Opinion
No. C 03-01884 WHA
August 4, 2003
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
Now before the Court is plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis. A court may authorize a plaintiff to prosecute an action in federal court without prepayment of fees or security if the plaintiff submits an affidavit showing that he or she is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). A court is under a continuing duty, however, to dismiss a case whenever it determines that the action "(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)(B)(i) — (iii).
Plaintiffs two-page complaint is difficult to comprehend, and does not appear to state any cognizable claims. Plaintiffs complaint does not contain a "short and plain statement of the claim" as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2). For this reason, the Court concludes that plaintiffs complaint fails to state a cognizable claim and must be dismissed. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126 (9th Cir. 2000) (section 1915 "requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim"). Furthermore, the court held at hearing on July 31, 2003, at which time plaintiff was given an opportunity to explain his claims. Plaintiffs explanations, like his pleadings, were incomprehensible. He states no claim that can be discerned.
Accordingly, plaintiffs complaint is hereby DISMISSED.