Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01629/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01629-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

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

WO NN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Sam Salar, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Target Corporation; Sedgwick CMS;

Target Store 1429; Target Store 909, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 06-1629-PHX-EHC

ORDER

Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint Re:

Failure to Comply with Court’s Order (“Motion to Dismiss”) on July 10, 2008. They argue

that Pro Se Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint fails to state a claim, comport with Rules

8 and 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and comply with the Court’s Order dated

April 21, 2008. Plaintiff has yet to respond. 

Plaintiff has had several opportunities to file a complaint that conforms with the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (See Dkts. 30, 35, & 52). Rule 8(a) requires a “short and

plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Rule 8(e) requires

that each averment in a pleading be “simple, concise, and direct.” Plaintiff alleged two

claims for relief in the 26-page Amended Complaint and in the 31-page Revised Amended

Complaint and neither complied with these requirements. The Court gave Plaintiff another

opportunity to correct the deficiencies. Once again, Plaintiff’s 31-page Second Amended

Case 2:06-cv-01629-EHC Document 64 Filed 08/19/08 Page 1 of 2
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 -

Complaint fails; the lack of clarity makes it difficult to understand and thus does not state a

claim upon which relief can be granted. See Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6).

As before, the assertions in the complaint are merely conclusory allegations, and the

Court also finds that Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint does not adhere to Rule 10(b)

which requires that all averments “be made in numbered paragraphs, the contents of each of

which shall be limited as far as practicable to a statement of a single set of circumstances.”

Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 10(b).

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 59) is granted without prejudice.

DATED this 18th day of August, 2008.

Case 2:06-cv-01629-EHC Document 64 Filed 08/19/08 Page 2 of 2