Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-01853/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-01853-0/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

Pedro E. Camacho, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

City of San Luis, Arizona; et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 12-1853-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

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 relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). While much of section 1915 outlines how prisoners can

file proceedings in forma pauperis, section 1915(e) applies to all in forma

pauperis proceedings, not just those filed by prisoners. Lopez v. Smith, 203

F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000)(“section 1915(e) applies to all in forma

pauperis complaints”). “It is also clear that section 1915(e) not only permits

but requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails

to state a claim.” Id. Therefore, this court must dismiss an in forma pauperis

complaint if it fails to state a claim or if it is frivolous or malicious. 

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

Here, the only demand Plaintiff makes in his “complaint” is to reopen CV-06-1462-

PHX-FJM. Plaintiff further moves in his “complaint” to have this case tranfered to Judge

Martone.

Case 2:12-cv-01853-JAT Document 6 Filed 09/07/12 Page 1 of 2
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 -

The Court finds that filing a new complaint is not the procedurally correct method to

re-open a closed case. See Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 60(b). Thus, the complaint in this case fails to

state a claim. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss this case.

Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, 

IT IS ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed (such dismissal is without prejudice

to Plaintiff seeking to re-open CV 06-1462-PHX-FJM in a procedurally proper manner); and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s application for leave to proceed in

forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is denied.

DATED this 7th day of September, 2012.

Case 2:12-cv-01853-JAT Document 6 Filed 09/07/12 Page 2 of 2