Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00866/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00866-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgment

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Katherine D. Worden, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Federal Home Loan Mortgage

Corporation, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-10-0866-PHX-DGC

ORDER

Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a pro se complaint on April 19, 2010.

Dkt. #1. Plaintiff has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. #2. For reasons that

follow, the Court will dismiss the complaint and deny the motion without prejudice.

I. Dismissal of the Complaint.

Plaintiff’s complaint does not adequately allege subject matter jurisdiction. “Federal

courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that power authorized by

Constitution and statute[.]” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377

(1994). This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over a case only if (a) it arises under

federal law or (b) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the parties are citizens of

different states. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a). 

The complaint does not explain why this Court has subject matter jurisdiction.

Plaintiff states in her complaint that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, but those statutes merely state that this Court can grant declaratory

relief in cases which are properly before the Court. They do not provide jurisdiction. 

Case 2:10-cv-00866-DGC Document 5 Filed 04/29/10 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

- 2 -

The Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice. Plaintiff shall have until

May 21, 2010 to file an amended complaint. For purposes of the amended complaint,

Plaintiff is directed to Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 8(a) provides that

a complaint “shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the

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

the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader

seeks.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). These pleading requirements shall be set forth in separate and

discrete paragraphs. The paragraphs must be numbered in consecutive order. Each

paragraph must be “simple, concise, and direct.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(d)(1).

Plaintiff is advised that vague references are insufficient to satisfy the pleading

requirements of Rule 8. The amended complaint must give each defendant “fair notice of

what [Plaintiff’s] claim is and the grounds upon which it is based.” Holgate v. Baldwin, 425

F.3d 671, 676 (9th Cir. 2005). This includes some factual basis for each claim asserted and

the specific legal theory supporting the claim. “Threadbare recitals of the elements of a

cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Iqbal, 129 S. Ct.

at 1949.

II. Plaintiff’s Obligations.

Plaintiff must become familiar with, and follow, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

and the Rules of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona (“Local Rules”).

See King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1986) (“Pro se litigants must follow the same

rules of procedure that govern other litigants.”); Jacobsen v. Filler, 790 F.2d 1362, 1364 (9th

Cir. 1986) (pro se litigants “should not be treated more favorably than parties with attorneys

of record”); Carter v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 784 F.2d 1006, 1008 (9th Cir. 1986)

(“Although pro se, [plaintiff] is expected to abide by the rules of the court in which he

litigates.”). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are available at the following Internet

website: http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/. A copy of the Court’s Local Rules of Civil

Procedure may be obtained from the Clerk’s Office.

Case 2:10-cv-00866-DGC Document 5 Filed 04/29/10 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

- 3 -

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s complaint (Dkt. #1) is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff shall

have until May 21, 2010 to file an amended complaint.

2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed informa pauperis (Dkt. #2) is denied without

prejudice. Plaintiff may re-file the motion if she files an amended complaint.

3. The Clerk is directed to terminate this action without notice if Plaintiff fails to

file an amended complaint by May 21, 2010.

DATED this 29th day of April, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-00866-DGC Document 5 Filed 04/29/10 Page 3 of 3