Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01272/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01272-0/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

Donald Muhammad,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

City of Phoenix Housing Department,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 06-1272-PHX-MHM

ORDER

Currently, before the Court is Plaintiff Donald Muhammad's ("Plaintiff") Motion to

proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. #3). Having reviewed the Motion, the Court issues the

following Order.

Plaintiff's Motion to proceed in forma pauperis demonstrates that Plaintiff does not

possess the means to pay the filing fee in this case. Accordingly, the Court will grant the

application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 

However, the Motion to proceed in forma pauperis requires the Court to screen the

Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a) and (e)(2). In screening a complaint filed with a

request to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court must dismiss the complaint at any time if it

is "frivolous or malicious" or if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See

28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i),(ii). 

The Complaint appears to allege that Rita Cordova and Donna Overstreet

discriminated against Plaintiff on the basis of religion by denying Plaintiff's application for

Case 2:06-cv-01272-MHM Document 4 Filed 06/12/06 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 -

an apartment. (Complaint ("Compl.") ¶ 1). Plaintiff has named the City of Phoenix Housing

Department as a Defendant. Plaintiff seeks a hearing or $100,000 in compensation. In

reviewing this Complaint, it is apparent to the Court that Plaintiff's Complaint does not

comply with Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires that a

complaint contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is

entitled to relief." Rule 8(e)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P. states that "[e]ach averment of a pleading shall

be simple, concise, and direct." Plaintiff's Complaint, while apparently alleging a claim based

upon housing discrimination, fails to set forth sufficient factual allegations in support of his

claim. For instance, Plaintiff claims that Rita Cordova and Donna Overstreet were involved

in the alleged discrimination, but these individuals are not named as defendants and it is

unclear what relationship they have to the named Defendant, City of Phoenix. Moreover,

there are no factual allegations in the Complaint against the City of Phoenix.

Therefore, the Complaint will be dismissed with leave to amend to allow Plaintiff to

clearly allege his claims in short, plain statements which demonstrate he is entitled to relief.

In any amended complaint, Plaintiff must tell the Court: (1) the constitutional right or

statutory provision under which Plaintiff is proceeding; (2) the constitutional right or

statutory provision which Plaintiff believes has been violated; (3) exactly what the named

Defendants did or failed to do and the date or dates of the act or omission alleged; (4) how

the action or inaction of the Defendant is connected to the alleged violation; and (5) what

specific injury Plaintiff has suffered because of Defendant's conduct. Plaintiff may set forth

his allegation in numbered paragraphs for purposes of clarity. Plaintiff further should set

forth a plain and concise statement of the relief he is seeking.

Plaintiff should take notice that if he fails to timely comply with every provision of

this Order, or any order of the Court entered in this matter, the action will be dismissed

pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963

F.2d 1258 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court may dismiss action for failure to comply with any

order of the court). 

Accordingly,

Case 2:06-cv-01272-MHM Document 4 Filed 06/12/06 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 HEREBY ORDERED granting Plaintiff's Motion to proceed in forma

pauperis, without prepayment of costs or fees or the necessity of giving security therefore.

Plaintiff shall be responsible for service by waiver or of the summons and complaint.

(Dkt.#3).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice with

leave to amend. Plaintiff shall have 20 days from the date this Order is filed in which to file

an amended complaint in order to state specific allegations against the Defendant in

compliance with Rule 8, Fed.R.Civ.P., and to otherwise comply with this Order. The

amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety and may not incorporate any

part of the original complaint by reference. Any amended complaint submitted by Plaintiff

should be clearly designated as such on the face of the document. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to enter a judgment

of dismissal without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff, if Plaintiff fails to

timely file an amended complaint within 20 days from the date this Order is filed. 

DATED this 7th day of June, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-01272-MHM Document 4 Filed 06/12/06 Page 3 of 3