UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 15, 2011
KAMAL B. MAHDAVI,
THE DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Barry Ted MoskowitzUnited States District Judge
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS; DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
On December 7, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Complaint and a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("IFP"). For the reasons discussed below, the IFP Motion is granted, and the Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim.
I. Motion to Proceed IFP
Upon review of Plaintiff's affidavit in support of her IFP Motion, the Court finds that Plaintiff has made a sufficient showing of inability to pay the filing fee required to prosecute this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff's IFP Motion is GRANTED.
II. Failure to State a Claim
Although the Court will allow Plaintiff to proceed IFP, Plaintiff's Complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The Court is under a continuing duty to dismiss an IFP case whenever the Court determines that the action "fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
Plaintiff has named eighty defendants, including governmental agencies, judges, police, hospitals, hotels, banks, grocery stores, libraries, and universities. His 62-page complaint is a rambling account of various acts of malfeasance and conspiracies. Plaintiff has failed to meet the pleading standards set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and has failed to allege facts supporting a plausible claim for relief. Therefore, Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED.
For the reasons discussed above, Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to file a First Amended Complaint. If Plaintiff chooses to file a First Amended Complaint, he must do so on or before January 20, 2012. Failure to do so will result in the closing of this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.