Gray v. Martin

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California screened Plaintiff Richard Bernard Gray’s amended pro se complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court concluded that the complaint did not identify a cognizable federal cause of action or establish subject-matter jurisdiction, but granted a final opportunity to file a second amended complaint within 30 days. The order also limited the amended complaint to 25 pages and warned that failure to comply could result in a recommendation of dismissal.

Holdings

1. The amended complaint did not establish federal-question jurisdiction because it did not identify or allege facts supporting a federal cause of action; its principal allegations concerning invasion of privacy and fraud were state-law matters.
2. The amended complaint failed to state any cognizable claim for relief because its allegations did not provide sufficient factual matter connecting each defendant to a violation of federal constitutional rights or other actionable law.
3. The court granted plaintiff a final opportunity to file a second amended complaint because the identified pleading deficiencies might be curable by amendment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the amended complaint established federal-question subject-matter jurisdiction.
2. Whether the amended complaint stated a facially plausible and cognizable claim for relief under the applicable pleading standard.
3. Whether plaintiff should receive leave to file a second amended complaint to cure the identified deficiencies.

Disposition

other