Douglas v. Autovest LLC

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * Sean Edward Douglas, Case No. 2:21-cv-01576-APG-BNW 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v. Autovest LLC, et al., 8 Defendants.

10 Plaintiff Sean Edward Douglas has filed a complaint and submitted a request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). ECF Nos. 1, 1-1.

12 As discussed in more detail below, the Court will grant his request to proceed in forma pauperis but dismiss the complaint without prejudice and with leave to amend.

14 I. Background 15 First, while the Court notes that Plaintiff filed the form required in state court, the Court determines it has all the information that it needs to make a determination regarding eligibility.

17 The Court finds that Plaintiff is not able to pay the filing fee. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) is granted.

19 II. Screening Order 20 Upon granting a request to proceed in forma pauperis, a court must screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). In screening the complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Dismissal for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 26 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft dismiss them “if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678).

4 In considering whether the complaint is sufficient to state a claim, all allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Wyler Summit P’ship v. Turner Broad. Sys. Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted).

7 Although the standard under Rule 12(b)(6) does not require detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff must provide more than mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 9 544, 555 (2007). A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action is insufficient. Id. Unless it is clear the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured through amendment, a pro se plaintiff should be given leave to amend the complaint with notice regarding the complaint’s deficiencies. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995).

13 Plaintiff sues multiple defendants: Autovest LLC, Whitney Wilcher, Lippman Recupero PLLC, and Oliva Gamble & Lawgistic Partners. ECF No. 1-1. While Plaintiff provides general statements about how he has been wronged (social security number, tax ID number, address, etc. being made public), he fails to detail exactly why or how each defendant violated the law. In addition, he does not break his complaint into counts or claims against specific defendants. Id. 18 Even liberally construing Plaintiff’s complaint, the Court is unable to determine exactly what claims Plaintiff is attempting to allege against which defendants and cannot evaluate whether Plaintiff states any claims for relief. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and with leave to amend. To help Plaintiff file a properly formatted complaint, the Court now advises Plaintiff of the following requirements under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff is also advised that failure to comply with these rules when drafting and filing his amended complaint may result in this action being dismissed.

25 First, Plaintiff is advised that he must specify which claims he is alleging against which defendants. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading policy, Plaintiff still must give defendants fair notice of each of the claims he is alleging against each the approximate dates of their involvement. Put another way, Plaintiff should tell the Court, in plain language, what each defendant did to him and when. “While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported with factual allegations.” Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 679.

5 Second, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that [Plaintiff] is entitled to relief.”

7 Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). “Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(d)(1). “A party must state its claims or defenses in numbered paragraphs, each limited as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). “[E]ach claim founded on a separate transaction or occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.” Id. 11 Third, Plaintiff may not raise multiple unrelated claims in a single lawsuit. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit a litigant to raise unrelated claims involving different defendants in a single action. A basic lawsuit is a single claim against a single defendant. But Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 18(a) allows a plaintiff to add multiple claims to the lawsuit when those claims are against the same defendant. And Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) allows a plaintiff to add multiple parties to a lawsuit where the right to relief arises out of the “same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2)(A). “However, unrelated claims that involve different defendants must be brought in separate lawsuits.” Bryant v. Romero, No. 1:12-CV-02074-DLB PC, 2013 WL 5923108, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2013) (citing George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007)). This rule is intended to avoid confusion, which arises out of bloated lawsuits.1 22 Lastly, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must be complete in and of itself. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, he is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and, thus, the amended complaint must be complete by itself. See Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1989) (holding that “[t]he fact that a party was named in the original complaint is irrelevant; an amended pleading || supersedes the original”); see also Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) || Cholding that for claims dismissed with prejudice, a plaintiff is not required to reallege such || claims in a subsequent amended complaint to preserve them for appeal). Plaintiff's amended || complaint must contain all claims, defendants, and factual allegations that Plaintiff wishes to || pursue in this lawsuit. Moreover, Plaintiff must file his amended complaint on this Court’s || approved form, which the Clerk of Court will send to Plaintiff.

7 || If. Conclusion and Order 8 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis || (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED.

10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is DISMISSED || without prejudice and with leave to amend.

12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly directed to mail Plaintiff || acopy of the non-prisoner, pro se form complaint.

15 DATED: December 16, 2021.

16 a Les Wr pet, BRENDA WEKSLER 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE