Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01634/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01634-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 42:1983bv Bivens Non-Prisoner

---

1

17cv1634 BTM (BLM)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MONTOREY D. HARPER,

Plaintiff,

v.

US DOJ,

Defendant.

Case No.: 17cv1634 BTM (BLM)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA 

PAUPERS AND DISMISSING 

COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO 

STATE A CLAIM

On August 14, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Complaint and a Motion to Proceed In 

Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). For the reasons discussed below, the IFP Motion is 

granted, and the Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim.

DISCUSSION

I. Motion to Proceed IFP

Upon review of Plaintiff’s affidavit in support of his IFP Motion, the Court finds 

that Plaintiff has made a sufficient showing of inability to pay the filing fee required 

to prosecute this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s IFP Motion is GRANTED. 

II. Failure to State a Claim

Although the Court will allow Plaintiff to proceed IFP, Plaintiff’s Complaint 

Case 3:17-cv-01634-BTM-BLM Document 3 Filed 08/28/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

17cv1634 BTM (BLM)

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

must be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The Court is under a continuing duty 

to dismiss an IFP case whenever the Court determines that the action “fails to state 

a claim on which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), Plaintiff’s complaint must state 

a claim for relief that contains: (1) “a short and plain statement of the grounds for 

the court’s jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim 

needs no new jurisdictional support; (2) a short and plain statement of the claim 

showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for relief sought, 

which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.” The factual 

allegations “must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” 

Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Here, even under the most 

liberal review, Plaintiff has failed to state enough facts to support a cognizable 

claim for relief. The first page of the Complaint includes the following heading: 

“Fashionable Assault.” However, the allegations under the heading are 

unintelligible and fail to support a claim of assault. The following pages of the 

Complaint appear to be letters written to the “State Bureau of Investigation” 

requesting that it investigate “identity theft,” “religious discrimination,” and 

“disability discrimination,” but these also fail to allege sufficient facts to support a 

claim for relief. 

 Because Plaintiff is proceeding without counsel, and he has now been 

provided with notice of his Complaint’s deficiencies, the Court will grant him leave 

to amend. See Rosati v. Igbinoso, 791 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 2015) (“A district 

court should not dismiss a pro se complaint without leave to amend [pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)] unless ‘it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of 

the complaint could not be cured by amendment.’”) (quoting Akhtar v. Mesa, 698 

F.3d 1202, 1212 (9th Cir. 2012)).

//

//

Case 3:17-cv-01634-BTM-BLM Document 3 Filed 08/28/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

17cv1634 BTM (BLM)

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

CONCLUSION

For the reasons discussed above, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED for failure to state 

a claim. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to file a First Amended Complaint

which cures the deficiencies noted above. If Plaintiff chooses to file a First 

Amended Complaint, he must do so on or before September 22, 2017. Plaintiff’s 

Amended Complaint must be complete by itself without reference to his original 

pleading. Defendants not named and any claim not re-alleged in his Amended 

Complaint will be considered waived. See S.D. CAL. CIVLR 15.1; Hal Roach 

Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1989) 

(“[A]n amended pleading supersedes the original.”); Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 

F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (noting that claims dismissed with leave to amend 

which are not re-alleged in an amended pleading may be “considered waived if not 

repled.”). If Plaintiff fails to file an Amended Complaint, the Court will enter a final 

Order dismissing this civil action based both on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim 

upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 

his failure to prosecute in compliance with a court order requiring amendment. See

Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) (“If a plaintiff does not take 

advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court may convert the 

dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 28, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-01634-BTM-BLM Document 3 Filed 08/28/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3