Garrett v. Sycuan Casino

Opinion

WILLIAM ALLEN GARRETT, Case No.: 3:25-cv-01596-JES-KSC

Plaintiff, ORDER: v. (1) DENYING APPLICATION TO SYCUAN CASINO, et al., PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS Defendants. AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE;

(2) OVERRULING OBJECTION AS MOOT

[ECF Nos. 2, 5]

On June 20, 2025, Plaintiff William Allen Garrett (“Plaintiff”) proceeding pro se, filed a complaint alleging due process and ADA discrimination punishment naming Defendant Sycuan Casino1 and individual employees of Sycuan Casino in their official 1 The Court presumes Plaintiff means to refer to the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation, which is a “federally recognized tribe of Mission Indians from Southern California, located in an unincorporated area of San Diego County just east of El Cajon. The Sycuan band are a Kumeyaay tribe, one of the four ethnic groups indigenous to San Diego County.” See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sycuan_Band_of_the_Kumeyaay_Nation (last visited August 10, 2024). capacity. ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”). Plaintiff filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). ECF No. 2. On July 7, 2025, Plaintiff filed an objection against sovereign immunity. ECF No. 5. Upon review, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s IFP request and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objection as MOOT. Plaintiff previously filed a complaint regarding this matter. See 3:24-cv-01296-JES- SBC, ECF No. 1. On July 25, 2024, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint alleging breach of contract, fourteenth amendment and due process violations naming Defendant Sycuan Casino and individual employees of Sycuan Casino in their official capacity. Id. Plaintiff filed a Motion to Proceed IFP in that case and the Court conducted a screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and dismissed the case with prejudice since Sycuan Casino is entitled to sovereign immunity. Garrett v. Sycuan Casino, No. 3:24-cv-01296- JES-SBC, 2024 WL 3798398, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2024) (“Garrett I”). In Garrett I, Plaintiff alleged he was deprived of a $2,335 jackpot won while at Sycuan Casino. Id. at *1. On June 20, 2025, Plaintiff once again filed a complaint against Sycuan Casino, a commissioner and a slot machine supervisor alleging a due process violation and ADA discrimination. Compl. at 5-8. This new complaint relates to the jackpot Plaintiff previously alleged he won and was deprived of receiving. Id. at 7. The factual allegations in this new case are the same as Garrett I and the only cause of action that is different is a new cause of action for ADA discrimination. The Court previously dismissed Plaintiff’s initial case with prejudice, because Sycuan is entitled to sovereign immunity. See Garrett I, 2024 WL 3798398, at *2. Plaintiff’s new cause of action does not change that analysis.

Sycuan Casino is an Indian gaming casino owned by the Sycuan Tribe. See l Thus, the Court concludes Plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed sua sponte for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)Gi) and 1915A(b)(1). For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES with prejudice Plaintiffs Complaint in its entirety based on his failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)1) and 1915A(b)(1); and the Court finds amendment would be futile. See Gonzalez v. Planned Parenthood of L.A., 759 F.3d 1112, (9" Cir. 2014) (“Futility of amendment can, by itself, justify the denial of ... leave amend.’”) (quoting Bonin v. Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 845 (9" Cir. 1995)). The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. No further filings will be accepted on this case. Dated: July 29, 2025 4 we Sn— “4 A. Honorable James E. Simmons Jr United States District Judge