Fregosi v. Department of Social and Health Services, et al

Filing 12

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT, granting 11 Motion for More Definite Statement. Amended Complaint due 8/17/18. Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. Paper copy sent to plaintiff at Burley address. (JL)

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

7
8
9

JUSTIN FREGOSI,

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

CASE NO. 3:18-cv-5440-RJB
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’
MOTION FOR A MORE
DEFINITE STATEMENT

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES, et al.,
Defendants.

This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for a More Definite
Statement. Dkt. 11. The Court has considered the pleadings filed regarding the motion and the
remainder of the record herein.
On June 4, 2018, Plaintiff filed this case, moved to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”),
and provided a proposed complaint. Dkt. 1 and 1-1. Plaintiff’s application for IFP was granted.
Dkt. 3. Defendants now move the Court to order Plaintiff to file an amended complaint that
provides a more definite statement of the facts of the case and his claims for relief. Dkt. 11.
Plaintiff’s Complaint is somewhat difficult to follow. In his “Statement of Facts,”
attached to the Complaint, Plaintiff does assert, in part, that the Defendants violated his due

24
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A
MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT- 1

1 process rights when Christie Dotson and Jamie Young, both social workers, testified in state
2 court that Plaintiff had a prior child abuse conviction which resulted in his children being placed
3 in foster care. Dkt. 4, at 7-8. Plaintiff claims that he had no such conviction, and while one of
4 his children was in foster care, the child was abused. Dkt. 4, at 8. Plaintiff’s Complaint is fairly
5 hard to understand, but he also refers to other federal statutes and state law claims. Dkt. 4.
6 Plaintiff’s Complaint states that he seeks damages for himself and for his children. Id.
7

STANDARD ON MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT. Fed. R. Civ.

8 P. 12 (e) provides:
9
10
11
12

A party may move for a more definite statement of a pleading to which a
responsive pleading is allowed but which is so vague or ambiguous that the party
cannot reasonably prepare a response. The motion must be made before filing a
responsive pleading and must point out the defects complained of and the details
desired. If the court orders a more definite statement and the order is not obeyed
within 14 days after notice of the order or within the time the court sets, the court
may strike the pleading or issue any other appropriate order.

13
MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT. In their motion, Defendants
14
argue that Plaintiff’s Complaint is vague and that they are left to guess which constitutional
15
amendments are being alleged as violated. Dkt. 11. They note that the Complaint “makes
16
reference to 28 U.S.C. Code 4101 as the federal statute for his jurisdictional basis to bring this
17
action.” Id. (The portion of the U.S. Code cited is the definition section of The Securing the
18
Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act, which provides that a
19
U.S. “domestic court ‘shall not recognize or enforce a foreign [country’s] judgment for
20
defamation’ unless it satisfies both First Amendment and due process considerations.” See Trout
21
Point Lodge, Ltd. v. Handshoe, 729 F.3d 481, 487 (5th Cir. 2013)(Citing 28 U.S.C. § 4102). It
22
does not appear to apply in any way here). Defendants assert that his declaration of facts
23
Plaintiff “cites a number of different cases and different constitutional amendments,” but it is
24
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A
MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT- 2

1 unclear upon which facts those claims are based. Id. They assert that although he refers to
2 DSHS social worker Christine Dotson in his declaration of facts, she isn’t listed as a defendant in
3 the caption of the Complaint. Id. The Defendants note that although Plaintiff seeks damages for
4 his children, they are not included as Plaintiffs. Id.
5

DECISION ON MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT. Defendants’

6 Motion for a More Definite Statement (Dkt. 11) should be granted. The Defendants have shown
7 that the Plaintiff’s Complaint is so vague and ambiguous that it is difficult for them to formulate
8 a response. Further, Plaintiff failed to respond to the motion. Under Local Rule W.D. Wash.
9 7(b)(2), “[e]xcept for motions for summary judgment, if a party fails to file papers in opposition
10 to a motion, such failure may be considered by the court as an admission that the motion has
11 merit.”
12

Accordingly, on or before August 17, 2018, Plaintiff should be ordered to file an

13 amended complaint which follows the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including Fed. R. Civ.
14 P. 10, “Form of Pleadings,” which provides:
15
16

(a) Caption; Names of Parties. Every pleading must have a caption with the
court's name, a title, a file number, and a Rule 7 (a) designation. The title of the
complaint must name all the parties; the title of other pleadings, after naming the
first party on each side, may refer generally to other parties.

17
18
19
20
21
22

(b) Paragraphs; Separate Statements. A party must state its claims or defenses in
numbered paragraphs, each limited as far as practicable to a single set of
circumstances. A later pleading may refer by number to a paragraph in an earlier
pleading. If doing so would promote clarity, each claim founded on a separate
transaction or occurrence--and each defense other than a denial--must be stated in
a separate count or defense.
(c) Adoption by Reference; Exhibits. A statement in a pleading may be adopted
by reference elsewhere in the same pleading or in any other pleading or motion. A
copy of a written instrument that is an exhibit to a pleading is a part of the
pleading for all purposes.

23
24
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A
MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT- 3

1 Further, Plaintiff should follow Rule 8, including 8 (a)(2), which provides that a complaint must
2 contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
3 Plaintiff should plainly state what happened and what claims he is making as a result. Plaintiff
4 should also refer to the remaining federal rules and the Local Rules of the Western District of
5 Washington for guidance. Even though he is acting pro se, he is expected to follow all the
6 federal and local rules. Plaintiff should be aware that “an amended complaint supersedes the
7 original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.” Ramirez v. Cty. of San Bernardino,
8 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015)(internal citation and quotation marks omitted).
9

Plaintiff is notified that failure to respond to this order by filing an amended complaint

10 may result in dismissal of his case.
11

ORDER

12

•

Defendants’ Motion for a More Definite Statement (Dkt. 11) IS GRANTED; and

13

•

On or before August 17, 2018, Plaintiff should file his amended complaint, if any

14

and Plaintiff should be aware that failure to do so may result in dismissal of the

15

case.

16

The Clerk is directed to send Plaintiff a summons form and uncertified copies of this

17 Order to all counsel of record and to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known
18 address.
19
20
21
22

Dated this 30th day of July, 2018.

A
ROBERT J. BRYAN
United States District Judge

23
24
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A
MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT- 4