Macias v. U.S. District Court Judge Kari A Dooley

[1] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT [2] DISTRICT OF NEVADA [3] * * * [4] Carlos Macias, Case No. 2:24-cv-00483-GMN-BNW [5] Plaintiff, 6 ORDER v. [7] U.S. District Court Judge 8 Kari A Dooley, et al., 9 Defendants. [10] 11 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 4 and 12 5. Plaintiff submitted the affidavit required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (a) showing an inability to prepay 13 fees or costs or give security for them. Accordingly, the Court will grant his request to proceed in 14 forma pauperis. Plaintiff will, however, be required to make monthly payments toward the full 15 $350.00 filing fee when he has funds available. The court now screens Plaintiff’s complaint. 16 I. ANALYSIS 17 A. Screening standard 18 Upon granting a request to proceed in forma pauperis, a court must screen the complaint 19 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2). In screening the complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims 20 and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be 21 granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. 22 § 1915(e)(2). Dismissal for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard 23 for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 24 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient 25 factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft 26 v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints and may only 27 dismiss them “if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of 1 his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 ). 3 In considering whether the complaint is sufficient to state a claim, all allegations of 4 material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Wyler 5 Summit P’ship v. Turner Broad. Sys. Inc., 135 F.3d 658 , 661 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). 6 Although the standard under Rule 12(b)(6) does not require detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff 7 must provide more than mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 8 544, 555 (2007). A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action is insufficient. Id. 9 Unless it is clear the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured through amendment, a pro se 10 plaintiff should be given leave to amend the complaint with notice regarding the complaint’s 11 deficiencies. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 12 B. Screening the Complaint 13 Plaintiff’s complaint is hard to understand. Specifically, it is not clear which defendant is 14 responsible for what conduct. ECF No. 1-1. Even liberally construing Plaintiff’s complaint, the 15 Court is unable to determine exactly what claims Plaintiff is attempting to allege against which 16 defendants or what are the factual allegations underlying each claim. As a result, the Court cannot 17 evaluate whether Plaintiff states any claims for relief. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss 18 Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and with leave to amend. 19 C. Instructions for Amendment 20 Plaintiff is advised that all defendants must be identified in the caption of the pleading and 21 that he must specify which claims he is alleging against which defendants. Although the Federal 22 Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading policy, Plaintiff still must give defendants fair 23 notice of each of the claims he is alleging against each defendant. Specifically, he must allege 24 facts showing how each named defendant is involved and the approximate dates of their 25 involvement. 26 Plaintiff is also advised that if he chooses to file an amended complaint, the original 27 complaint no longer serves any function in this case. As such, if he files an amended complaint, 1 refer to a prior pleading or to other documents to make his amended complaint complete. The 2 amended complaint must be complete in and of itself without reference to prior pleadings or to 3 other documents. 4 II. CONCLUSION 5 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis 6 (ECF Nos. 4 and 5) is GRANTED. Nevertheless, the full filing fee shall still be due, pursuant to [7] 28 U.S.C. § 1915 , as amended by the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act. The movant herein is 8 permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without the necessity of prepayment of fees or 9 costs or the giving of security therefor. This order granting in forma pauperis status shall not 10 extend to the issuance and/or service of subpoenas at government expense. 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 , as amended by the 12 Prisoner Litigation Reform Act, the Louis C. Powledge Unit shall pay to the Clerk of the United 13 States District Court, District of Nevada, 20% of the preceding month's deposits to the account of 14 Carlos Macias, # 02173322 (in months that the account exceeds $10.00) until the full $350 filing 15 fee has been paid for this action. The Clerk shall send a copy of this order to the attention of 16 Nicole Sandiner, Senior Warden for Louis C. Powledge Unit, 1400 FM 3452, Palestine, TX 17 75803. 18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, even if this action is dismissed, or is otherwise 19 unsuccessful, the full filing fee shall still be due, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915 , as amended by the 20 Prisoner Litigation Reform Act. 21 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court must detach and separately file 22 Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 23 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff will have until May 11, 2024, to file an 24 amended complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint by that date may result in dismissal of 25 the case. 26 // 27 // 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mail Plaintiff a copy of the 2 || prisoner, pro se form complaint. 3 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed with leave to amend. [5] 6 DATED: April 11, 2024 7 KK gn la We ERK BRENDA WEKSLER 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE