Opinion
No. CV 06-1272-PHX-MHM.
June 7, 2006
ORDER
Currently, before the Court is Plaintiff Donald Muhammad's ("Plaintiff") Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. #3). Having reviewed the Motion, the Court issues the following Order.
Plaintiff's Motion to proceed in forma pauperis demonstrates that Plaintiff does not possess the means to pay the filing fee in this case. Accordingly, the Court will grant the application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
However, the Motion to proceed in forma pauperis requires the Court to screen the Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a) and (e)(2). In screening a complaint filed with a request to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court must dismiss the complaint at any time if it is "frivolous or malicious" or if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii).
The Complaint appears to allege that Rita Cordova and Donna Overstreet discriminated against Plaintiff on the basis of religion by denying Plaintiff's application for an apartment. (Complaint ("Compl.") ¶ 1). Plaintiff has named the City of Phoenix Housing Department as a Defendant. Plaintiff seeks a hearing or $100,000 in compensation. In reviewing this Complaint, it is apparent to the Court that Plaintiff's Complaint does not comply with Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires that a complaint contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Rule 8(e)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P. states that "[e]ach averment of a pleading shall be simple, concise, and direct." Plaintiff's Complaint, while apparently alleging a claim based upon housing discrimination, fails to set forth sufficient factual allegations in support of his claim. For instance, Plaintiff claims that Rita Cordova and Donna Overstreet were involved in the alleged discrimination, but these individuals are not named as defendants and it is unclear what relationship they have to the named Defendant, City of Phoenix. Moreover, there are no factual allegations in the Complaint against the City of Phoenix.
Therefore, the Complaint will be dismissed with leave to amend to allow Plaintiff to clearly allege his claims in short, plain statements which demonstrate he is entitled to relief. In any amended complaint, Plaintiff must tell the Court: (1) the constitutional right or statutory provision under which Plaintiff is proceeding; (2) the constitutional right or statutory provision which Plaintiff believes has been violated; (3) exactly what the named Defendants did or failed to do and the date or dates of the act or omission alleged; (4) how the action or inaction of the Defendant is connected to the alleged violation; and (5) what specific injury Plaintiff has suffered because of Defendant's conduct. Plaintiff may set forth his allegation in numbered paragraphs for purposes of clarity. Plaintiff further should set forth a plain and concise statement of the relief he is seeking.
Plaintiff should take notice that if he fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, or any order of the Court entered in this matter, the action will be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court may dismiss action for failure to comply with any order of the court).
Accordingly,IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting Plaintiff's Motion to proceed in forma pauperis, without prepayment of costs or fees or the necessity of giving security therefore. Plaintiff shall be responsible for service by waiver or of the summons and complaint. (Dkt. #3).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall have 20 days from the date this Order is filed in which to file an amended complaint in order to state specific allegations against the Defendant in compliance with Rule 8, Fed.R.Civ.P., and to otherwise comply with this Order. The amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety and may not incorporate any part of the original complaint by reference. Any amended complaint submitted by Plaintiff should be clearly designated as such on the face of the document.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to enter a judgment of dismissal without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff, if Plaintiff fails to timely file an amended complaint within 20 days from the date this Order is filed.