United States District Court, D. Nevada
ORDER APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS [ECF NO. 1] AND COMPLAINT [ECF NO. 1-1]
FERENBACH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
the Court is Plaintiff Lamario Sears' Application for
Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) and
Complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff did not submit a complete
application. Therefore, the Court denies his application to
proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice.
FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION
potential plaintiff must pay a filling fee to commence a
civil action in federal court. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The
Court may allow a plaintiff to proceed in forma
pauperis, without prepayment of the filing fee, if the
plaintiff can demonstrate an inability to pay or give
security for the fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The
presiding judge has discretion to determine whether the
plaintiff is unable to pay or give security. Lasko v.
Hampton & Hampton Collections, LLC, No.
2:15-cv-01110-APG-VCF, 2015 WL 5009787, at *1 (D. Nev. Aug.
21, 2015). The judge bases this determination on the
information submitted by the plaintiff. Id.
Sears did not file the first page of his in forma
pauperis application. (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff states he
has no money in any bank account (ECF No. 1 at 2), but later
reports a current account balance of $49.58 in his prison
account. (ECF No. 1 at 4). Because Plaintiff's in
forma pauperis application is incomplete and
inconsistent, the Court cannot grant it at this time.
the Court grants an in forma pauperis application,
it must screen the case. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The Court
must dismiss a case if the action is legally frivolous or
malicious, seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2). Relief can be granted on a claim if it contains
sufficient facts that, when accepted as true, make the claim
plausible. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009). In making this determination, the presiding judge
accepts all material allegations in the complaint as true and
construes them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.
Russell v. Landrieu, 621 F.2d 1037, 1039-42 (9th
Court is not required to screen Plaintiff's complaint at
this time because his in forma pauperis application
has been denied. The Court gives Plaintiff guidance on
potential issues in his complaint that he should consider
addressing if he re-submits an in forma pauperis
application in this case. See generally Balistreri v.
Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988)
(discussing the court's duty to ensure pro se
litigants do not lose their rights because of technical
Sears' Complaint arises from his arrest by the Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police Department (“LVMPD”) and
subsequent detention. (ECF No. 1-1 at 3, 5). Plaintiff claims
that on August 25, 2019, he and his family were subjected to
unreasonable force in their home as officers executed an
arrest warrant on Plaintiff. (Id. at 4). Plaintiff
claims the arresting officers threatened him and his wife
with guns, screamed obscenities, used a bullhorn, threatened
to unleash police dogs on his wife, and held his daughter
“at the end of our street while in her mother's
car.” (Id.). Plaintiff also alleges
mistreatment by a judge during his court appearance on
February 4, 2019, which the Court cannot read. (Id.
at 5). Plaintiff claims that, while detained beginning on
February 5, 2019, he was denied medical treatment, which he
needed after a “near-fatal car crash, ” in
October. (Id. at 3). Plaintiff brings claims for
violations of his Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and
Fourteenth Amendment rights and several federal statutes.
(Id. at 4-9).
the Court accepts all facts as true and construes them in the
light most favorable to the Plaintiff as far as it is able,
the Court does not understand significant portions of
Plaintiff's compliant due to illegibility. Specifically,
the letters and words are spaced too narrowly and at times
the words are written too lightly. Some portions that are
legible are incomplete, such as the ending of the supporting
facts under Count I. (ECF No. 1-1 at 4). Should Plaintiff
re-submit his in forma pauperis application,
Plaintiff must allege specific facts under each cause of
action that make each claim plausible. Plaintiff must present
the facts in a legible manner, specifically those regarding:
1. Names of defendants in the complaint. (ECF No. ...