Jones v. Lotte Hotels

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE CORTEZ DAUNDRE JONES, CASE NO. C23-1365-JCC Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. LOTTE HOTELS, 13 Defendant.

Pro se Plaintiff, Cortez D. Jones, filed a complaint against Lotte Hotels alleging that it harbors fugitives. (Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff seeks to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (Dkt. No. 1.) Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court must dismiss IFP complaints if “at any time” it is determined the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also id. § 1915A(b)(1); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000) (Section 1915(e) applies to all IFP proceedings, not just those filed by prisoners).

Upon review of Plaintiff’s complaint, the Court hereby DISMISSES it for failure to set forth factual allegations sufficient for a remedy at law. Plaintiff’s allegations do not set forth sufficient factual matter to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 664 (2009). Labels and conclusions, lacking factual enhancement are insufficient. Id. The factual allegations must be “enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.”

2 Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007).

3 For the foregoing reasons the complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. This dismissal renders consideration of IFP status moot.

DATED this 27th day of September 2023.

A John C. Coughenour 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE