Leal de la Hoz v. Hush Communications Canada Inc

Filing 6

ORDER directing Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint within 21 days of this Order. Plaintiff is reminded that he is not to include personal identifiers in his Amended Complaint and that such information should be redacted or removed from his documents before filing. Signed by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (PM) cc: plaintiff via the U.S. Mail

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

5
6
7

HELIO J. LEAL DE LA HOZ,

8

Plaintiff,

9
10
11

v.
HUSH COMMUNICATIONS CANADA,
INC.

12

Defendant.

13

)
) CASE NO. C17-1465 RSM
)
) ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO
) AMEND COMPLAINT
)
)
)
)
)

14
15
16
17
18

Pro Se Plaintiff Helio J. Leal de La Hoz, a Seattle resident, filed his Complaint on
September 28, 2017. Dkt. #5. Summons has not yet been issued.
Plaintiff’s claims relate to his “hushmail” email account with Defendant Hush
Communications Canada, Inc. Plaintiff appears to make claims of theft and fraud arising from

19
20

Defendant’s October 23, 2016, disabling of Plaintiff’s account “because they had received a large

21

number of complaints denouncing my messages as spam.” Id. Plaintiff alleges he has lost access

22

to important documents and “intellectual Property, whose value I estimate in trillions of dollars.”

23

Id. Plaintiff also seeks as damages compensation for Plaintiff’s “adrenaline poisoning,” and to

24

be compensated for his time “litigating this evidence-based claim,” which Plaintiff calculates at

25
26

over 10,000 hours. Id. Plaintiff seeks total damages of “1,001,011,380,000.00 USD.” Id.

27

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

28

establishing that his case is properly filed in federal court. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co.,
ORDER
PAGE - 1

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 189, 56 S. Ct. 780, 785, 80 L. Ed. 1135 (1936). Further, the
6
7

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

8

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

9

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

10

In this case, Plaintiff appears to base federal jurisdiction on diversity, citing Defendant’s

11

residence as “either Vancouver, Canada or another state, Delaware, or both.” Dkt. #5 at 2.
12
13

However, Plaintiff has failed to present credible evidence that the damages at issue in this case

14

exceed the statutory requirement of $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Plaintiff’s valuation of

15

his email account at “trillions of dollars,” is facially frivolous. Plaintiff’s Complaint also fails

16

to set forth causes of action, citing theft and fraud only in passing. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s

17
18
19

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

20

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

21

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

22

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

23
24

basis for his claims. Plaintiff shall identify what law or laws it believes Defendant has violated

25

through its alleged conduct. Finally, Plaintiff must plead specific facts demonstrating that the

26

damages at issue exceed $75,000.

27
28

ORDER
PAGE - 2

1

In addition, Plaintiff is reminded that he is not to include personal identifiers in his

2

Amended Complaint, such as complete bank or credit card account numbers, social

3

security numbers, and the like, and that such information should be redacted or removed

4

from his documents before filing.

5

The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to Mr. Leal de La Hoz at 77 S. Washington St.,
6
7
8

Seattle, WA 98104.
DATED this 29th day of September 2017.

9

A

10
11

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

ORDER
PAGE - 3