United States District Court, D. Nevada
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
WEKSLER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
plaintiff Frederic Charles Prado brings this lawsuit
regarding a dispute he is having regarding unpaid medical
bills. Prado moves to proceed in forma pauperis.
(IFP Application (ECF No. 1).) Prado submitted the affidavit
required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) showing an inability to
prepay fees or costs or give security for them. Prado's
request to proceed in forma pauperis therefore will
be granted. The court now screens Prado's complaint (ECF
No. 1-1) as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
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, file 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 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 v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints
and may only 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).
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).
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. 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).
Screening the complaint
alleges that he has Medicare health insurance through the
United States Social Security System. (Compl. (ECF No. 1-1).)
He states that unspecified Medicare employees informed him
that certain medical bills he incurred related to a car
accident that occurred in May of 2016 are not Medicare's
responsibility because Prado received a financial settlement
from Geico Insurance and/or Liberty Mutual Insurance.
(Id. at 1-2.) He further states that he was informed
he needs to reimburse Medicare for medical bills paid since
the time of the car accident. (Id. at 2-3.)
According to Prado, repaying the bills will cause him
financial problems. (Id. at 3.) The court
understands Prado to be stating that the bills should be the
responsibility of Geico, Liberty Mutual, or the City of Las
Vegas bus system. (See id.) Prado seeks “a
fine for negligent activity by the insurance company as the
statute of limitations runs out in 20 days for filing this
legal case . . . .” (Id. at 4.)
liberally construing the complaint, the court finds Prado
does not state a claim against any of the entities mentioned
in the complaint. While Prado generally describes the
underlying circumstances that prompted him to file this
lawsuit, he does not provide sufficient factual allegations
for the court to understand which legal claims he seeks to
assert against which defendants. Without additional factual
allegations regarding the underlying dispute and the various
entities' roles in the case, the court cannot evaluate
whether Prado's complaint states a claim against
Medicare, Geico, Liberty Mutual, or the City of Las Vegas Bus
System. Additionally, Prado does not include any statement of
the grounds for the court's jurisdiction in this case.
The court therefore will recommend dismissal of Prado's
complaint without prejudice for Prado to file an amended
Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, the document
must be titled “Amended Complaint.” The amended
complaint must contain a short and plain statement of the
grounds for the court's jurisdiction. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1). Additionally, the amended complaint must
contain a short and plain statement describing the underlying
case and each defendant's involvement in the case.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Although the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading standard,
Prado still must give each defendant fair notice of
Prado's claims against it and of Prado's entitlement
Prado is advised that if he files an amended complaint, the
original complaint (ECF No. 1-1) no longer serves any
function in this case. As such, the amended complaint must be
complete in and of itself without reference to prior
pleadings or other documents. The court cannot refer to a
prior pleading or other documents to make Prado's amended
complaint complete. Given that the court is recommending
dismissal of Prado's complaint without prejudice, the
court will deny Prado's motions for a hearing (ECF Nos.
5, 6) without prejudice.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
THEREFORE ORDERED that Prado's application to proceed
in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED. Plaintiff
is permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without
prepaying fees or costs or giving security for them.
FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court must detach and
separately file ...