Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01573/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01573-0/pdf.json

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

---

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Wayne Alan Harr initiated this action by filing a complaint against the United States 

of America, the President of the United States, the Bakersfield Police Department, Juan and “his 

partner Pinky,” Trans West Security, Narducci’s Café, Kern Medical Center, and Rite Aid Pharmacy 

for “intentional malicious infliction of psychophysiological[l] distress.” (Doc. 1) Plaintiff seeks to 

proceed pro se and in forma pauperis with his claims against these defendants. 

The Court may authorize the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees and 

costs of security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit that . . . the person is unable to pay 

such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Therefore, an action may proceed despite 

a failure to prepay the filing fee only if leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted by the Court. 

See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1178, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). 

Nevertheless, Plaintiff fails to provide any information regarding his financial status, other than 

the fact that he receives Social Security and retirement income. Without further information, 

WAYNE ALAN HARR,

 Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01573 - --- - JLT

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN 

AMENDED MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S 

COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Case 1:15-cv-01573-JAM-JLT Document 4 Filed 11/05/15 Page 1 of 2
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

including his monthly income and expenses, the Court is unable to determine whether Plaintiff 

satisfies the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) to proceed IFP in this action.

In addition, the Court has reviewed the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2) and notes 

there are not any factual allegations in the complaint. Rather, Plaintiff only identifies numerous 

defendants and a monetary amount in damages that he is seeking against each defendant. Plaintiff is 

advised that he is required by Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to provide a defendant 

with fair notice of the claims against him, and to state facts in support of his claims. See Swierkiewicz 

v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002). The Supreme Court explained,

Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, but it demands more than an 

unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation. A pleading that offers 

labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will 

not do. Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders naked assertions devoid of further 

factual enhancement.

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (emphasis added). Thus, conclusory and vague allegations 

do not support a cause of action. Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 

Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff SHALL file an amended motion to proceed in forma pauperis no later than 

November 18, 2015; and

2. Plaintiff SHALL file an amended complaint that alleges facts sufficient to support his 

claims for relief within twenty-one days of the date of service of this Order.

Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to comply with this Order will result in the 

recommendation that the action be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 5, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01573-JAM-JLT Document 4 Filed 11/05/15 Page 2 of 2