Opinion
Case No. 2:20-cv-01893-JAD-EJY
11-18-2020
STANLEY KEITH MIYABARA, Plaintiff, v. ROY GARCIA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER and REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Re: Plaintiff's Initiating Documents (ECF Nos. 1-1 through 1-17)
Non-inmate pro se Plaintiff Stanley Keith Miyabara filed 294 pages of Initiating Documents with the Clerk of Court in an attempt to commence a civil action in this court. ECF No. 1-1 through 1-17. These Initiating Documents consist of requests for writs of injunction (ECF Nos. 1-1, 1-3, 1-4, 1-5, 1-9, 1-10), affidavits (ECF Nos. 1-2, 1-6, and 1-17), an "Executive Summary" (ECF No. 1-7), a "Warning" about domestic terrorists (ECF No. 1-8), a "Caution for the Future" (ECF No. 1-14) (internal alterations omitted), financial documents (ECF No. 1-11), a filing titled "The 12 Presumptions of Law" (ECF No. 1-12), an "Emergency Declaration and Proclamation (ECF No. 1-13), an Addendum (ECF No. 1-15), and an untitled document questioning whether the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department is declining to investigate terrorist cases (ECF No. 1-16).
I. PLAINTIFF'S INITIATING DOCUMENTS
Plaintiff has not submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis, which he must do pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada Local Rule LSR 1-1 if he seeks to proceed without paying the $400.00 filing fee. Plaintiff also has not paid the $400 filing fee. Because Plaintiff has met neither requirement to commence his action in this Court, it is premature for the Court to substantively review Plaintiff's Initiating Documents.
Moreover, while the Court acknowledges Plaintiff's pro se status, his attempt to allege claims in 294 pages is in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) requiring a "short and plain statement of" the claims asserted, as well as Rule 8(d)(1) requiring each allegation to be "simple, concise, and direct." In other words, Plaintiff's claims for relief fail to tie specific facts to specific defendants in a simple, concise or direct manner that would reasonably allow each defendant to understand the link between the alleged conduct and the alleged deprivation of rights. As a matter of fact, Plaintiff's Initiating Documents fail to provide any coherent factual bases underlying his claims, and contain frivolous stream-of-consciousness allegations about terroristic threats and statements regarding unrelated entities and matters. Plaintiff's allegations are also so long that they appear to be at least partially duplicative, making it "excessively difficult for individual defendants to formulate proper defenses and [would] subject the [defendants] to unnecessary discovery." McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1175 (9th Cir. 1996); Cafasso, U.S. ex rel. v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc., 637 F.3d 1047, 1059 (9th Cir. 2011) (providing that complaints that are "argumentative, prolix, replete with redundancy, and largely irrelevant" are subject to dismissal under Rule 8) (internal quotation marks omitted). All of the above is in contravention of Rule 8, which ensures each defendant has "fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Dura Pharms., Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336, 346 (2005) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).
II. ORDER
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall send Plaintiff the approved application to proceed in forma pauperis by a non-prisoner, as well as the document entitled information and instructions for filing an in forma pauperis application.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within thirty (30) court days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall either: (1) file a fully complete application to proceed in forma pauperis, on the correct form, in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) and LSR 1-1, or (2) pay the full $400.00 fee for filing a civil action (which includes the $350.00 filing fee and the $50.00 administrative fee).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a failure to comply with this Order may result in dismissal of this action with prejudice.
III. RECOMMENDATION
IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Initiating Documents (ECF Nos. 1-1 through 1-17) be DISMISSED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that if Plaintiff so chooses, he may file a complaint correcting the above deficiencies within thirty (30) court days from the date of this Order. The complaint must contain a short and plain statement describing all facts underlying the conduct that constitutes the violations of law Plaintiff alleges. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading standard, Plaintiff still must give each defendant fair notice of Plaintiff's claims against him/her and Plaintiff's entitlement to relief.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that any complaint filed by Plaintiff must not exceed a total of thirty pages in length.
DATED this 18th day of November, 2020.
/s/_________
ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE
Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2, any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen (14) days. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This Circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).