Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01801/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01801-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL CEVALLOS,

Plaintiff,

v.

OFFICE OF COUNTY COUNSEL, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01801-EDL 

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Re: Dkt. No. 1

Plaintiff Michael Cevallos filed his complaint and Application to Proceed In Forma 

Pauperis (“IFP Application”) on April 21, 2015. On April 24, 2015, this Court GRANTED 

Plaintiff’s IFP Application but reserved its determination of compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(e)(2)(B). On April 30, 2015, Plaintiff consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(c).1 For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with leave 

to amend.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), “[a]ny court of the United States may authorize the 

commencement . . . of any suit . . . without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor, by a 

person who makes affidavit that he is unable to pay such costs or give security therefor.” The 

court may dismiss a case sua sponte if the court determines that the party applying for in forma 

pauperis status has filed a frivolous action or that the action fails to state a claim on which relief 

may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1989). 

 

1

To the extent that this order is dispositive, the Court does not require the consent of Defendants 

because Defendants have not been served and therefore are not parties under the meaning of 28 

U.S.C. § 636(c). See Ornelas v. De Frantz, 2000 WL 973684, *2, n.2 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (citing

Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 532 (5th Cir. 1995) (magistrate judge had jurisdiction to dismiss

prisoner’s civil rights action without consent of the defendants because the defendants had not 

been served yet and therefore were not parties)).

Case 3:15-cv-01801-EDL Document 7 Filed 05/07/15 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Dismissal on these grounds is often made sua sponte prior to the issuance of process, so as to spare 

prospective defendants the inconvenience and expense of answering such complaints. Neitzke v. 

Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). 

Plaintiff’s complaint does not make any clear claims against any Defendant and is largely 

unintelligible. While it appears that Plaintiff alleges a number of claims stemming from violations 

of his constitutional rights, the factual bases for each claim and the Defendant(s) against which 

each claim is asserted are unclear. In sum, Plaintiff's complaint fails to include a “short and plain 

statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief” as required by Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 8(a)(2). Therefore, Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. 

Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint. Any amended complaint must be 

filed by May 28, 2015, and should clearly state Plaintiff’s factual allegations and make it plain 

which allegations and causes of action relate to which defendants. Plaintiff may wish to seek 

assistance from the Legal Help Center, a free service of the Volunteer Legal Services Program, by 

calling (415) 782-8982 or signing up for an appointment on the 15th Floor of the Courthouse, 

Room 2796. At the Legal Help Center, Plaintiffs may speak with an attorney who may be able to 

provide basic legal help, but not legal representation. The Court also urges Plaintiffs to obtain a 

copy of the Pro Se Handbook, available free of charge from the Court's website 

(www.cand.uscourts.gov) or in the Clerk's Office on the 16th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San 

Francisco, CA.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 7, 2015

________________________

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-01801-EDL Document 7 Filed 05/07/15 Page 2 of 2