Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04475/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04475-0/pdf.json

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

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL KEATING-TRAYNOR, et al.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

DEBORAH GOLDSTEIN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 05-04475 CRB

ORDER

Now before the Court is plaintiff Maureen Keating’s application to proceed in forma

pauperis (“IFP”). A court may authorize a plaintiff to prosecute an action in federal court

without prepayment of fees or security if the plaintiff submits an affidavit showing that he or

she is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff

has submitted the required documentation, and it is evident from her application that her

assets and income are insufficient to enable plaintiff to prosecute the action.

Viewing plaintiff’s application in isolation, it appears that she should be allowed to

proceed IFP. The Court notes, however, that plaintiff is joined by two other plaintiffs, who

are also representing themselves: Daniel Keating-Traynor and Terrence Traynor. Neither

Keating-Traynor nor Traynor have submitted affidavits in support of the application to

proceed in forma pauperis, and they did not execute the application submitted by Keating. 

For this reason alone the Court must deny plaintiffs’ application to proceed without payment 

Case 3:05-cv-04475-CRB Document 4 Filed 11/21/05 Page 1 of 3
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

of the required fees.

In addition, a court is under a continuing duty to dismiss a case whenever it

determines that the action “(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on 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)(B)(i)-- (iii).

In this case plaintiffs appear to challenge the treatment of plaintiff Daniel KeatingTraynor while in foster case, as well as the treatment of his natural parents, plaintiffs

Maureen Keating and Terrence Traynor. The complaint makes federal and state law claims,

and, in the caption, identifies nearly 58 different defendants. Before the Court will authorize

service of process on 58 separate defendants–several of whom are located out of

state–plaintiffs’ complaint must allege facts which show they have viable claims against

these defendants. Plaintiffs’ complaint does not do so; instead, it alleges that certain

defendants “conspired” together without alleging any facts as to the conspiracy or the

allegedly unlawful conduct that they conspired to engage in.

This Court’s jurisdiction is based on the federal law claims. Accordingly, the Court’s

initial analysis of whether the complaint states a claim, and thus whether plaintiffs may

proceed in forma pauperis, will focus on the federal claims. Plaintiffs must amend their

federal claims to set forth the factual basis for each claim, including the factual basis for

naming a particular individual or entity as a defendant to such claim. Specifically, plaintiffs

must set forth the factual basis for their claims under section 1983 and section 1985, the

First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as the Alien Tort Claims

Act. It is not sufficient for plaintiffs to identify certain defendants by name and then allege

that they violated the law; plaintiffs must plead the facts that give rise to their claims.

Accordingly, on or before December 30, 2005 plaintiffs shall (1) submit applications

to proceed in forma pauperis from all plaintiffs, and (2) file an amended complaint which 

//

//

//

Case 3:05-cv-04475-CRB Document 4 Filed 11/21/05 Page 2 of 3
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

G:\CRBALL\2005\4475\order1ifp.wpd 3

pleads the factual basis for plaintiffs’ federal claims.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: Nov. 21, 2005

 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-04475-CRB Document 4 Filed 11/21/05 Page 3 of 3