Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01221/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01221-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCOS ANTHONY GONZALEZ, 

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

Defendant.

No. 1: 15-cv-01221---BAM

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

(Doc. 1)

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO 

PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF 

FEES OR COSTS

(Doc. 2)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO 

RETURN CONSENT FORM

INTRODUCTION

On August 6, 2015, Marcos Anthony Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”), appearing pro se, filed an 

application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2.) A review of his application reveals that 

Plaintiff is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis and his application is GRANTED. 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(a). 

Plaintiff also has filed a complaint naming the State of California as defendant in this 

action. (Doc. 1.) The Court has screened the complaint and orders that it be dismissed with leave 

to amend. 

///

Case 1:15-cv-01221-BAM Document 3 Filed 10/05/15 Page 1 of 5
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

A. Screening Standard

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court must dismiss a case if at any time the Court 

determines that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In 

determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the Court applies the same pleading 

standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). A complaint must contain “a short and 

plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 

8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of 

a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 

556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. 

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007)).

“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to 

relief that is plausible on its face.’” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). 

“[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are ‘merely consistent with’ a defendant’s liability . . . 

‘stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.’” Iqbal, 556 

U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Further, although a court must accept as true all 

factual allegations contained in a complaint, a court need not accept a plaintiff’s legal conclusions 

as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.

B. Plaintiff’s Allegations 

Plaintiff’s complaint, titled a “First Amended Complaint,” contains a list of allegations

identified as “Discrimination,” “Aggravated Assault” and “Terrorist Threats” against Defendant 

State of California, Tulare County. (Doc. 1 at 2.) Plaintiff seeks 32.5 million in damages. 

Plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege any facts; therefore, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon 

which relief can be granted. Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to amend his complaint and is 

provided with the following pleading and legal standards to assist him with filing an amended 

complaint.

DISCUSSION

As discussed more fully below, Plaintiff’s complaint fails to comply with Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure 8(a) and 10(b). Further, Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which 

Case 1:15-cv-01221-BAM Document 3 Filed 10/05/15 Page 2 of 5
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

relief can be granted and seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such 

relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), (iii). As Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he will be given an 

opportunity to amend his complaint. To assist Plaintiff, the Court provides the following 

pleading and legal standards. 

A. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8

Plaintiff’s complaint does not contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing 

that he is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Although the Federal Rules adopt a flexible 

pleading policy, a complaint must give fair notice and state the elements of the claim plainly and 

succinctly. Jones v. Community Redev. Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). While detailed 

allegations are not required, a plaintiff must set forth “the grounds of his entitlement to relief [,]” 

which “requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a 

cause of action . . . .” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (internal quotations and citations omitted).

In this instance, Plaintiff’s mere labels of purported violations are not sufficient to satisfy 

the pleading requirements of Rule 8. Plaintiff must set forth the facts underlying his claims. If 

Plaintiff amends his complaint, he must include the factual basis of his allegations. Simply listing 

the parties or causes of action is not sufficient. Plaintiff must explain his case with specificity. 

B. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(b)

Rule 10(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure also requires a plaintiff to state claims 

in “numbered paragraphs, each limited as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.” 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Moreover, “[i]f doing so would promote clarity, each claim founded on a 

separate transaction or occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). 

Plaintiff’s complaint style and formatting fails to comply with Rule 10(b). He must do more than 

simply list his purported causes of action. In Plaintiff’s amended complaint, he must comply with 

Rule 10(b).

C. Eleventh Amendment Immunity

Plaintiff names the State of California as the defendant in this action.1 The Eleventh 

 

1 The State of California is the sole defendant identified in the caption. In the body of the complaint, Plaintiff 

identifies one defendant as the State of California Tulare County. (Doc. 1 at 2.) 

Case 1:15-cv-01221-BAM Document 3 Filed 10/05/15 Page 3 of 5
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

4

Amendment erects a general bar against federal lawsuits brought against the state. Wolfson v. 

Brammer, 616 F.3d 1045, 1065-66 (9th Cir. 2010). While “[t]he Eleventh Amendment does not 

bar suits against a state official for prospective relief,” Wolfson, 616 F.3d at 1066, suits against 

the state or its agencies are barred absolutely, regardless of the form of relief sought. E.g., 

Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 100, 104 S.Ct. 900, 79 L.Ed.2d 67 

(1984); Buckwalter v. Nevada Bd. of Medical Examiners, 678 F.3d 737, 740 n. 1 (9th Cir.2012). 

Accordingly, Plaintiff may not bring a monetary damages action against the State of California. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s complaint fails to comply 

with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 10(b). Plaintiff’s complaint also fails to state a claim 

upon which relief can be granted and inappropriately seeks monetary relief against a defendant 

who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), (iii). However, in an abundance 

of caution, and because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he will be given leave to amend the 

complaint to cure these deficiencies to the extent he can do so in good faith. Accordingly, it is 

HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed for failure to comply with Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure 8 and 10, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for seeking 

monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 

2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a 

first amended complaint; and 

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a Consent to Magistrate Jurisdiction 

Form to Plaintiff. Plaintiff shall complete the form and advise the Court whether or not he will 

consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction no later than November 3, 2015. 

4. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order, the Court will dismiss this action 

for failure to obey a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 2, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01221-BAM Document 3 Filed 10/05/15 Page 4 of 5
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

5

Case 1:15-cv-01221-BAM Document 3 Filed 10/05/15 Page 5 of 5