Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00442/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00442-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

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

TRACEE MCKINNEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

BANK OF AMERICA N.A.

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 15cv0442 JAH (KSC)

ORDER DISMISSING

COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)

Plaintiff Tracee McKinney, appearing pro se, originally filed a complaint along with

an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on February 27, 2015. Finding the

complaint did not meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, the Court

dismissed the complaint without prejudice and denied the IFP motion as moot. In

response, Plaintiff filed an First Amended Complaint on June 10, 2015. The Court again

found Plaintiff failed to meet the requirements of Rule 8 and dismissed the complaint with

leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) asserting claims for

deceit, concealment fraud, and negligent misrepresentation. See Doc. No. 10. Plaintiff

also filed a motion to proceed IFP. See Doc. No. 11.

All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the

United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of

$400. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to

prepay the entire fee only if the plaintiff is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). 

15cv442

Case 3:15-cv-00442-JAH-KSC Document 12 Filed 10/09/15 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

Notwithstanding payment of any filing fee or portion thereof, a complaint filed by

any person seeking to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) is subject to a

mandatory and sua sponte review and dismissal by the court to the extent it is “frivolous,

malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief

from a defendant immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Calhoun v. Stahl,

254 F.3d 845, 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[T]he provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) are

not limited to prisoners.”); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en

banc). 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) mandates that a court reviewing a complaint filed pursuant

to the in forma pauperis provisions of section 1915 make and rule on its own motion to

dismiss before directing that the complaint be served by the U.S. Marshal pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3). Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1127.

In the SAC, Plaintiff alleges Defendant Bank of America, provided her a

“misrepresented” transaction history report designed to mislead her about mortgage

payments. SAC ¶ 1. She further alleges the escrow account showed an improper balance

and the loan balance did not include additional principal payments she made. Id. ¶¶ 2,

3. She also alleges the closing costs were incorrect, she was never given required

disclosures, several copies of the loan documents she was sent did not match, and the deed

of trust showed an altered signature. Id. ¶¶ 4, 5. 

Plaintiff’s SAC fails to comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil procedure. 

Under Rule 8, a complaint “must contain (1) a short plain statement of the grounds for

the court’s jurisdiction. . .(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader

is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought.” Rule 8 is designed to provide

defendants with fair notice of the claims against them and the grounds on which those

claims rest. McKeever v. Block, 932 F.2d 795, 798 (9th Cir. 1991). Although Plaintiff

includes a jurisdiction statement and a “short and plain statement” of her claims to

provide Defendant fair notice of the claims, she fails include a prayer for relief as required. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The SAC is DISMISSED without prejudice.

2 15cv442

Case 3:15-cv-00442-JAH-KSC Document 12 Filed 10/09/15 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

2. If Plaintiff wishes to file a Third Amended Complaint to address the

deficiencies noted above, she may do so on or before November 9, 2015.

3. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot.

1

Dated: October 7, 2015

 

JOHN A. HOUSTON

United States District Judge

1

If Plaintiff files a Third Amended Complaint, she must also either pay the filing fee or file a new motion to proceed IFP

3 15cv442

Case 3:15-cv-00442-JAH-KSC Document 12 Filed 10/09/15 Page 3 of 3