Akinmulero v. United States Attorney General

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 OLASEBIKAN N. AKINMULERO, 8 NO. C20-1135RSL Plaintiff, 9 v. ORDER 10 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 11 et al., 12 Defendants. 13 14 15 On August 6, 2020, plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis was granted and 16 his complaint was accepted for filing. The complaint was defective, however, in that the named 17 defendants could not be held liable for damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of 18 Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and plaintiff has not adequately stated a 19 claim for review of agency action. Plaintiff was given an opportunity to file an amended 20 21 complaint (Dkt. # 6) and has now done so (Dkt. # 7). 22 The amended complaint names the Department of Homeland Security, USCIS, as the 23 defendant and alleges that the agency acted arbitrarily and/or in violation of law when it 24 requested that plaintiff file a form I-212 seeking permission to reapply for admission to the 25 United States. Plaintiff alleges that he was previously granted a waiver of excludability and 26 27 continuous resident status. The Order for More Definite Statement is hereby VACATED. The 1 Clerk of Court is directed to issue summons so that plaintiff may serve the summons and 2 complaint on defendant as set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i). 3 4 Dated this 5th day of October, 2020. 5 Robert S. Lasnik 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27