United States District Court, D. Nevada
P. GORDON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Anderson (“Plaintiff”), who was formerly in the
custody of the Nevada Department of Corrections
(“NDOC”), has submitted a civil rights complaint
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and has filed an application to
proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1-1, 1).
Plaintiff has paid the full filing fee of $400. ECF Nos. 1
-3, 3. Therefore the application for in forma
pauperis status is denied as moot. I now screen
Plaintiffs civil rights complaint under 28 U.S.C. §
court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court
determines that . . . the action or appeal (i) is frivolous
or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a
defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii). This provision applies to all
actions filed in forma pauperis, whether or not the
plaintiff is incarcerated. See Lopez v. Smith, 203
F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000); see also Calhoun v.
Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (per curiam).
of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted is provided for in Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6), and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)
tracks that language. Thus, when reviewing the adequacy of a
complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), the court
applies the same standard as is applied under Rule 12(b)(6).
See Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir.
2012) (“The standard for determining whether a
plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can
be granted under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is the same as the
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard for failure
to state a claim.”). Review under 12(b)(6) is
essentially a ruling on a question of law. See Chappel v.
Lab. Corp. of Am., 232 F.3d 719, 723 (9th Cir. 2000).
reviewing the complaint under this standard, the court must
accept the well-pleaded allegations as true, construe the
pleadings in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and
resolve all doubts in the plaintiffs favor. Jenkins v.
McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969). Allegations in
pro se complaints are “held to less stringent
standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.”
Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9 (1980) (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted).
complaint must contain more than a “formulaic
recitation of the elements of a cause of action, ” it
must contain factual allegations sufficient to “raise a
right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007).
“The pleading must contain something more . . . than .
. . a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion [of]
a legally cognizable right of action.” Id.
(quoting 5 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice &
Procedure § 1216, at 235-36 (3d ed. 2004)). At a
minimum, a plaintiff should state “enough facts to
state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”
Id. at 570; see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556
U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
pro se litigant must be given leave to amend his or
her complaint, and some notice of its deficiencies, unless it
is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint
could not be cured by amendment.” Cato v. United
States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995).
SCREENING OF COMPLAINT
has filed a 114-page complaint with a 108-page attachment.
ECF No. 1-1, 1-2. Plaintiff seems to try to incorporate text
and allegations against specific defendants in his
attachment. See, e.g., ECF No. 1-1 at 9, referring
to ECF No. 1-2 Attachment 36 for the Nature of the Case.
Plaintiff sues 29 defendants, including prison staff, NDOC
officials, and members of the Nevada Board of Parole. ECF No.
1-1 at 2-9. Plaintiff alleges 30 counts, including violations
of the First Amendment (see, e.g., Id. at 10),
Eighth Amendment (see, e.g., Id. at 14), and
Fourteenth Amendment (see, e.g., Id. at 18).
Plaintiff claims that he was wrongfully denied a variety of
sentencing credits including statutory credits (see,
e.g., Id. at 10), work credits (see, e.g., Id.
at 22), programming credits (see, e.g., Id. at 34),
and fiscal credits (see, e.g., Id. at 65). Plaintiff
alleges that the illegal denial of such credits caused
Plaintiffs sentence to be extended, and that the defendants
generally engaged in the denial of credits in order to
kidnap, falsely imprison, and extort Plaintiffs labor for
profit. See, e.g., Id. at 13. Plaintiff seeks
damages and injunctive relief. Id. at 110-113.
Short and Plain Statement
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, Plaintiffs complaint must
contain “a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that [Plaintiff] is entitled to relief.”
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. A 114-page complaint with a 108-page attachment,
some of which is text apparently meant to be incorporated as
part of the complaint, is not “short and plain.”
Further, the complaint must be complete in and of itself.
See Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co.,
Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1989). Plaintiff may
submit exhibits in an attachment as evidentiary proof, but
Plaintiffs complaint itself must contain all claims,
defendants, and factual allegations that Plaintiff wishes to
pursue in this lawsuit. Further, Plaintiff frequently makes
allegations against “Defendants” without stating
what actions each individual defendant took that violated
Plaintiff s civil rights. See, e.g., CEF No. 1-1 at
12, paragraph 11, 12. Therefore, I dismiss Plaintiffs
complaint without prejudice and with leave to amend.
Leave to Amend
is granted leave to file an amended complaint to cure the
deficiencies of the complaint. If Plaintiff chooses to file
an amended complaint he is advised that an amended complaint
supersedes (replaces) the original complaint and, thus, the
amended complaint must be complete in itself. Hal Roach
Studios, 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”). Plaintiff's amended
complaint must contain all claims, defendants, and ...