Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01671/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01671-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE RODRIGUEZ,

Plaintiff, 

vs. CIV S-05-1671 LKK KJM PS

JOHN EDMON,

Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has

filed a third amended complaint.

The federal in forma pauperis statute authorizes federal courts to dismiss a case if

the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2). 

A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact. 

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28

(9th Cir. 1984). The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an

indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke,

490 U.S. at 327. 

Case 2:05-cv-01671-LKK -KJM Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 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

2

A complaint, or portion thereof, should only be dismissed for failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted if it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set

of facts in support of the claim or claims that would entitle him to relief. Hishon v. King &

Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984) (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957)); Palmer

v. Roosevelt Lake Log Owners Ass'n, 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). In reviewing a

complaint under this standard, the court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in

question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Rex Hosp. Trustees, 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976), construe the

pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff's favor,

Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969). 

Plaintiff’s third amended complaint again suffers from the deficiencies previously

noted with regard to the original, first, and second amended complaints. It now appears plaintiff

is claiming jurisdiction over this action is conferred under the civil rights statutes. However, the

gravamen of plaintiff’s complaint is a claim for embezzlement. There are no allegations

regarding civil rights violations. 

Plaintiff has now filed four complaints. In each complaint, plaintiff has failed to

allege a proper basis for jurisdiction. Despite repeated opportunities to cure the deficiencies in

his complaints, plaintiff has failed to do so. Moreover, it appears that further amendment would

be futile.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed.

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:05-cv-01671-LKK -KJM Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 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

3

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: May 31, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

006

rodriquez.57

Case 2:05-cv-01671-LKK -KJM Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 3 of 3