Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_17-cv-00081/USCOURTS-azd-2_17-cv-00081-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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 

WO NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Navel Al-Luenig Bey, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Cynthia Gialketsis, 

Defendant. 

No. CV-17-00081-PHX-JJT

ORDER 

 At issue is pro se Plaintiff Navel Al-Luenig Bey’s Second Application to Proceed 

in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. 8). 

I. LEGAL STANDARDS 

A. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) 

As the Court previously stated, (Doc. 6), for cases in which a party is permitted to 

proceed in forma pauperis, Congress provided that a district court “shall dismiss the case at 

any time if the court determines” that the “allegation of poverty is untrue” or that the 

“action or appeal” is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief may be 

granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Section 1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis proceedings. 

Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000). “It is also clear that section 1915(e) 

not only permits but requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that 

fails to state a claim.” Id. at 1127. “The standard for determining whether a plaintiff has 

failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is the 

Case 2:17-cv-00081-JJT Document 10 Filed 03/16/17 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - 

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 

same as the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard for failure to state a claim.” 

Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). 

B. Sufficiency of a Claim 

A complaint must include “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 

pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). The complaint must contain “sufficient 

factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” 

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 

544, 570 (2007)). The Court is to construe a pro se plaintiff’s complaint “liberally” and 

afford the plaintiff “the benefit of any doubt.” Watison, 668 F.3d at 1112 (citation omitted). 

II. ANALYSIS 

 Upon review of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 7, Am. Compl.), the Court 

finds that the Amended Complaint still fails to comply with Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure 8 and 10(b). Moreover, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint fails to provide the 

proper factual basis for each claim asserted or the specific legal theory supporting each 

claim so as to give Defendant “fair notice of what [Plaintiff’s] claim is and the grounds 

upon which it is based.” Holgate v. Baldwin, 425 F.3d 671, 676 (9th Cir. 2005). 

 Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint—while different from his original Complaint—is 

as deficient under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as his first. The large majority of 

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is a variation on his original Complaint, still consisting of 

references to various constitutional principles and citations to federal rules. Plaintiff 

lodges vague and conclusory charges of false imprisonment, fraud, improper seizure, 

domestic violence, and threat of arrest. Plaintiff fails to allege a single fact that would 

provide the Court, or any Defendant, with notice regarding the conduct on which he bases 

his purported claims. Nor does he state any intelligible basis for jurisdiction. Plaintiff also 

asserts that “Attorneys may not insight testimony or write statement of facts when it is a 

witness he lacks.” (Am. Compl. at 1.) However, Plaintiff must, at the very least, lodge 

allegations that plausibly create a legal claim based on some facts. As the Court noted in 

its previous Order, it is wholly unclear who the purported Defendants in this action are, 

Case 2:17-cv-00081-JJT Document 10 Filed 03/16/17 Page 2 of 3
- 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 

or what conduct gave rise to Plaintiff’s theoretical causes of action. The remaining 

allegations in the Amended Complaint include purportedly appointing this Court as a 

trustee, bringing an action against a receiver, trustee, or manager of property, and vague 

references to a securities fraud scheme. At bottom, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint 

remains disjointed, incomprehensible, and unsubstantiated by any fact or law and is 

therefore unreviewable by the Court or Defendant. The Court will provide Plaintiff one 

final opportunity to file a comprehensible Second Amended Complaint that complies 

with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court’s Orders. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 7) is 

dismissed. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may file a Second Amended 

Complaint that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure no later than 30 days 

from the date of this Order. If no Second Amended Complaint is timely filed, the Clerk 

shall dismiss this action without further Order of the Court. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED striking Plaintiff’s Second Application to Proceed 

in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. 8) because Plaintiff provided 

insufficient detail for the Court to determine his ability to pay fees. As with Plaintiff’s 

first application (Doc. 3), Plaintiff failed to provide any detail regarding any expenses 

whatsoever, or any explanation for a lack of any living expenses. If Plaintiff files a 

Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff may either file a Second Amended Application to 

Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs containing the required 

information, or pay the Court’s filing fee. 

 Dated this 16th day of March, 2017. 

Honorable John J. Tuchi

United States District Judge 

Case 2:17-cv-00081-JJT Document 10 Filed 03/16/17 Page 3 of 3