Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-01479/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-01479-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 320
Nature of Suit: Assault, Libel, and Slander
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

10cv1479

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GINA HERNDON,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES ARMY,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 10cv1479 JAH(CAB)

ORDER SUA SPONTE

DISMISSING COMPLAINT

WITHOUT PREJUDICE; AND

DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL [DOC. # 2] AND

MOTION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS [DOC. # 3]

AS MOOT

Plaintiff, a non-prisoner appearing pro se, filed the instant complaint on July 16,

2010, along with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis and a motion for appointment of

counsel. All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the

United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of

$350. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to

prepay the entire fee only if the plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir.

1999). 

Notwithstanding payment of any filing fee or portion thereof, a complaint filed by

any person seeking to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) is subject

to a mandatory and sua sponte review and dismissal by the court to the extent it is

“frivolous, malicious, failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeking

monetary relief from a defendant immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B);

Case 3:10-cv-01479-JAH-CAB Document 4 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 3
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 10cv1479

Calhoun v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845, 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[T]he provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) are not limited to prisoners.”); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27

(9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) mandates that the Court reviewing a

complaint filed pursuant to the in forma pauperis provisions of Section 1915 make and rule

on its own motion to dismiss before directing that the complaint be served by the U.S.

Marshal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2). Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1127.

As currently plead, it is clear that plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon

which relief can be granted. The standard used to evaluate whether a complaint states a

claim is a liberal one particularly when the action has been filed pro se. See Estelle v.

Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 97 (1976). However, even a “liberal interpretation ... may not

supply elements of the claim that were not initially pled.” Ivey v. Bd. of Regents of the

Univ. of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). “[P]ro se litigants are bound by the

rules of procedure.” Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995). Rule 8 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[a] pleading that states a claim for relief

must contain ... a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is

entitled to relief ...” Fed.R.Civ. P. 8(a). “[A] plaintiff’s obligation to provide the grounds

of [her] entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic

recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)(quotation omitted).

Here, plaintiff’s complaint consists of a single paragraph which states:

I was speaking to an officer regarding the probable development of laser technology and he called the cops on me. They illegally searched by room and caused an emotional breakdown. I was hospitalized in an unsanitary environment.

Compl. at 1.

This Court finds these allegations are insufficient to put defendant on notice of the

claims against it, as required by Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Therefore,

this Court finds the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

Accordingly, the instant complaint must be sua sponte dismissed pursuant to Section

Case 3:10-cv-01479-JAH-CAB Document 4 Filed 07/26/10 Page 2 of 3
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

3 10cv1479

1915(e)(2)(B). Because the complaint must be dismissed, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in

forma pauperis and request for appointment of counsel are moot. 

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The instant complaint is sua sponte DISMISSED without prejudice for

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted;

2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot; and

3. Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel is DENIED as moot.

DATED: July 26, 2010 

JOHN A. HOUSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:10-cv-01479-JAH-CAB Document 4 Filed 07/26/10 Page 3 of 3