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

Download PDF
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

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?