Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-02371/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-02371-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Emmanuel Jau Kuel, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Peter Miarial Miabek, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-2371-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a complaint, which states:

I want Peter to Leave me alone. I do not want to stay with him or other [sic]

person. I also want my documents to get changes.

(Doc. 1.)

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. As a result, they can hear only those

cases that the Constitution and Congress have authorized them to adjudicate: namely, cases

involving diversity of citizenship, a federal question, or cases to which the United States is

a party. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). The party

asserting jurisdiction bears the burden of proving a jurisdictional basis exists. Id. The

Complaint in this case alleges no basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction. 

Plaintiff has also moved to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Congress provided with respect to in forma pauperis cases 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

Case 2:10-cv-02371-JAT Document 5 Filed 11/05/10 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 -

relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2).

Kennedy v. Andrews, 2005 WL 3358205, *2 (D. Ariz. 2005). 

Additionally,

A claim must be stated clearly enough to enable a defendant to frame a

responsive pleading. A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement

of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).

“Each averment of a pleading shall be simple, concise, and direct.” Fed. R.

Civ. P. 8(e)(1). A complaint having the factual elements of a cause of action

present but scattered throughout the complaint and not organized into a “short

and plain statement of the claim” may be dismissed for failure to satisfy Rule

8(a). Sparling v. Hoffman Constr. Co., 864 F.2d 635, 640 (9th Cir. 1988). 

In order to assist litigants to understand the Rule 8(e) requirements that

averments “be simple, concise, and direct,” Rule 84 of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure provides samples in an Appendix of Forms, which are

“intended to indicate the simplicity and brevity of statement which the rules

contemplate.” McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 1996). An

example is Form 9 (Complaint for Negligence): 

1. Allegation of jurisdiction

2. On June 1, 1936, in a public highway called Boylston Street in Boston,

Massachusetts, defendant negligently drove a motor vehicle against

plaintiff, who was then crossing said highway.

3. As a result plaintiff was thrown down and had his leg broken, and was

otherwise injured, was prevented from transacting his business, suffered

great pain of body and mind, and incurred expenses for medical attention and

hospitalization in the sum of one thousand dollars.

4. Wherefore plaintiff demands judgment against defendant in the sum

of ____ dollars and costs. 

Id. “This complaint fully sets forth who is being sued, for what relief, and

on what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery. It can be read in

seconds and answered in minutes.” Id. In addition, to satisfy Rule 8, each

claim must be stated in a separate count. Bautista v. Los Angeles, 216 F.3d

837, 840-41 (9th Cir. 2000). 

Id. at *2-*3.

In its current form, the Complaint does comply with the pleading requirements of Rule

8. Based on the foregoing,

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:10-cv-02371-JAT Document 5 Filed 11/05/10 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 -

IT IS ORDERED that by December 6, 2010, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint

that properly alleges federal subject matter jurisdiction and which clearly articulates his

claims against Defendant. If Plaintiff fails to file the amended complaint within this

deadline, the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment of dismissal, without prejudice.

DATED this 5th day of November, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-02371-JAT Document 5 Filed 11/05/10 Page 3 of 3