Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02031/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02031-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

GEORGE PATRICK STONE,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 12-CV-2031 - IEG (BLM)

ORDER:

(1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS; AND

[Doc. No. 2]

(2) SUA SPONTE DISMISSING

COMPLAINT

[Doc. No. 1]

vs.

CONRAD PREHY; SHARP MESA VISTA

HOSPITAL; DAVID BERMAN, Doctor;

ELLIOT KASTER; ALVARADO

HOSPITAL; SAN DIEGO COUNTY

SHERIFF; EL CAJON POLICE

DEPARTMENT; and KFR STAR REALTY

Defendants.

Plaintiff commenced this action on August 17, 2012, appearing to allege that his civil

rights were violated. [Doc. No. 1.] Along with his complaint, Plaintiff submitted a motion to

proceed in forma pauperis. [Doc. Nos. 2.] Having considered Plaintiff’s submissions, the Court

GRANTS Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis and DISMISSES WITHOUT

PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s complaint.

DISCUSSION

I. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court, except an

application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $350. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a).

- 1 - 12cv2031

Case 3:12-cv-02031-IEG-BLM Document 3 Filed 08/21/12 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

However, an action may proceed despite failure to pay the filing fee if the party is granted in

forma pauperis (“IFP”) status. See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). The

Court may grant IFP status to any party who demonstrates that he or she is unable to pay such fees

or give security therefor. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

In the present case, having reviewed Plaintiff’s motion and declaration in support of the

motion, the Court finds that Plaintiff has made a sufficient showing of inability to pay the required

filing fees. See Rodriguez, 169 F.3d at 1177. Accordingly, good cause appearing, the Court

GRANTS Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

II. INITIAL SCREENING PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)

After granting IFP status, the Court must dismiss the case if the complaint “fails to state a

claim on which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); see also Lopez v. Smith, 203

F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) “not only permits but

requires” the court to sua sponte dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim). 

In order to properly state a claim for relief, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,

accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.

662, 678 (2009). A complaint must contain more than a “labels and conclusions” or a “formulaic

recitation of the elements of a cause of action;” it must contain factual allegations sufficient to

“raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,

555 (2007). “‘The pleading must contain something more . . . than . . . a statement of facts that

merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action.’” Id.

As currently pleaded, Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim for relief that is plausible on

its face. Plaintiff’s complaint is one paragraph and simply states different causes of action and legal

conclusions. [See Compl. (“Impugnment of civil rights, collusion, conspiracy, bribery[,]

obstruction of justice[,] color of law violations[,] abuse of power, corruption[,] entrapment, wire

taping, obstruction of access to a mental health facility[,] defamation, slander[,] libel[.]”).] 

However, Plaintiff provides no factual allegations in support of any of these claims. A complaint

must contain more than mere “labels and conclusion” or a formulaic recitation of causes of action. 

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. Even affording Plaintiff’s complaint the special consideration given to

- 2 - 12cv2031

Case 3:12-cv-02031-IEG-BLM Document 3 Filed 08/21/12 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

pro se claimants, his allegations fail to present facts sufficient to support a cognizable legal theory

against any of the Defendants. Although the Court must assume Plaintiff can prove the facts he

alleges in his complaint, the Court may not “supply essential elements of the claim that were not

initially pled.” Ivey v. Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 

Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to

state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed in Forma

Pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), but DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s

complaint as frivolous and for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Plaintiff is GRANTED thirty (30) days from the date this Order is filed to file a First

Amended Complaint addressing the deficiencies of the pleading set forth above. Plaintiff is

cautioned his First Amended Complaint must be complete in itself, without relying on references to

the original Complaint. Plaintiff is further cautioned any defendant not named or claim not

re-alleged will be considered waived. See King v. Attiyeh, 814 F.3d 1172, 1177-79 (9th Cir. 1996). 

Plaintiff is also cautioned that if his amended complaint does not state a claim, the Court may

dismiss his complaint without leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 21, 2012 ______________________________

IRMA E. GONZALEZ, Chief Judge

United States District Court

- 3 - 12cv2031

Case 3:12-cv-02031-IEG-BLM Document 3 Filed 08/21/12 Page 3 of 3