Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-03219/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-03219-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 230
Nature of Suit: Rent, Lease, Ejectment
Cause of Action: 28:1443(1) Rent, Lease &amp; Ejectment

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3109 KING ST PROPERTY 

MANAGEMENT, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DEUTSCHE BANK AMERICAS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-03219-VC 

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED 

COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e) 

Re: Dkt. No. 27

On July 12, 2016, this Court adopted Magistrate Judge Beeler's Report and 

Recommendation to dismiss the complaint without prejudice and ordered Plaintiffs to file any 

amended complaint within thirty days. Dkt. No. 17. On August 11, 2016, Plaintiffs Robert 

Eberwein and 3109 King St. Property Management purported to file an amended complaint 

seeking "TRO/Injunction." Dkt. No. 27. Though their complaint is timely, it is dismissed sua 

sponte for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 

The amended complaint not only fails to describe how Defendants' actions have caused 

injury to the Plaintiffs, but also fails to mention Robert Eberwein or 3109 King St. Property 

Management at all. Instead, the allegations pertain to Defendants' alleged eviction of "Mr. 

Darrick Sterling" and how Defendants' actions will injure Mr. Sterling unless he is granted 

injunctive or other relief. No part of the amended complaint describes or explains any 

relationship between Mr. Sterling and Mr. Eberwein or 3109 King St. Property Management.1 

 

1

It appears that Plaintiffs have merely re-filed a complaint from a different case. The amended 

complaint appears substantively identical to a complaint originally filed in a different case. 

Apart from crossing out the former plaintiff's name (Mr. Darrick Sterling), substituting in "3109 

King St. Property Management," and adding the names of additional defendants, Plaintiffs 

Case 3:16-cv-03219-VC Document 30 Filed 09/09/16 Page 1 of 2
2

Because Plaintiffs have failed to allege any facts about how Defendants' actions injured 

them or otherwise violated the law in a manner entitling Plaintiffs to relief, the complaint fails to 

state a plausible claim for relief. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). It is 

clear that the deficiencies of the complaint cannot be cured by amendment. See Manzarek v. St. 

Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). The amended complaint is 

therefore dismissed with prejudice. To the extent Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, their 

application is denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 9, 2016

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

 

appear not to have changed any of the complaint's original allegations. An ECF stamp runs 

across the top of each page, which indicates that the complaint was originally filed in case no. 

4:14-cv-00827. Plaintiffs have not alleged any connection between their case and case no. 4:14-

cv-00827, nor is any connection evident to the Court.

Case 3:16-cv-03219-VC Document 30 Filed 09/09/16 Page 2 of 2