Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02075/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02075-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 29:623 Job Discrimination (Age)

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM WHITSITT,

Plaintiff, CIV S-06-2075 MCE KJM PS

vs.

CLUB RESOURCE GROUP, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to and

has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. This

proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

Plaintiff was ordered to show cause as to why the action should not be dismissed

for material representations in the in forma pauperis application. Plaintiff has responded to the

order to show cause and the court has determined that the show cause order will be discharged.

Plaintiff has submitted the affidavit required by § 1915(a) showing that plaintiff is

unable to prepay fees and costs or give security for them. Accordingly, the request to proceed in

forma pauperis will be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

The federal in forma pauperis statute authorizes federal courts to dismiss a case if

the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

Case 2:06-cv-02075-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 10/31/06 Page 1 of 4
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

2

granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2). 

A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in

fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-

28 (9th Cir. 1984). The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an

indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. 

Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. 

Plaintiff alleges a claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

(“ADEA”) and names as defendants the employer and individual employees. Under the ADEA,

individual employees cannot be held liable for damages. See Miller v. Maxwell’s Int’l, Inc., 991

F.2d 583, 587-88 (9th Cir. 1993). The court therefore declines to order service on the individual

employees and this action will proceed solely against the employer. Plaintiff also alleges claims

contending his constitutional rights were violated because of the termination. There are no

allegations that the employer is a state actor; thus, there is no cause of action under 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983. The action will accordingly proceed only on plaintiff’s claim under the ADEA. 

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The show cause order is discharged.

2. Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

3. Plaintiff shall obtain one USM-285 form for defendant Club Resource Group,

one summons for defendant Club Resource Group and an instruction sheet. Blank USM-285

forms, blank summons, and instruction sheets are available in the office of the Clerk of the

Court.

4. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the completed Notice to the court with

the following documents:

/////

Case 2:06-cv-02075-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 10/31/06 Page 2 of 4
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

3

a. One completed summons for the defendant named in the complaint;

b. One completed USM-285 form for the defendant named in the

complaint; and 

c. Two copies of the endorsed complaint filed September 18, 2006 and

two copies of this order.

5. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendant Club Resource Group and need

not request waiver of service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will

direct the United States Marshal to serve the defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 4 without prepayment of costs. 

6. Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation that this

action be dismissed.

DATED: October 30, 2006.

006

whitsitt.usm

Case 2:06-cv-02075-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 10/31/06 Page 3 of 4
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM WHITSITT,

Plaintiff, CIV S-06-2075 MCE KJM PS

vs.

CLUB RESOURCE GROUP, et al.,

Defendants. NOTICE OF SUBMISSION

OF DOCUMENTS

 /

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's

order filed :

 completed summons form

 completed USM-285 forms

 copies of the Complaint

DATED: 

 

Plaintiff

DATED: 

Case 2:06-cv-02075-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 10/31/06 Page 4 of 4