Cagliostro v. Collins

Filing 9

ORDER directing Plaintiff to file a new Amended Complaint within 14 days of this Order. The Court hereby STRIKES Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend (Dkt. # 5 ) and Amended Complaint (Dkt. # 6 ) as procedurally improper. Signed by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (PM) cc: plaintiff via first class mail

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

7
8
9
10

RITA CAGLIOSTRO,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

Case No. C18-425 RSM
SECOND ORDER DIRECTING
PLAINTIFF TO AMEND COMPLAINT

v.
FORREST R. COLLINS,

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Defendant.
Pro se Plaintiff Rita Cagliostro has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in
this matter. Dkt. #2. Summons has not yet been issued and no defendant has appeared.
Ms. Cagliostro’s original Complaint was posted on the docket on March 27, 2018. Dkt.
#3. That Complaint had separate sections entitled “Basis for Jurisdiction,” “Statement of
Claim,” and “Relief.” Id.

22

On March 27, 2018, the Court issued an Order directing Ms. Cagliostro to file an

23

amended complaint because her original filing was missing the substance of her claims. Dkt.

24
25
26
27

#4. The Court stated that “Plaintiff must include [in her Amended Complaint] a short and plain
statement demonstrating to the Court that there is a legal basis for her claims and subject matter
jurisdiction for this Court.” Id. at 2. The Court warned that “[f]ailure to file this Amended

28

SECOND ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO AMEND COMPLAINT - 1

1
2

Complaint will result in dismissal of this case.” Id. The Court expected Ms. Cagliostro to file
an Amended Complaint similar in form to her original Complaint.

3

In Response to the Court’s Order, Ms. Cagliostro instead filed a Motion for Leave to

4

File Amended Complaint. Dkt. #5. Contained in this Motion are additional facts and causes of

5
6
7

action that could be helpful to the Court and Defendant because they shed light on what Ms.
Cagliostro is claiming in this case. However, Ms. Cagliostro does not set forth her facts, legal

8

causes of action, and basis for jurisdiction in separate sections as is typical of a complaint.

9

Furthermore, because she has apparently filed her amended complaint within the body of her

10
11
12

Motion, the resulting document is in violation of the rules regarding the form of pleadings. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Fed. R. Civ. P. 10.

13

Confusingly, Ms. Cagliostro has also filed on the docket an “Amended Complaint” that

14

is actually a “notice of claim,” (Dkt. #6); an appellate brief, (Dkt. #6-1); and several exhibits

15

and declarations, (Dkts. #6-2 through #6-8). The Court notes that Ms. Cagliostro does not need

16

to present her entire case at this stage in litigation.

As it stands, these documents are

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

mislabeled and/or procedurally improper.
The Court finds that Ms. Cagliostro has not complied with the Court’s prior Order.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS:
1) Plaintiff must file a new Amended Complaint in compliance with the Court’s prior
Order no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order.

This

deadline is an additional week beyond the prior deadline imposed by the Court.

25

2) In this new Amended Complaint, Plaintiff must include a short and plain statement

26

demonstrating to the Court that there is a legal basis for her claims, with a separate

27

section setting forth the grounds for the Court’s jurisdiction, and a separate section

28

SECOND ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO AMEND COMPLAINT - 2

1

with a demand for the relief sought.

Plaintiff is advised to follow the same

2

formatting as her original Complaint, or to review the Federal Rules of Civil

3

Procedure and this Court’s Local Rules for guidance on formatting.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

3) Plaintiff need not file another motion for leave to amend because the Court is
granting leave to amend in this Order.
4) Failure to file this new Amended Complaint will result in dismissal of this case for
the reasons stated in the Court’s Prior Order (Dkt. #4).
5) The Court hereby STRIKES Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend (Dkt. #5) and
Amended Complaint (Dkt. #6) as procedurally improper.
6) The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at 212 ALASKAN WAY S.

13

#205 SEATTLE, WA 98104.

14

DATED this 11th day of April 2018.

15
16
17
18

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

SECOND ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO AMEND COMPLAINT - 3