Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05929/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05929-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CESAR ANCHANTE-MARTINETTI,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WORLD SAVINGS, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-5929 SI

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is scheduled for a hearing on February 1, 2008.

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court determines that the matter is appropriate for resolution

without oral argument, and VACATES the hearing. As set forth below, the Court GRANTS defendants’

motion (Docket No. 4), and GRANTS plaintiff leave to amend the complaint.

On November 26, 2007, plaintiff filed a “Petition for Libel of Review of an Administrative

Judgment.” Plaintiff’s petition states, among other things, that he seeks review of a foreign judgment

and that this case involves “a constitutional matter involving a man on the land complaining about theft

and kidnap.” Plaintiff has attached numerous documents to his petition, including a “conditional

acceptance,” a “letter rogatory,” and several affidavits. Plaintiff states that “all parties are U.S. Vessels”

and that the Public Vessels Act applies to this case. The petition also states that the complaint is brought

under admiralty law. Plaintiff has also attached to his petition an “Accounting and True Bill” which

seeks over 33 million dollars in damages.

Defendants move to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff has filed

a “memorandum” in opposition which does not address defendants’ arguments. After review of

plaintiff’s voluminous and largely unintelligible filings, the Court agrees that plaintiff has failed to state

Case 3:07-cv-05929-SI Document 12 Filed 01/23/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

a claim for which relief can be granted. The Court cannot determine the factual or legal bases for

plaintiff’s claims. Accordingly, plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND).

See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1128 (9th Cir. 2000). If plaintiff wishes to file an amended

complaint, the complaint shall (1) state the basis for federal jurisdiction; (2) specifically identify the

claims that plaintiff is asserting (for example, if plaintiff is suing under a federal or state statute, the

complaint shall identify that statute); (3) state, as clearly as possible, the facts giving rise to the

complaint, including the dates upon which the events occurred; and (4) state the relief that plaintiff

seeks. Any amended complaint must be filed by February 8, 2008. Failure to file an appropriate

amended complaint by that date will result in dismissal without leave to amend. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 23, 2008 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05929-SI Document 12 Filed 01/23/08 Page 2 of 2