Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California grants Laura Alexis’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The court dismisses her ADA complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) for failure to satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, allowing her 45 days to file an amended complaint.
Holdings
- Plaintiff demonstrated that she was unable to pay the filing fee, so the court granted her motion to proceed in forma pauperis and declined to impose an initial partial filing fee.
- The complaint failed to satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and failed to state a claim because its disjointed allegations did not clearly identify the defendants, relevant facts, or basis for the ADA claims; the complaint was therefore dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff qualified to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
- Whether the complaint satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and plausibly stated an ADA claim sufficient to avoid dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (11)
- Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Soldani v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 2019 WL 2160380, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2019)(followed)
- Beasley v. San Diego Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 2023 WL 4918306, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2023)(followed)
- Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 920 n.1 (9th Cir. 2014)(followed)
- Wheeler v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc., 689 F.3d 680, 681 (7th Cir. 2012)(followed)
- Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(followed)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)(followed)
- Knapp v. Hogan, 738 F.3d 1106, 1109 (9th Cir. 2013)(followed)
- Cafasso v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., 637 F.3d 1047, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 11.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…