Opinion
NO: 2:14-CV-0001-TOR
04-02-2014
JOHN M. TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. THE FEDS, Defendant.
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiff's request to file a pro se complaint in forma pauperis. ECF No. 1 and 2.
DISCUSSION
By Local Rule, each United States Magistrate Judge in this District is delegated the authority to "[r]ule upon applications to proceed in forma pauperis, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915." LMR 1(a)(16). By Order dated January 2, 2014, a United States Magistrate Judge reviewed Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and denied the same with leave to renew. ECF No.3. The Order explained that Plaintiff provided incomplete answers to multiple questions, but allowed Plaintiff thirty days to submit a properly completed application (or pay the full filing fee). Id. Thirty days has passed and Plaintiff chose neither alternative.
In Forma Pauperis Determination
Forma pauperis status requires two findings: (1) a finding of indigency, and (2) a finding that the underlying claim has some merit. Bradshaw v. Zoological Soc. of San Diego, 662 F.2d 1301, 1308 (9th Cir. 1981). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that the action or appeal (i) is frivolous or malicious or (ii) fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
A complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted if it lacks a cognizable legal theory or lacks sufficient facts to support a cognizable legal theory. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). Plaintiff's Complaint does not state a cognizable legal theory, i.e., short plain statements showing the court's jurisdiction and the grounds for relief. See Fed. Rule Civ. Pro. 8(a).
Plaintiff's civil cover sheet accompanying his complaint purports to seek $500 million for "Discrimination when it comes down to Premedicated (sic) Murder 'Spying' unjust uses of Work 'I can see the people on TV (Live)." Thus, Plaintiff does not articulate a cognizable legal theory upon which relief may be granted.
Plaintiff failed to avail himself of the opportunity to amend his application to provide complete information, nor has he paid the filing fee within thirty days.
Plaintiff is advised that the filing of further frivolous actions will result in the imposition of more serious sanctions than dismissal.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in the District Court In Forma Pauperis, ECF No. 2, is DENIED.
2. Plaintiff's proposed Complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED.
The District Court Executive is hereby directed to enter this Order, a Judgment of Dismissal, furnish copies to Plaintiff at his last known address, and CLOSE the file.
THOMAS O. RICE
United States District Judge