Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02577/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02577-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner 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

27

28

JDDL

WO MDR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Alisrael Champion Amira-Hawkman, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Michael Skelton, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-2577-PHX-RCB (JRI)

ORDER

On December 9, 2009, Plaintiff Alisrael Champion Amira-Hawkman, who is confined

in the INS Processing Center-Florence in Florence Arizona, filed a pro se civil rights

Complaint (Doc. #1) and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3).

I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee

Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis will be granted. Because

Plaintiff is an immigration detainee, he is not subject to the provisions of the Prison

Litigation Reform Act and will be allowed to proceed without payment of the filing fee.

Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1122 (9th Cir. 2005); Agyeman v. INS, 296 F.3d 871, 885-

86 (9th Cir. 2002). 

II. Statutory Screening

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), in a case in which a plaintiff has been granted in

forma pauperis status, the Court 

shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines

that–(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or (B) the action or

appeal–(I) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on

Case 2:09-cv-02577-RCB--JRI Document 4 Filed 01/05/10 Page 1 of 5
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

JDDL - 2 -

which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief

against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the

pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While Rule 8 does not

demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009).

“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

statements, do not suffice.” Id.

“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a

claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,

550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content

that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the

misconduct alleged.” Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for

relief [is] . . . a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial

experience and common sense.” Id. at 1950. Thus, although a plaintiff’s specific factual

allegations may be consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must assess whether there

are other “more likely explanations” for a defendant’s conduct. Id. at 1951.

If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the allegation of other facts,

a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend a complaint before dismissal of the

action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). The Court

should not, however, advise the litigant how to cure the defects. This type of advice “would

undermine district judges’ role as impartial decisionmakers.” Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225,

231 (2004); see also Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1131 n.13 (declining to decide whether the court was

required to inform a litigant of deficiencies). Plaintiff’s Complaint will be dismissed for

lack of subject matter jurisdiction, with leave to amend because the Complaint may possibly

be saved by amendment.

. . . .

. . . .

Case 2:09-cv-02577-RCB--JRI Document 4 Filed 01/05/10 Page 2 of 5
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

JDDL - 3 -

III. Lack of Jurisdiction

Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, and limitations on the court’s jurisdiction

must neither be disregarded nor evaded. Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S.

365, 374 (1978). The Court is obligated to determine sua sponte whether it has subject

matter jurisdiction. See Valdez v. Allstate Ins. Co., 372 F.3d 1115, 1116 (9th Cir. 2004).

See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subjectmatter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”).

Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that “[a] pleading that states

a claim for relief must contain: (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s

jurisdiction . . . .” In order to proceed in federal court, Plaintiff must demonstrate some right

of action and legal entitlement to the damages he seeks. In a case challenging his conditions

of confinement while an immigration detainee at a federal facility, the most likely source of

a right to sue is Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics,

403 U.S. 388 (1971). The Court has jurisdiction over such cases pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1331. 

Plaintiff has not alleged that his Complaint arises pursuant to Bivens or that the Court

has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. He alleges that the Court has jurisdiction

pursuant to “Deprivation & Denial of a Kosher Meal.” That is a statement regarding the

types of claims Plaintiff intends to raise in the lawsuit, not a jurisdictional basis. See Watson

v. Chessman, 362 F. Supp. 2d 1190, 1194 (S.D. Cal. 2005) (“The court will not . . . infer

allegations supporting federal jurisdiction; federal subject matter [jurisdiction] must always

be affirmatively alleged.”). Therefore, the Court will dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint without

prejudice.

IV. Leave to Amend

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Complaint will be dismissed for failure to allege

a jurisdictional basis. Within 30 days, Plaintiff may submit a first amended complaint to cure

the deficiencies outlined above. The Clerk of Court will mail Plaintiff a court-approved form

to use for filing a first amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to use the court-approved form,

Case 2:09-cv-02577-RCB--JRI Document 4 Filed 01/05/10 Page 3 of 5
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

JDDL - 4 -

the Court may strike the amended complaint and dismiss this action without further notice

to Plaintiff.

Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “First

Amended Complaint.” The first amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its

entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original

Complaint by reference. Plaintiff may include only one claim per count.

A first amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963

F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542,

1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court will treat an original complaint as

nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of action that was raised in the original

complaint is waived if it is not raised in a first amended complaint. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d

565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987).

V. Warnings

A. Address Changes

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

B. Copies

Plaintiff must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See

LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice

to Plaintiff.

C. Possible Dismissal

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik, 963 F.2d at

1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the

Court).

. . . .

Case 2:09-cv-02577-RCB--JRI Document 4 Filed 01/05/10 Page 4 of 5
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

JDDL - 5 -

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #3) is granted;

Plaintiff is not required to pay the filing fee.

(2) The Complaint (Doc. #1) is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a first amended complaint in

compliance with this Order.

(3) If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within 30 days, the Clerk of

Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with

prejudice.

(4) The Clerk of Court must mail Plaintiff a court-approved form for filing a civil

rights complaint by a prisoner.

Dated this 30th day of December, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-02577-RCB--JRI Document 4 Filed 01/05/10 Page 5 of 5