Summary
The court dismissed Serena Ruiz’s pro se action against Brian Gottlieb without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(ii) for failure to state a claim and failure to establish jurisdiction. Ruiz did not respond to the court’s order to show cause, which was returned as undeliverable.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the pro se complaint stated a plausible claim for relief sufficient to survive screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(ii).
- Whether the complaint adequately established the court's jurisdiction.
Holdings
- A complaint subject to in forma pauperis screening must plead enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face; Ruiz's conclusory one-page complaint did not meet that standard and was subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(ii).
- The complaint did not adequately establish this court's jurisdiction.
Key quotations
“A complaint fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted when it does not plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.””
Factual background
Ruiz alleged only that Gottlieb had “failed to remain the same when doing his job” and, when adjudicating issues, had “showed tardiness.” The court found these allegations insufficient to state a plausible claim or establish the court’s jurisdiction. Ruiz also failed to respond to the court’s order to show cause, which was returned as undeliverable.
Procedural history
Serena Ruiz filed the action on February 3, 2026, against Brian Gottlieb. Because Ruiz sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). On February 9, 2026, the court issued an order to show cause requiring a response by February 23, 2026. Ruiz did not respond, and the order was returned as undeliverable. The court entered judgment dismissing the action without prejudice.