Gabelman v. FBI Special Agent

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedMay 15, 2023
Docket2:23-cv-00039
StatusUnknown

This text of Gabelman v. FBI Special Agent (Gabelman v. FBI Special Agent) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gabelman v. FBI Special Agent, (D. Nev. 2023).

Opinion

3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** Barry Allen Gabelman, 9 Case No. 2:23-cv-00039-JAD-VCF 10 Plaintiff, vs. 11 FBI Special Agent, et al., ORDER 12 Defendants.

13 APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (EFC NO. 2) AND COMPLAINT (ECF NO. 1-1) 14

16 Pro se plaintiff Barry Allen Gabelman filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a 17 proposed complaint ECF Nos. 2 and 1-1. I grant his IFP application. ECF No. 2. I dismiss the plaintiff’s 18 complaint without prejudice. ECF No. 1-1. 19 I. Plaintiff’s IFP Application 20 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a plaintiff may bring a civil action "without prepayment of fees or 21 security thereof" if the plaintiff submits a financial affidavit that demonstrates the plaintiff "is unable to 22 23 pay such fees or give security therefor." If the plaintiff is a "prisoner" as defined by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(h), 24 as amended by the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), he must pay the entire fee in installments, 25 regardless of whether his action is ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. 1 Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002). 2 Under the PLRA, a prisoner seeking leave to proceed IFP must submit a "certified copy of the 3 4 trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the six-month period 5 immediately preceding the filing of the complaint." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 6 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). From the certified trust account statement, the Court must assess an initial 7 payment of 20% of (a) the average monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the 8 average monthly balance in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner 9 has no assets. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). The institution having custody of the 10 prisoner must collect subsequent payments, assessed at 20% of the preceding month's income, in any 11 month in which the prisoner's account exceeds $10, and forward those payments to the Court until the 12 entire filing fee is paid. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). Even if this action is dismissed, the prisoner must 13 still pay the full filing fee pursuant to § 1915(b) and the monthly payments from his inmate account will 14 continue until the balance is paid. 15 Plaintiff is currently incarcerated. ECF No. 2. Plaintiff filed a declaration and a certified copy of 16 17 the trust fund account statement per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Plaintiff's average monthly balance is $0, 18 and his average monthly deposits are $0. The institution calculated that his partial filing fee should be 19 $0. I grant plaintiff's IFP application. 20 Since plaintiff's monthly deposit is currently so low, I will exercise my discretion and waive the 21 initial installment of the filing fee. The entire $350 filing fee will, however, remain due from plaintiff, 22 and the institution where plaintiff is incarcerated will collect money toward the payment of the full filing 23 fee when plaintiff's institutional account has a sufficient balance, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915. The 24 25 2 entire $350 filing fee will remain due and payable and will be collected from plaintiff's institutional 1 account regardless of the outcome of this action. 2 II. Plaintiff’s Complaint 3 4 a. Legal Standard 5 Since I grant plaintiff’s IFP application, I must review his complaint to determine whether the 6 complaint is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a plausible claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Federal 7 Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) provides that a complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of 8 the claim showing that the [plaintiff] is entitled to relief.” Rule 8 ensures that each defendant has "fair 9 notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Dura Pharms., Inc. v. 10 Broudo, 544 U.S. 336, 346, 125 S. Ct. 1627, 161 L. Ed. 2d 577 (2005). The Supreme Court’s decision in 11 Ashcroft v. Iqbal states that to satisfy Rule 8’s requirements, a complaint’s allegations must Luckett “the 12 line from conceivable to plausible.” 556 U.S. 662, 680 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 13 550 U.S. 544, 547, (2007)). Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for 14 dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A complaint 15 should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6), “if it appears beyond a doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set 16 17 of facts in support of her claims that would entitle him to relief.” Buckey v. Los Angeles, 968 F.2d 791, 18 794 (9th Cir. 1992). 19 “[A] pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than 20 formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quoting Estelle v. 21 Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976)). If the court dismisses a complaint under § 1915(e), the plaintiff 22 should be given leave to amend the complaint with directions as to curing its deficiencies, unless it is 23 clear from the face of the complaint that the deficiencies could not be cured by amendment. Cato v. 24 United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). "[W]hen a plaintiff files an amended complaint, '[t]he 25 3 amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.'" Rhodes 1 v. Plaintiff, 621 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir.1967)). 2 An amended complaint must be "complete in itself, including exhibits, without reference to the 3 4 superseded pleading." LR 15-1(a). 5 "Federal law opens two main avenues to relief on complaints related to imprisonment: a petition 6 for habeas corpus ... and a [civil rights] complaint under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 ... 42 U.S.C. § 7 1983." Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 750, 124 S. Ct. 1303, 158 L. Ed. 2d 32 (2004).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Preiser v. Rodriguez
411 U.S. 475 (Supreme Court, 1973)
Estelle v. Gamble
429 U.S. 97 (Supreme Court, 1976)
Thomas v. Arn
474 U.S. 140 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Heck v. Humphrey
512 U.S. 477 (Supreme Court, 1994)
Muhammad v. Close
540 U.S. 749 (Supreme Court, 2004)
Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo
544 U.S. 336 (Supreme Court, 2005)
Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Wallace v. Kato
127 S. Ct. 1091 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Rhodes v. Robinson
621 F.3d 1002 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Richard E. Loux v. B. J. Rhay, Warden
375 F.2d 55 (Ninth Circuit, 1967)
Evelyn Dejesus v. Banco Popular De Puerto Rico
951 F.2d 3 (First Circuit, 1991)
Juan Valdez v. United States
651 F. App'x 626 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)
Cato v. United States
70 F.3d 1103 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)
Harvey v. Waldron
210 F.3d 1008 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
Rosselló-González v. Calderón-Serra
398 F.3d 1 (First Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Gabelman v. FBI Special Agent, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gabelman-v-fbi-special-agent-nvd-2023.