Rodriguez v. Northwest Trustee Services Inc et al

Filing 10

ORDER dismissing Plaintiff's 9 Amended Complaint, by Judge Richard A Jones. (SWT) cc: Plaintiff via USPS

Download PDF
1 HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 MELIN T. RODRIGUEZ, 11 Plaintiff, 12 14 ORDER v. 13 CASE NO. C17-1627 RAJ NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. For the reasons that follow, the Court DISMISSES pro se Plaintiff Melin T. Rodriguez’s Amended Complaint. Dkt. # 9. On December 1, 2017, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to allege facts that “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face,” pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Dkt. # 8; Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 568 (2007). Plaintiff was given the opportunity to amend his complaint. On December 20, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. Dkt. # 9. The Amended Complaint is almost identical to the original complaint and fails to cure its deficiencies. Plaintiff provides no further information as to how Defendants denied his right to due process, or why the trustee’s deed allegedly held by Defendants is not valid. ORDER- 1 1 Additionally, Plaintiff fails to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. To 2 comply with Rule 8, Plaintiff must plead a short and plain statement of the elements of 3 her claim, “identifying the transaction or occurrence giving rise to the claim and the 4 elements of a prima facie case.” Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 840 (9th 5 Cir. 2000). Accordingly, Plaintiff must set forth “who is being sued, for what relief, and 6 on what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery.” McHenry v. Penne, 84 F.3d 7 1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir. 1996). Here, it is still unclear what Plaintiff’s claims are and 8 what facts support those claims. Further, Plaintiff must allege facts which support 9 damages in excess of $75,000 to remain in federal court. Guglielmino v. McKee Foods 10 Corp., 506 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal quotation omitted). It remains unclear 11 how Plaintiff arrives at his $1,350,000 demand. 12 For the reasons stated above, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Amended 13 Complaint. Dkt. # 9. 14 15 Dated this 8th day of January, 2018. 16 A 17 18 The Honorable Richard A. Jones United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ORDER- 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?