Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01655/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01655-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 42:405 Fair Housing Act

---

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

JOHN ALFRED PANZER,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 

OF HOUSING & URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01655-MEJ 

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED 

COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO 

AMEND

On April 10, 2015, Plaintiff filed a 96-page Complaint against at least 13 (but possibly 

more) defendants, “seeking declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory relief . . . as well as 

exemplary damages for their willful, malicious, fraudulent, grossly reckless, negligent acts, 

exacted on [him].” Compl., Dkt. No. 1. He stated that he brought this action “pursuant to the Fair 

Housing Act of 1968 as amended; the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to 

our United States Constitution; The State of California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act of 1959; the 

Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 as amended, The Plain Language Act of 2010 as its 

original language and added ‘guidance,’ suggests; and Title 42- The Public Health and Welfare 

Code§ 1983, ‘Civil action for deprivation of rights,’ as well as related federal and California 

laws.” 

On April 24, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application, but 

dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend, finding that he failed to identify each defendant he 

proposes to hold liable for each claim and failed to allege facts showing what each defendant did 

or failed to do in relation to each of those claims. Dkt. No. 8. The Court informed Plaintiff that he 

may properly join as many claims as he has against an opposing party in a single complaint, but

unrelated claims against different defendants must be alleged in separate complaints. The Court 

Case 3:15-cv-01655-MEJ Document 10 Filed 05/26/15 Page 1 of 5
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

also informed Plaintiff that the allegations in his Complaint were so lengthy, repetitive, and 

unnecessarily detailed that it could not readily determine all of the injuries for which each 

defendant is allegedly liable. The Court gave Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint in 

which he clearly links each defendant to the alleged injury, or injuries, for which that defendant is 

alleged to be responsible, and directed him to provide a concise statement identifying each 

defendant and the specific action or actions the defendant took, or failed to take, that allegedly 

caused his injuries. 

On May 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint. Rather than complying with the 

Court’s directives, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is longer than his original Complaint, with all 

claims alleged against 29 defendants. Once again, while it is possible that Plaintiff may have one 

or more viable claims against some or all of the defendants, he has failed to identify each 

defendant he proposes to hold liable for each claim and has failed to allege facts showing what 

each defendant did or failed to do in relation to each of those claims. Plaintiff merely alleges all 

claims against “All Defendants.” 

A plaintiff may properly join as many claims as he has against an opposing party in a 

single complaint (Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a)), but unrelated claims against different defendants must be 

alleged in separate complaints. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). Parties may 

be joined as defendants only if “there is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the 

alternative, any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or 

series of transactions or occurrences and if any question of law or fact common to all defendants 

will arise in the action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a). As a practical matter, this means that claims 

involving different parties cannot be joined together in one complaint if the facts giving rise to the 

claims are not factually related in some way—that is, if there is not “similarity in the factual 

background.” Coughlin v. Rogers, 130 F.3d 1348, 1350 (9th Cir. 1997). General allegations are

not sufficient to constitute similarity when the specifics are different. Id. The court, on its own 

initiative, may dismiss misjoined parties from an action, and any claim against a misjoined party 

may be severed and proceeded with separately. Fed. R. Civ. P. 21.

In this case, as with the initial Complaint, the Court is unable to determine which of the 

Case 3:15-cv-01655-MEJ Document 10 Filed 05/26/15 Page 2 of 5
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

claims Plaintiff may wish to keep and which he wants to omit. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. Thus, 

instead of dismissing certain claims and defendants, the Court shall dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended 

Complaint in its entirety with leave to file a second amended complaint. The amended complaint 

must comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 18 and 20 concerning joinder of claims and 

defendants. If it does not, Plaintiff is advised that this entire action shall be dismissed without 

prejudice.

Additionally, the allegations in the Amended Complaint are so lengthy, repetitive, and 

unnecessarily detailed that the Court cannot readily determine all of the injuries for which each 

defendant is allegedly liable. Plaintiff also fails to provide a simple, concise, narrative that sets 

forth all of the injuries attributed to each individual defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiff must link

each defendant to the alleged injury, or injuries, for which that defendant is alleged to be 

responsible. While Plaintiff must provide sufficient information to give the defendants fair notice 

of the nature of the claims against them, Plaintiff need not provide a lengthy narrative with respect 

to each defendant to satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 8. Instead, Plaintiff should provide 

a concise statement identifying each defendant and the specific action or actions the defendant 

took, or failed to take, that allegedly caused his injuries. Plaintiff should state each claim 

separately, setting forth what occurred and the dates on which the events occurred. He must also 

identify each defendant he proposes to hold liable for each claim, and allege facts showing what 

each of those persons did or failed to do related to that claim. 

Based on this analysis, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Complaint WITH LEAVE TO 

AMEND. Consistent with the instructions in this Order, Plaintiff shall file any amended 

complaint by June 25, 2015. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file a Second Amended 

Complaint by June 25, 2015, that complies with the instructions in this Order and the April 

24, 2015 Order shall result in dismissal of this case without leave to amend. 

The Court advises Plaintiff that he 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 by 

signing up for an appointment on the15th Floor of the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco, 450 

Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California. At the Legal Help Center, you will be able to 

Case 3:15-cv-01655-MEJ Document 10 Filed 05/26/15 Page 3 of 5
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

speak with an attorney who may be able to provide basic legal help but not representation. More 

information is available online at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/helpcentersf. 

Plaintiff may also wish to obtain a copy of the district court’s Handbook for Litigants 

Without a Lawyer. It provides instructions on how to proceed at every stage of your case, 

including discovery, motions, and trial. The handbook is available in person at the Clerk’s Office 

and online at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/prosehandbook.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 26, 2015

______________________________________

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-01655-MEJ Document 10 Filed 05/26/15 Page 4 of 5
5

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

JOHN ALFRED PANZER,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 

OF HOUSING & URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01655-MEJ 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of California.

That on 5/26/2015, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said 

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing 

said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle 

located in the Clerk's office.

John Alfred Panzer

1797 Shattuck Avenue

Apt #312

Berkeley, CA 94709 

Dated: 5/26/2015

Richard W. Wieking

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

Chris Nathan, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable MARIA-ELENA JAMES

Case 3:15-cv-01655-MEJ Document 10 Filed 05/26/15 Page 5 of 5