Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01326/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01326-0/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

The Court assumes that Plaintiff intended to assert civil rights claims under 42

U.S.C. §§ 1981-1983, and not 28 U.S.C. §§ 1981-1983, as stated.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KIA CHEVALIER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

FORT KNOX STORAGE, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 15-01326 JSW

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

AND DENYING IN FORMA

PAUPERIS APPLICATION

Now before the Court is a document that purports to be a request for an order granting

injunctive relief filed by Plaintiff Kia Chevalier. Although no complaint has been filed in this

matter, it appears that Plaintiff is suing Fort Knox Storage and Storage Pro. Beyond the

Defendants’ names, it is difficult to ascertain the nature of Plaintiff’s claims. Plaintiff appears

to assert claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1981-1983,1

 the “RICO Act 1971,” “FRE 451-FRE

452-453,” and breach of contract. Even assuming that Plaintiff intends to assert civil rights

claims, her filing is rambling, incoherent, and states no claims over which this Court has

jurisdiction. Moreover, although Plaintiff’s filing purports to be a request for a temporary

restraining order, most of the document is a lengthy discourse on the underlying facts. 

A district court may deny in forma pauperis status and sua sponte dismiss an action if

federal subject matter jurisdiction is lacking or if the complaint is frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2). A complaint is frivolous if “it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).

Case 4:15-cv-01326-JSW Document 6 Filed 03/25/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

If the filings fail to allege that a plaintiff’s constitutional or statutory rights have been

violated, and no basis exists for the exercise of federal subject matter jurisdiction, there is no

“arguable basis in law” under Neitzke and the court on its own initiative may decline to permit

the plaintiff to proceed and may dismiss the action under section 1915(d). Cato v. United

States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). “Furthermore, where the complaint is wholly

lacking in merit, is ‘clearly baseless,’ ‘fanciful,’ or ‘delusional’ it may be dismissed as

frivolous.” Borhani v. The Whole World, 2006 WL 1214861, at *1 (N.D. Cal. May 5, 2006)

(quoting Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992)). 

The gravamen of Plaintiff’s filing is that she is being denied access to her storage

lockers in Defendants’ facility and fears that Defendants may sell or otherwise dispose of her

property. Defendants are not state actors and therefore there is no federal jurisdiction for a civil

rights claim. Nor do Plaintiff’s other asserted claims – to the extent the Court can decipher

what they are – support federal subject matter jurisdiction. If it were possible for Plaintiff to

cure these defects, the Court would be required to grant leave to amend. Denton, 504 U.S. at

34. However, if it is clear that a plaintiff would be unable to cure deficiencies even if granted

leave to amend, a court may dismiss with prejudice. Cato, 70 F.3d at 1106.

The Court finds that Plaintiff’s filing is wholly without merit and provides no basis for

federal jurisdiction. Thus, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma

pauperis, DENIES Plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order, and DISMISSES this

action. The Clerk is directed to close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 25, 2015 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:15-cv-01326-JSW Document 6 Filed 03/25/15 Page 2 of 2