Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01954/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01954-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property 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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAIMI SHOAGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF STOCKTON, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:21-cv-01954-KJM-JDP (PS)

SCREENING ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF:

(1) STAND BY HIS COMPLAINT 

SUBJECT TO DISMISSAL, OR

(2) FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

ECF No. 1

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff filed a complaint purporting to assert claims against several defendants, together 

with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. His complaint, however, fails to state a claim. 

I will defer ruling on his application to proceed in forma pauperis and grant him an opportunity to 

file an amended complaint.1 

1 Plaintiff may, but is not required to, file an amended application to proceed in forma 

pauperis. His current application reflects that his monthly income is approximately $5,300, but 

he identifies monthly expenses totaling less than $1,700. ECF No. 2. From the limited 

information on plaintiff’s current application, it does not appear that he qualifies to proceed in 

forma pauperis. See Gastelum v. M5 Dev LLC, No. 21-cv-01255-BAS-AHG, 2021 WL 3438641, 

at *1 (S.D. Cal. July 21, 2021) (quoting Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 

339 (1948)) (“To satisfy the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), ‘an affidavit [of poverty] is 

sufficient which states that one cannot because of his poverty pay or give security for costs . . .

and still be able to provide himself and dependents with the necessities of life.’”). 

Case 2:21-cv-01954-DC-JDP Document 3 Filed 12/14/22 Page 1 of 4
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

Screening and Pleading Requirements

A complaint must contain a short and plain statement that plaintiff is entitled to relief,

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), and provide “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its 

face,” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The plausibility standard does not 

require detailed allegations, but legal conclusions do not suffice. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 

662, 678 (2009). If the allegations “do not permit the court to infer more than the mere 

possibility of misconduct,” the complaint states no claim. Id. at 679. The complaint need not 

identify “a precise legal theory.” Kobold v. Good Samaritan Reg’l Med. Ctr., 832 F.3d 1024, 

1038 (9th Cir. 2016). Instead, what plaintiff must state is a “claim”—a set of “allegations that 

give rise to an enforceable right to relief.” Nagrampa v. MailCoups, Inc., 469 F.3d 1257, 1264 

n.2 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc) (citations omitted). 

The court must construe a pro se litigant’s complaint liberally. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 

U.S. 519, 520 (1972) (per curiam). The court may dismiss a pro se litigant’s complaint “if it 

appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which

would entitle him to relief.” Hayes v. Idaho Corr. Ctr., 849 F.3d 1204, 1208 (9th Cir. 2017). 

However, “‘a liberal interpretation of a civil rights co mplaint may not supply essential elements 

of the claim that were not initially pled.’” Bruns v. Nat’l Credit Union Admin., 122 F.3d 1251, 

1257 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting Ivey v. Bd. of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982)).

Analysis

Plaintiff brings this action against ten defendants—the City of Stockton, Wesley (an 

officer), Austin Samuel, Susan Samuel, Jose Guttierrez, Freeway Automotive, Spanos Home 

Owners Association, Citywide Towing, Lien Receivables, LLC, and Francini (California 

Highway Patrol Officer). ECF No. 1 at 1. The complaint’s caption page suggests that plaintiff 

seeks to assert a Fourth Amendment unlawful search and seizure claim and an Eighth 

Amendment excessive bail claim. Id. However, the complaint’s allegations, which are minimal, 

simply state that defendants are liable for harassment, illegal towing, conversion, and “severe 

emotional distress and mental suffering.” Id. at 2.

Case 2:21-cv-01954-DC-JDP Document 3 Filed 12/14/22 Page 2 of 4
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

Plaintiff’s complaint fails to present a short and plain statement of his claim as required by 

the Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Instead, it consists of little more than a list of 

claims and defendants, with no specific factual allegations. Although pro se pleadings are 

liberally construed, plaintiff must still identify each of the defendant’s actions that support his 

claims. See Jones v. Cmty. Redev. Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984) (“The plaintiff must 

allege with at least some degree of particularity overt acts which defendants engaged in that 

support the plaintiff’s claim.”).

I will allow plaintiff a chance to amend his complaint before recommending that this 

action be dismissed. If plaintiff decides to file an amended complaint, the amended complaint 

will supersede the current complaint. See Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F. 3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th 

Cir. 2012) (en banc). This means that the amended complaint will need to be complete on its face 

without reference to the prior pleading. See E.D. Cal. Local Rule 220. Once an amended 

complaint is filed, the current complaint no longer serves any function. Therefore, in an amended 

complaint, as in an original complaint, plaintiff will need to assert each claim and allege each 

defendant’s involvement in sufficient detail. The amended complaint should be titled “Amended 

Complaint” and refer to the appropriate case number. If plaintiff does not file an amended 

complaint, I will recommend that this action be dismissed. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days from the service of this order, plaintiff must either file an 

amended complaint or advise the court he wishes to stand by his current complaint. If he selects 

the latter option, I will recommend that this action be dismissed. 

2. Failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action.

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to send plaintiff a new form complaint and in forma 

pauperis form. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 13, 2022 

JEREMY D. PETERSON

Case 2:21-cv-01954-DC-JDP Document 3 Filed 12/14/22 Page 3 of 4
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

4

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:21-cv-01954-DC-JDP Document 3 Filed 12/14/22 Page 4 of 4