Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_05-cv-03088/USCOURTS-azd-3_05-cv-03088-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Daniel J. DeRienzo,

Plaintiff,

v.

Yavapai County, et al.,

Defendants.

NO. CIV-05-3088-PCT-SMM

ORDER

On October 4, 2005, Plaintiff filed with the Court a Complaint initiating this

matter. (Dkt. 1.) Upon consideration of the Complaint, the Court finds that it is

defective on its face for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and

accordingly will be dismissed sua sponte with leave to refile.

Specifically, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) and (e) provide that each pleading shall be

simple, concise and direct, with a short and plain statement of relevant claims. While

brevity is required, it is not enough to simply allege that a wrong has been committed

and demand relief. Rather, the underlying requirement is that a pleading give “fair

notice” of the claim being asserted and the “grounds upon which it rests.” Conley v.

Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47-48 (1957). 

 In the present case, after review of Plaintiff’s Complaint, the Court finds it in

violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) and (e). The Complaint at issue here is an unfocused

Case 3:05-cv-03088-SMM Document 14 Filed 07/10/06 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

-2-

and rambling journey of the circumstances that allegedly give rise to Plaintiff’s action 

without any specification of the claims Plaintiff asserts against Defendants or the

elements of such claims. Moreover, it fails to delineate any specific claims, and thus

lacks sufficient information to outline the elements of any claim or permit inferences to

be drawn that such elements exist. Because the Complaint fails to provide sufficient

notice of the claims upon which Plaintiff seeks relief and the material elements necessary

for any such claims, the Court will dismiss the Complaint sua sponte with leave to refile

an amended complaint. See Johnson Enterprises of Jacksonville, Inc. v. FPL Group,

Inc., 162 F.3d 1290, 1332 n. 94 (11th Cir. 1998) (district courts have inherent authority

sua sponte to demand that a party replead its pleadings to conform to the requirements of

Rule 8(a)).

In amending his Complaint, Plaintiff shall specify and separately delineate each

cause of action with a brief description of the basis thereof. In addition, Plaintiff is

reminded that the general allegation of conspiracy is lacking and without support or

citation. 

Plaintiff will be granted until Friday, August 11, 2006, to amend his Complaint to

comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and to file such amended complaint

with the Court.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed without

prejudice, with leave to refile.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have up to and including

Friday, August 11, 2006, to file an amended complaint with the Court.

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 3:05-cv-03088-SMM Document 14 Filed 07/10/06 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

-3-

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING as MOOT Defendants’ Motion to

Dismiss. (Dkt. 7.)

DATED this 7th day of July, 2006.

Case 3:05-cv-03088-SMM Document 14 Filed 07/10/06 Page 3 of 3