United States District Court, E.D. California
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSING
ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, FAILURE TO PROSECUTE,
AND FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF
THE COURT TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN THIS MATTER TO A DISTRICT
JUDGE
I.
PROCEDURAL
HISTORY
Ginny
Rene Burns (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro
se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint on
October 29, 2019. (ECF No. 1.) On November 15, 2019,
Plaintiff's complaint was screened and it was found not
to state a cognizable claim. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff was
granted leave to file an amended complaint within thirty
days. (Id.) More than thirty days have passed and
Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise
responded to the November 15, 2019 order.
II.
SCREENING
REQUIREMENT
Notwithstanding
any filing fee, the court shall dismiss a case if at any time
the Court determines that the complaint “(i) is
frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which
relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against
a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2); see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d
1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (section 1915(e) applies to all in
forma pauperis complaints, not just those filed by
prisoners); Calhoun v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir.
2001) (dismissal required of in forma pauperis proceedings
which seek monetary relief from immune defendants); Cato
v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995)
(district court has discretion to dismiss in forma pauperis
complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)); Barren v.
Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193 (9th Cir. 1998) (affirming sua
sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim). The Court
exercises its discretion to screen the plaintiff's
complaint in this action to determine if it “(i) is
frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which
relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against
a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2).
In
determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the
Court uses the same pleading standard used under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 8(a). A complaint must contain “a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief. . . .” Fed.R.Civ.P.
8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but
“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of
action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not
suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).
In
reviewing the pro se complaint, the Court is to liberally
construe the pleadings and accept as true all factual
allegations contained in the complaint. Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). Although a court must
accept as true all factual allegations contained in a
complaint, a court need not accept a plaintiff's legal
conclusions as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
“[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are
‘merely consistent with' a defendant's
liability . . . ‘stops short of the line between
possibility and plausibility of entitlement to
relief.'” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Therefore, the complaint
must contain sufficient factual content for the court to draw
the reasonable conclusion that the defendant is liable for
the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
II.
DISCUSSION
A.
Allegations in Complaint
Plaintiff's
October 29, 2019 complaint is incomprehensible. Plaintiff
attaches a letter from the Social Security Administration,
dated March 18, 2016, which informs her that she
“cannot enter any Social Security
office for any reason. This restriction means that if you
enter a Social Security office, you can be arrested and
charged with trespassing.” (ECF No. 1 at
7[1](emphasis in original). The letter states:
Why You May No. Longer Enter An Office
Your actions in the WEST FRESNO CA Social Security office
violated our regulations. These regulations prohibit
threatening or disorderly conduct on Federal property or
directed at our personnel. Specifically, on 03/18/2016, you
assault a federal ...