Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-04706/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-04706-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jerry Hall
Defendant
Tracey N. Thompson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

TRACEY N. THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

JERRY HALL,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-04706-MEJ 

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION 

TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

INTRODUCTION & IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION

On August 15, 2016, Plaintiff Tracey N. Thompson (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint and an 

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Compl., Dkt. No. 1; Appl., Dkt. No. 3. A district 

court may authorize the start of a civil action in forma pauperis if the court is satisfied the wouldbe plaintiff cannot pay the filing fees required to pursue the lawsuit. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). 

Plaintiff submitted the required documentation declaring she is unable to pay the costs of this 

action, and it is evident from the Application that Plaintiff’s assets and income are insufficient to 

pay the court filing-fees. See Appl. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Application to 

Proceed In Forma Pauperis. However, as Plaintiff did not yet consent to the jurisdiction of a 

United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the Clerk of Court shall 

REASSIGN this case to a District Judge with the undersigned’s RECOMMENDATION that the 

Complaint be DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.

SUA SPONTE SCREENING UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1915(E)(2)

A. Legal Standard

While the Court has granted Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, it must 

also review Plaintiff’s Complaint to determine whether the action may be allowed to proceed. 

The Court must dismiss the Complaint if it is frivolous, fails to state a claim upon which relief can 

Case 4:16-cv-04706-YGR Document 4 Filed 09/19/16 Page 1 of 4
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

be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). To make this determination, courts assess whether there is a factual 

and legal basis for the asserted wrong, “however inartfully pleaded.” Franklin v. Murphy, 745 

F.2d 1221, 1227 (9th Cir. 1984) (quotation omitted). Pro se pleadings are liberally construed. 

Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam). Moreover, when dismissing a case, the 

Ninth Circuit has “repeatedly held that a district court should grant leave to amend even if no 

request to amend the pleading was made, unless it determines that the pleading could not possibly 

be cured by the allegation of other facts.” Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2000). 

Thus, unless it is clear that no amendment can cure the defects of a complaint, a pro se plaintiff 

proceeding in forma pauperis is entitled to notice and an opportunity to amend before dismissal. 

Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987).

B. Allegations in the Complaint

Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that Defendant Jerry Hall “used [Plaintiff] to open a nice big 

CVS Pharmacy store and mini market on 7th Street and Market Street” in San Francisco, 

California and that Hall “wishes to include [Plaintiff] in the profits since it was [Plaintiff’s] idea to 

open a store there.” Compl. at 1. She does not otherwise explain how Hall injured her. 

Plaintiff also lists Stuart Murray as a Defendant, appearing to allege that he damaged her 

“right buttox and she had surgery on it[.]” Id. (errors in original). It is unclear if Plaintiff seeks to 

assert claims against Murray, however, as she crossed out his name and one of the allegations 

about her injury. Id. She also does not name Murray on her civil cover sheet. Id. at 2 (civil cover 

sheet included with the Complaint). Plaintiff’s civil cover sheet also lists Mick Jagger as a 

Defendant, but again crossed out his name; the civil cover sheet further refers to Hall and Jagger 

as the attorneys for the Defendant. Id. Plaintiff did not make direct allegations against Jagger in 

her Complaint. 

C. Analysis and Screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)

Having carefully reviewed Plaintiff’s Complaint, the undersigned recommends the district 

court dismiss this case with leave to amend. The Complaint fails to state a claim at this point for 

the following reasons:

Case 4:16-cv-04706-YGR Document 4 Filed 09/19/16 Page 2 of 4
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

First, Plaintiff has not alleged sufficient facts showing she is entitled to relief under Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (a pleading that states a claim for relief 

must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to 

relief”); see also Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (a complaint must provide 

a defendant with “fair notice” of the claims against it and the grounds for relief). Plaintiff 

provides very little background information about the basis for this lawsuit. She does not specify 

what if any wrongful conduct Defendant allegedly committed or specifically when and how. It is 

also not clear what relief Plaintiff actually seeks through this lawsuit and against whom. 

Second, it is not clear that this Court has jurisdiction over this action. Federal courts such 

as this one have limited jurisdiction, which means that the United States Constitution limits the 

power of these courts to only hearing cases where the court has subject matter jurisdiction. 

Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). Subject matter jurisdiction 

is established by the party bringing the lawsuit in one of two ways: (1) by showing diversity of 

citizenship (diversity jurisdiction) or (2) by raising a federal question (federal question 

jurisdiction). Id. Subject matter jurisdiction is determined from the face of the complaint. Rivet 

v. Regions Bank of La., 522 U.S. 470, 475 (1998); see also Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 

386, 392 (1987) (federal question must be presented on face of plaintiff’s properly pleaded 

complaint); Fifty Assocs. v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 446 F.2d 1187, 1189-90 (9th Cir. 1970) 

(same re: diversity jurisdiction). While Plaintiff contends this Court has jurisdiction based on the 

existence of a federal question in this action (see Civil Cover Sheet), she has not asserted any 

federal claim, nor has she demonstrated the parties are diverse or that the amount in controversy

exceeds $75,000. Without more, the Court has no basis to exercise subject matter jurisdiction 

over this action.

While there may be other issues associated with Plaintiff’s case that preclude her from 

bringing this action in this Court, based on the issues above, the undersigned finds dismissal of the 

current Complaint appropriate. Nonetheless, as Plaintiff is acting pro se, and given it is not clear 

what she seeks to allege at this point, theoretically it is possible the deficiencies of the Complaint 

could be cured by amendment. Consequently, the undersigned recommends the district court 

Case 4:16-cv-04706-YGR Document 4 Filed 09/19/16 Page 3 of 4
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

grant Plaintiff one further opportunity to amend her Complaint. 

CONCLUSION

Based on the analysis above, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the Complaint be 

DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, any 

party may serve and file objections to this Report and Recommendation within 14 days after being 

served. 

Finally, the undersigned notes that Plaintiff may wish to seek assistance from the Legal 

Help Center, a free service offered by the Justice & Diversity Center of the Bar Association of San 

Francisco (“JDC”), by calling 415-782-8982, or by signing up for an appointment on the15th 

Floor, Room 2796, of the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San 

Francisco, California. At the Legal Help Center, you will be able to 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. The handbook is available in person at the Clerk’s Office and 

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

IT IS SO ORDERED AND RECOMMENDED.

Dated: September 19, 2016

______________________________________

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:16-cv-04706-YGR Document 4 Filed 09/19/16 Page 4 of 4