Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01229/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01229-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:1651w All Writs Act

---

1

17cv1229-LAB (WVG)

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

GABRIEL ANDREW RANGEL,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

Case No.: 17cv1229-LAB (WVG)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS;

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY 

INJUNCTION;

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

LEAVE TO FILE ADDITIONAL 

PAGES; AND

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff Gabriel Rangel, proceeding pro se, initiated this case by filing what 

appears to be a petition for relief. He did not pay the mandatory filing fee, but instead 

moved to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). His IFP motion says he has no assets, 

liability, or income of any kind, and is not supported by the required affidavit. It claims 

that he is in the San Diego Central Jail, and represents that he is an indigent prisoner 

there. A trust account withdrawal authorization form is attached, but no prisoner trust 

Case 3:17-cv-01229-LAB-WVG Document 7 Filed 09/13/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

17cv1229-LAB (WVG)

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

statement. The return address on the envelope, however, shows he is in Patton State 

Hospital1 in Patton, California. Because the IFP motion is inadequate on many levels, it is 

DENIED. 

Even assuming Rangel had been granted leave to proceed IFP, the Court would be 

required to screen his complaint and to dismiss it 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). The Court must also 

raise jurisdictional issues sua sponte. Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.) Inc., 631 F.3d 

939, 954 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc).

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), every complaint filed in federal court must contain a 

short and plain statement of the grounds for the Court’s jurisdiction, and a short and plain 

statement of the claim showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. Neither the petition 

nor the motion for emergency injunctive relief includes any short and plain statement. It 

is not even clear who Rangel thinks the Defendant is, what relief he wants, what the name 

of the case should be, or what court he is trying to file it in. The 85-page rambling 

petition appears to be written in a stream-of-consciousness style and is wholly 

incomprehensible. Rangel’s motion for emergency injunctive relief suggests he might be 

attempting to challenge some kind of conviction. Why he is suing the United States is 

unexplained. His motion says he is being imprisoned in the San Diego Central Jail 

pursuant to a conviction by the U.S. Supreme Court on October 21, 1966, which is the 

same day he was born. Rangel attaches a copy of the judgment of incompetency, dated 

January 25, 2017. To the extent Rangel’s pleadings and moving papers are 

comprehensible, they are fanciful and lack any merit.

Rangel has filed one other case in this District, Rangel v. Pacheco, 17cv743-BTM 

(JLB), filed May 15, 2017; it was dismissed as frivolous on July 31, 2017. 

 

1 Patton state hospital is a forensic psychiatric hospital run by the state of California. It provides 

treatment to forensically and civilly committed patients.

Case 3:17-cv-01229-LAB-WVG Document 7 Filed 09/13/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

17cv1229-LAB (WVG)

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

Because Rangel has not stated a claim, has not invoked the Court’s jurisdiction, 

and has neither paid the filing fee or successfully moved to proceed IFP, and because his 

claims are frivolous, this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. 

His motion for injunctive relief and his motion for leave to file additional pages (Docket 

nos. 3 and 5) are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 12, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-01229-LAB-WVG Document 7 Filed 09/13/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3