From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tellez v. Brace

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2011
No. CIV-S-10-3237 DAD (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV-S-10-3237 DAD (TEMP) P.

February 22, 2011


ORDER


Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding in this action pro se. Plaintiff has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

Plaintiff has submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted.

Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(b)(1). Plaintiff is obligated to make monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding month's income credited to plaintiff's prison trust account. These payments shall be collected and forwarded by the appropriate agency to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in plaintiff's account exceeds $10.00, until the filing fee is paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

The federal in forma pauperis statute authorizes federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally "frivolous or malicious," fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28 (9th Cir. 1984). The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327.

In order to avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim a complaint must contain more than "naked assertions," "labels and conclusions" or "a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555-557 (2007). In other words, "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). Furthermore, a claim upon which the court can grant relief has facial plausibility. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949. When considering whether a complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted, the court must accept the allegations as true, Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007), and construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, see Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974).

In his first amended complaint, the operative complaint in this action, plaintiff essentially alleges that defendant breached a contract between he and plaintiff. However, plaintiff fails to identify under what basis this court has jurisdiction over plaintiff's claims as required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). For this reason, plaintiff's first amended complaint must be dismissed. The court will grant plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint. In this second amended complaint, plaintiff must identify on which basis the court has the authority to hear plaintiff's claims. Failure to identify a proper basis for jurisdiction or failure to file a second amended complaint within thirty days of this order will result in this action being dismissed.

Plaintiff is informed that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make plaintiff's second amended complaint complete. Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

2. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. The fee shall be collected and paid in accordance with this court's order to the Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation filed concurrently herewith.

2. Plaintiff's amended complaint is dismissed; and

3. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a second amended complaint in compliance with the terms of this order. Plaintiff's failure to file a second amended complaint within thirty days will result in dismissal of this action.

DATED: February 18, 2011.


Summaries of

Tellez v. Brace

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2011
No. CIV-S-10-3237 DAD (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2011)
Case details for

Tellez v. Brace

Case Details

Full title:BRANDY V. TELLEZ, Plaintiff, v. DANNY D. BRACE, JR., Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 22, 2011

Citations

No. CIV-S-10-3237 DAD (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2011)