Jimenez v. United States

District Court, E.D. California·Decided February 27, 2025·No. 1:24-cv-01376·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 EVELYN JIMENEZ, Case No. 1:24-cv-01376-JLT-SKO 10 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CASE BE DISMISSED FOR 11 v. FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 12 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and (Doc. 7) FEDERAL BUREAU OF 13 INVESTIGATION, FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff Evelyn Jimenez, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action, filed a 17 civil complaint on November 8, 2024. (Doc. 1). On December 13, 2024, the undersigned screened 18 the complaint, found that it failed to state any cognizable claims, and granted Plaintiff thirty days 19 leave to file an amended complaint curing the pleading deficiencies identified in the order. (Doc. 20 4.) 21 On February 7, 2025, in response to an order to show cause (Doc. 5), Plaintiff filed an 22 amended complaint, which is before the Court for screening. (Doc. 7) After screening Plaintiff’s 23 amended complaint, the Court finds that despite the explicit recitation of the deficiencies of the 24 original complaint, Plaintiff has failed to plead any cognizable claims. Accordingly, the Court 25 RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff’s amended complaint be DISMISSED without leave to amend. 26 I. SCREENING REQUIREMENT 27 In cases where the plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the Court is required to screen 28 each case and shall dismiss the case at any time if the Court determines that the allegation of poverty 1 is untrue, or that the action or appeal is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which 2 relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 3 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995) (district 4 court has discretion to dismiss in forma pauperis complaint); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193 5 (9th Cir. 1998) (affirming sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim). If the Court determines 6 that a complaint fails to state a claim, leave to amend may be granted to the extent that the 7 deficiencies of the complaint can be cured by amendment. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 8 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). 9 In determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the Court uses the same pleading 10 standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). A complaint must contain “a short and 11 plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of 13 a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 14 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). A 15 complaint may be dismissed as a matter of law for failure to state a claim based on (1) the lack of 16 a cognizable legal theory; or (2) insufficient facts under a cognizable legal theory. See Balistreri 17 v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). The plaintiff must allege a minimum 18 factual and legal basis for each claim that is sufficient to give each defendant fair notice of what 19 the plaintiff’s claims are and the grounds upon which they rest. See, e.g., Brazil v. U.S. Dep’t of 20 Navy, 66 F.3d 193, 199 (9th Cir. 1995); McKeever v. Block, 932 F.2d 795, 798 (9th Cir. 1991). 21 In reviewing the pro se complaint, the Court is to liberally construe the pleadings and accept 22 as true all factual allegations contained in the complaint. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 23 (2007). The Court, however, need not accept a plaintiff’s legal conclusions as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 24 at 678. “Where a complaint pleads facts that are merely consistent with a defendant’s liability, it 25 stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.” Id. (quoting 26 Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557) (internal quotation marks omitted). 27 28 1 II. DISCUSSION 2 A. Plaintiff’s Allegations 3 Plaintiff drafted her amended complaint using the general complaint form provided by this 4 Court. The caption of the complaint lists the “United States, et al.” and the “FBI Federal Bureau 5 of Investigation” as the defendants. (Doc. 7.) Plaintiff has checked federal question as the basis of 6 jurisdiction. (Id. at 3.) In the section in which she is asked to indicate which of her federal 7 constitutional or statutory rights have been violated, she writes “global identification – Los Banos, 8 CA,” “DMV Identification – Los Banos, CA,” and “other Identification – San Diego and customs 9 and borders – San Diego, CA.” (Id. at 4.) The statement of claim section states: “Jessica, James, 10 Xiomara are my children with other 18 years old getting Federal question with the FBI address and 11 phone number. Extension in time and a lawyer to settle eight billion queizgies [sic].” (Doc. 1 at 12 5.) The requested relief section states as follows: “I scare officer of law enforcement identification 13 they don’t believe is me, Evelyn Jimenez, where I am from, county I [sic] what language, same to 14 my community and places visit.” (Id. at 6.) 15 The Civil Cover Sheet filed with the original complaint lists the nature of suit as 16 “Constitutionality of State Statutes.” (Doc. 1-1.) 17 B. Plaintiff Fails to State a Cognizable Claim in the Amended Complaint 18 1. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint Violates Rule 8 19 Rule 8 requires that a complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim 20 showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. . ..” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Plaintiff’s amended 21 complaint violates Rule 8 because it does not contain a short and plain statement of the claim 22 demonstrating that she is entitled to relief. 23 Although the Federal Rules use a flexible pleading policy, Plaintiff is required to give fair 24 notice to the defendants of the basis of the claim and must allege facts that support the elements of 25 the claim plainly and succinctly. A complaint must contain sufficient factual allegations to give 26 the defendant fair notice of the claim and the grounds upon which it rests. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 27 555. Here, the statement of claim section states, “Jessica, James, Xiomara are my children with 28 other 18 years old getting Federal question with the FBI address and phone number. Extension in 1 time and a lawyer to settle eight billion queizgies [sic].” (Doc. 7 at 5.). There are no factual 2 allegations in the complaint that identify the basis any federal claim(s). Nor does Plaintiff specify 3 what state statute(s) she finds unconstitutional and what basis she has for doing so, as specified in 4 the Civil Cover Sheet. (See Doc. 1-1.) 5 In addition, a complaint is required to contain sufficient factual content for the court to draw 6 the reasonable conclusion that any defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 7 at 678.

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

Jimenez v. United States, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Jimenez v. United States (Jimenez v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lehman v. Nakshian
453 U.S. 156 (Supreme Court, 1981)
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Meyer
510 U.S. 471 (Supreme Court, 1994)
Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Bartlett v. Strickland
556 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Edward McKeever Jr. v. Sherman Block
932 F.2d 795 (Ninth Circuit, 1991)
Amanda Sateriale v. R J Reynolds Tobacco Company
697 F.3d 777 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
J. Wilkerson v. B. Wheeler
772 F.3d 834 (Ninth Circuit, 2014)
Cato v. United States
70 F.3d 1103 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)
Chang v. Chen
80 F.3d 1293 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)
Hodge v. Dalton
107 F.3d 705 (Ninth Circuit, 1997)
Lopez v. Smith
203 F.3d 1122 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
Bly-Magee v. California
236 F.3d 1014 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)
Kaiser v. Blue Cross of California
347 F.3d 1107 (Ninth Circuit, 2003)