Opinion
NO. CV 20-1377-GW (KS)
04-22-2020
YOUNG YIL JO, et al, Plaintiffs, v. SIX UNKNOWN NAMES AGENTS, et al, Defendants.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
On February 11, 2020, Plaintiffs, California residents proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 (the "Complaint") against, inter alia, Six Unnamed Agents, the President of the United States, the Mayor of Los Angeles, a church, and a property management company. (Dkt. No. 1.) The Complaint is impossible to comprehend, with annotations written sideways in the margins of each page, words crossed out, attachments interspersed with the pleadings, and each page reflecting a mix of typed and handwritten statements seemingly prepared by different individuals. (See generally id.) As such, the Complaint violates Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See FED. R. CIV. P. 8; United States ex rel. Cafasso v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc., 637 F.3d 1047, 1059 (9th Cir. 2011) (complaint violates Rules 8 if a defendant would have difficulty understanding and responding to it).
Also on February 11, 2020, the Court notified Plaintiffs that they had failed to pay the filing fee and had not filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. No. 2.) On February 26, 2020, after more than two weeks had passed and Plaintiffs had not responded to the Court's notification, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to show cause, no later than March 18, 2020, why the action should not be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee or obtain authorization to proceed without prepayment of the fee. (Dkt. No. 4.)
On March 4, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint (the "FAC"), which suffers from the same defects as the Complaint. (Dkt. No. 5.) One sample sentence reads:
A claim a complaint a plaintiff a person an individual individuals a remedy remedies his injury claim a timely a petition for writ of habeas corpus a decision in habeas corpus a case cases claims a key once a claim for relief no more than 30 days a private a privacy right alone suffice a master a special master issues a showing a matter of rights a title a demurrer a brief briefs a state a statute a statement in such proceedings a right a decision an immediately determination a rights for First Fifth Eleventh and Fourteenth Amendments. . .(FAC at 3.) As such, the First Amended Complaint, like the Complaint, violates Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and also is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See FED. R. CIV. P. 8; United States ex rel. Cafasso, 637 F.3d at 1059. Nevertheless, in the interests of justice, the Court granted Plaintiffs one final opportunity to, no later than March 26, 2020, file a viable pleading and either pay the filing fee or file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis with the necessary documentation. (Dkt. No. 6.)
More than two months have now passed since the Court issued its February 11, 2020 notification, and more than three weeks have passed since Plaintiff's March 26, 2020 deadline for paying the filing fee or filing a request to proceed without prepayment of the fee. To date, Plaintiff has neither paid the filing fee nor requested to proceed in forma pauperis. In light of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED. DATED: April 22, 2020
/s/_________
GEORGE H. WU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Presented by: /s/_________
KAREN L. STEVENSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE