UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON

CATHERINE ISABELLA MORRIS and

KATHERINE ANNE SMITH,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, US

ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC

HOLDER, JR., U.S. SENATOR RON

WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR JEFF

MERKLEY, OREGON GOVERNOR,

JOHN KITZHABER, OREGON

ATTORNEY GENERAL ELLEN

ROSENBLUM, OREGON SPEAKER OF

THE HOUSE TINA KOTEK,

Defendants.

Civil Case No. 3:14-CV-01019-KI

OPINION AND ORDER

DISMISSING CASE

Catherine Isabella Morris

PO Box 173

Salem, OR 97308

Page 1 - OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Case 3:14-cv-01019-KI Document 5 Filed 07/11/14 Page 1 of 3
Katherine Anne Smith

Salvation Army

30 SW 2nd Ave

Portland, OR 97204

Pro Se Plaintiffs

KING, Judge:

Plaintiffs Catherine Isabella Morris and Katherine Anne Smith bring a case against

various representatives from the federal and state executive and legislative branches. Plaintiffs 

move to proceed in forma pauperis. An examination of the application reveals that Morris is

unable to afford the costs of this action; Smith did not submit an application. 

Regardless, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the court may dismiss a case if the action is

frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary

relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Pro se complaints are construed

liberally and may only be dismissed “‘for failure to state a claim 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.’” 

Engebretson v. Mahoney, 724 F.3d 1034, 1037 (9th Cir. 2013) (quoting Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658

F.3d 1090, 1101 (9th Cir. 2011)). The court should allow a pro se plaintiff to amend the

complaint unless it would be impossible to cure the deficiencies of the complaint by amendment. 

Johnson v. Lucent Tech. Inc., 653 F.3d 1000, 1011 (9th Cir. 2011).

First of all, plaintiffs must comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, which requires

a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R.

Civ. P. 8(a)(2). The only citation to any law is to 18 U.S.C. § 241, which is a criminal statute

prohibiting conspiracies against an individual’s constitutional rights. Plaintiffs have no private

Page 2 - OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Case 3:14-cv-01019-KI Document 5 Filed 07/11/14 Page 2 of 3
right of action for violation of this criminal statute. Further, plaintiffs fail to allege any facts

about how any of the named defendants were involved in the alleged conduct. Plaintiffs’

allegations fail to put any defendant on notice of the nature of their claims. 

Normally, the court must advise a pro se plaintiff of the deficiencies of the complaint and

allow amendment. Because I cannot decipher any of their claims, I am unable to provide any

advice. It is clear the complaint’s deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment and I dismiss this

complaint with prejudice.

CONCLUSION

Because the action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, I dismiss this

action. I find any further amendments would be futile. As a result, this complaint is dismissed

with prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 11th day of July, 2014.

 /s/ Garr M. King 

GARR M. KING

United States District Court Judge

Page 3 - OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Case 3:14-cv-01019-KI Document 5 Filed 07/11/14 Page 3 of 3