Sund v. Labor Ready Northwest et al

Filing 7

ORDER directing plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 21 days by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (RS) cc plaintiff

1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

MATTHEW SUND,
Plaintiff,

Case No. C17-895 RSM
ORDER FOR AMENDED COMPLAINT

v.
LABOR READY NORTHWEST et al.,
Defendants.

16

Pro Se Plaintiff, Matthew Sund, has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in

17

this matter. Dkt. #4. The Complaint was filed on June 12, 2017, listing as defendants Labor

18

Ready Northwest and SanMar Corporation. Dkt. #5. Summonses have not yet been issued.

19
20

Plaintiff’s Complaint contains almost no factual detail. There is form language stating a

21

claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, however, in response to “acts complained of in

22

this suit” Plaintiff states only “[f]ailure to employ me,” and Plaintiff’s further detail alleges

23

only “contract fraud” against Labor Ready Northwest without reference to the elements of a

24
25

Title VII claim. Dkt. #5 at 2. Plaintiff does attach an EEOC “Charge of Discrimination” from

26

Plaintiff against Labor Ready Northwest, however that information is not included in the

27

Complaint. Dkt. #5-1. In any event, this attachment does not set forth specific details of the

28

acts of Defendants forming the basis for Plaintiff’s claims. The Complaint requests the Court

ORDER FOR AMENDED COMPLAINT - 1

1

direct the United States Marshal Service to seize the defendant’s property in the King County

2

area” but seeks no other relief. Dkt. #5 at 3.

3
4

The Court will dismiss a Complaint at any time if the action fails to state a claim, raises
frivolous or malicious claims, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from

5
6

such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Plaintiff does not clearly identify what laws or

7

statutes he believes are being violated by the two Defendants in this case, and he does not

8

support his claims with specific facts. It is unclear from the Complaint how federal subject

9

matter jurisdiction arises in this matter or why this Court has the authority to provide the type

10
11

of remedy that Plaintiff now seeks.

12

Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint suffers from deficiencies that, if not corrected in an

13

Amended Complaint, require dismissal. In the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff must write a

14

short and plain statement telling the Court: (1) the laws or statutes under which he brings each

15

of his claims against each of the Defendants; (2) exactly what facts support each of the alleged

16
17

violations of law; and (3) what specific injury Plaintiff suffered because of each alleged

18

violation of law. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint must contain the above information and may

19

not rely on attachments.

20

Therefore, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Plaintiff shall file an Amended

21

Complaint containing the detail described above no later than twenty-one (21) days from the

22
23
24

date of this Order. The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at 6337 S.
HIGHLAND DR. #213 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84121.

25

//

26

//

27
28

//

ORDER FOR AMENDED COMPLAINT - 2

1
2
3
4
5

DATED this 16th day of June 2017.

A
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER FOR AMENDED COMPLAINT - 3