been issued.

16

Plaintiff does not allege a single fact or claim in his Complaint. Instead, he simply
17
18

references two North Dakota case numbers, and attaches several Orders issued from the United

19

States District Court for the District of North Dakota and the state District Court for South Central

20

Judicial District Morton County, North Dakota earlier this year. Dkt. #6, Exhibits. It appears

21

from these documents that Plaintiff had been arrested and issued a trespassing citation in

22
23

connection with the protest activities related to the Dakota Access Pipeline near Cannonball, ND.

24

It also appears that the criminal action may be continuing in North Dakota state court. Id. On

25

March 3, 2017, Plaintiff attempted to remove the state criminal action to the United States District

26

Court for the District of North Dakota. Id. The federal court ultimately remanded the matter

27

back to state court. Id. In seeking reconsideration of the order of remand, Plaintiff claimed, inter
28

ORDER
PAGE - 1

1

alia, that his arrest violated the 1852 Treaty of Fort Laramie and that postponement of his

2

criminal trial in state court violated his federal speedy trial rights. Dkt. #6, Exhibits. He also

3

sought a transfer of venue to this Court on the basis that the North Dakota judge was biased

4

against him. Id. The motion for reconsideration was denied. Plaintiff then filed the instant action

5

here.
6
7

As federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, a plaintiff bears the burden of

8

establishing that his case is properly filed in federal court. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co.,

9

511 U.S. 375, 377, 114 S. Ct. 1673, 1675, 128 L. Ed. 2d 391 (1994); In re Ford Motor

10

Co./Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 264 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 2001). This burden, at the

11

pleading stage, must be met by pleading sufficient allegations to show a proper basis for the
12
13

federal court to assert subject matter jurisdiction over the action. McNutt v. General Motors

14

Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 189, 56 S. Ct. 780, 785, 80 L. Ed. 1135 (1936). Further, the

15

Court will dismiss a Complaint at any time if the action fails to state a claim, raises frivolous or

16

malicious claims, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

17
18

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

19

In this case, Mr. Artem fails to identify any basis for federal jurisdiction in his Complaint.

20

He fails to explain the factual basis for his claims, and he fails to identify what claim he actually

21

asserting against the named Defendants.

22

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Complaint suffers from

deficiencies that, if not corrected in an Amended Complaint, require dismissal.

23
24

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint

25

no later than twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order. In the Amended Complaint,

26

Plaintiff must include a short and plain statement demonstrating to the Court that there is federal

27

jurisdiction over his claims, either under federal question or diversity jurisdiction. If his claims

28

ORDER
PAGE - 2

1

are the same as the ones he raised before the federal court in North Dakota, he should explain as

2

much. He should also clarify whether he is naming any Defendant other than the State of North

3

Dakota.

4

The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to Mr. Artem at 161 16th Ave, Seattle, WA

5

98122.
6
7

DATED this 16th day of June 2017.

8

A

9
10

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER
PAGE - 3