Taylor v. Microsoft

Filing 16

ORDER granting Defendant's 11 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and denying as moot Plaintiff's 5 Motion for Audio Evidence and 6 Motion to Call Witness Against Microsoft. Within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies. Signed by Judge Richard A. Jones. (TH) (cc: Plaintiff via USPS)

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9

CHRISTOPHER M. TAYLOR,
Plaintiff,

10

CASE NO. C18-0899 RAJ

11

v.

12

MICROSOFT,

ORDER
Defendant.

13
14
15
16

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Microsoft’s Motion to Dismiss.
Dkt. # 11. Plaintiff Christopher M. Taylor did not file a response to Defendant’s Motion.

17
18

For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.

19

I.

20

On June 15, 2018, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendant, alleging that he

21

BACKGROUND

was “stalked, harassed, verbally torture, tortured [cruel] and inhuman by [Defendant’s]

22
23

employees on and off Microsoft campus and at Microsoft “transinedcenters in MRSA

24

island” and inside Microsoft buildings. Dkt. # 1. Plaintiff then filed a Motion for Audio

25

Evidence (Dkt. # 5) and a Motion to Call Witness Against Microsoft (Dkt. # 6). On

26

September 21, 2018, Defendant filed this Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint

27
28

ORDER – 1

1

pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8, 12(b)(5), and 12(b)(6). Dkt. # 11.

2

Plaintiff did not file a response to Defendant’s Motion, instead filing an 18 page

3

document that the Court has construed as an Amended Complaint. Dkt. # 14. Plaintiff

4

did not otherwise respond to Defendant’s Motion.

5
6

II.

DISCUSSION

7

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) states that “[a] pleading which sets forth a

8

claim for relief ... shall contain ... a short and plain statement of the claim showing that

9

the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. To comply with Rule 8, Plaintiff must

10
11

plead a short and plain statement of the elements of their claims, identifying the

12

transaction or occurrence giving rise to the claim and the elements of the prima facie

13

case. Id. Accordingly, Plaintiff must set forth “who is being sued, for what relief, and on

14

what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery.” McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172,

15
16

1179-80 (9th Cir. 1996). Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) permits a court to dismiss a complaint

17

for failure to state a claim. A court “need not accept as true conclusory allegations that

18

are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint.” Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire &

19

Marine Ins. Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). The plaintiff must point to factual

20
21
22
23
24

allegations that “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 568 (2007).
Plaintiff alleges that he travelled to Microsoft’s campus in December of 2013 to
show Bill Gates, Microsoft’s founder, a software program he had created. Dkt. # 8 at 1.

25
26

At that time, Plaintiff believed he was under investigation and that he was under audio

27

and video surveillance 24 hours a day. Id. Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant had an

28

ORDER – 2

1

investment scheme involving government agencies to “set-up law enforcement” that

2

involved Plaintiff’s software program, a money pool for a “murder for hire,” and a one

3

million dollar life insurance policy. Plaintiff also claims that Defendant was aided by

4

prison staff. Id. Plaintiff requests 60 million dollars in damages for loss of a retail store,

5
6

loss of a witness in a drug case, pain and suffering, medical bills, loss of his child, and

7

attempted murder. Id. at 2. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint makes many of the same

8

allegations, and repeatedly states that he was “tortured in the public” over Defendant’s

9

racketeering activity, that he was verbally tortured, and that Defendant “wagered a

10
11
12
13
14

murder pool” through Defendant’s trademark and logo. Dkt. # 14.
Plaintiff’s Complaint is both confusing and repetitive. It does not identify any
legal theories or state any claims for relief. None of Plaintiff’s allegations form a
cognizable claim under state or federal law and do not appear to have any logical

15
16

connection. The Complaint does not provide enough information to allow Defendant to

17

determine the substance of Plaintiff’s claims, provide direction for discovery, or inform

18

Defendant what transaction or occurrence gave rise to Plaintiff’s claims. Even taking all

19

allegations in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, the Court concludes that Plaintiff’s

20
21

Complaint is frivolous and fails to state a claim showing that he is entitled to relief.

22

//

23

//

24
25
26
27
28

ORDER – 3

III.

1

For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.

2
3
4

CONCLUSION

Dkt. # 11. Plaintiff’s Motion for Audio Evidence (Dkt. # 5) and Motion to Call Witness
Against Microsoft (Dkt. # 6) are DENIED as moot. Within fourteen (14) days from

5
6

the date of this Order, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint addressing the

7

deficiencies addressed above. If Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint within that

8

timeframe, or if Plaintiff files an amended complaint that does not state a cognizable

9

claim for relief or is otherwise untenable under § 1915(e), the Court will dismiss the

10
11

action.

12
13

DATED this 3rd day of December, 2018.

14
15

A

16
17

The Honorable Richard A. Jones
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER – 4