Carroll v. Agent of the State

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * 4 KASEY CARROLL, Case No. 2:24-cv-01348-CDS-EJY 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v. 7 AGENT OF THE STATE, et al., 8 Defendants. [9] 10 Pending before the Court are the Motions for Funds and to Compel Disclosure of Exculpatory 11 Evidence. ECF Nos. 4, 5. Plaintiff also filed an Amended Complaint, which is largely illegible. 12 ECF No. 6. There is no screened operative complaint filed with Court as Plaintiff’s original 13 Complaint is subject to a Report and Recommendation to dismiss without prejudice to allow Plaintiff 14 to proceed with a habeas corpus petition (see ECF No. 3) and Plaintiff’s illegible Amended 15 Complaint does not satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). See, e.g., Shuster v. Oppelman, [16] 962 F. Supp. 394, 396 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (stating that a partially illegible pro se complaint does not 17 comply with Rule 8); Knutson v. Lucky Store, Inc., Case No. CIV S-07-0981-LKK-EFB-P, 2008 18 WL 4167076 , at *1 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2008) (dismissing a pro se complaint that was mostly illegible 19 and did not comply with Rule 8). 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 6) 21 is DISMISSED without prejudice as illegible. 22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is to send Plaintiff the instructions for 23 filing a Civil Rights Complaint and a copy of the Court’s screening Order at ECF No. 3. 24 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to file what will be a second amended 25 complaint he must not assert claims against immune defendants as explained in the Court’s screening 26 Order. If Plaintiff seeks to assert claims against police officers, he may attempt to do so, but he must 27 ensure that his handwriting is legible—meaning the Court will be able to decipher the words so that 1 it may evaluate what Plaintiff is attempting to allege. A proposed second amended complaint must 2 be filed no later than September 4, 2024. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Funds (ECF No. 4) and Motion to 4 Compel Disclosure of Exculpatory Evidence (ECF No. 5) are DENIED. 5 Dated this 9th day of August, 2024. [7] ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE