Klint v. Moore et al
MINUTE ORDER. The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this complaint should not be dismissed. Plaintiff may do so by filing an amended complaint within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this order. If Plaintiff fails to state sufficient facts to support a cognizable legal theory, his complaint will be dismissed. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (TH) (cc: Plaintiff via U.S. Mail)
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
WARREN P. KLINT,
CASE NO. C17-1622-JCC
MOORE, Detective for King County
Sherriff’s Office, RCO LEGAL PS,
DOUG FISHER, Realty Broker,
ALLISON JAMES ESTATES &
The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C.
Coughenour, United States District Judge:
This matter comes before the Court on sua sponte. Pro se Plaintiff has been granted leave
to proceed in forma pauperis in this matter (Dkt. No. 3). The complaint was filed on October 31,
2017 (Dkt. No. 1). Summons has not yet been issued.
A plaintiff must “plead a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader
is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). This statement must be sufficient to “give the
defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Conley
v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957). A complaint may be dismissed as a matter of law if it lacks a
cognizable legal theory or states insufficient facts under a cognizable legal theory. Robertson v.
MINUTE ORDER C17-1622-JCC
PAGE - 1
Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 749 F.2d 530, 534 (9th Cir. 1984). A district court must dismiss a
case if it determines that an in forma pauperis complaint “fails to state a claim on which relief
may be granted” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.”
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)–(iii). Section 1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis proceedings,
not just those filed by prisoners. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000).
Here, Plaintiff’s pleads claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which is applicable only to state
or local officials for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution and federal laws.” Plaintiff fails to state how non-state defendants acted under color
of the law, as required for a section 1983 claim. Thus, he does not “state a claim upon which
relief can be granted” against Defendants RCO Legal, P.S., Doug Fischer, or Allison James
Estates and Homes. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Furthermore, Plaintiff does not plead sufficient
information in claim against state actor King County Sherriff’s Office and/or Detective Moore to
provide fair notice or to show he is entitled to relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); Conley, 355
U.S. at 47.
Accordingly the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this complaint should not
be dismissed. Plaintiff may do so by filing an amended complaint within thirty (30) days of the
issuance of this order. If Plaintiff fails to state sufficient facts to support a cognizable legal
theory, his complaint will be dismissed.
The Clerk shall send a copy of this order to Mr. Klint at 40017 S.E. 53rd Street,
Snoqualmie, WA 98065.
DATED this 6th day of November 2017.
William M. McCool
Clerk of Court
MINUTE ORDER C17-1622-JCC
PAGE - 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?