Justin v. Trump Jr.

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: May 7, 2025
• Docket: 5:25-cv-03787
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MALIK JUSTIN, Case No. 25-cv-03787-LJC

8 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 9 v. APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS SHOULD NOT BE 10 DONALD TRUMP JR., DENIED AND COMPLAINT SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED Defendant. 11 Re: Dkt. Nos. 1, 2

13 I. APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 14 Pro se Plaintiff Malik Justin applied to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. Justin 15 responded “No” to every question that he answered on his application form, indicating that he has 16 no assets or income of any kind. Justin failed to complete question 1 and did not respond to 17 questions 8 through 10. Id. at 2, 3-4. Justin’s application is therefore incomplete, and taken as a 18 whole, it does not include sufficient information to determine whether the answers that he actually 19 provided are credible. Justin is therefore ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why his application to 20 proceed in forma pauperis should not be denied, by filing a response no later than May 28, 2025 21 answering each question on the form application and—if he truly has no assets or income at all— 22 explaining how he meets basic needs. 23 II. SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT 24 If the Court were to grant Justin’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, it would next 25 need to review the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) to determine whether the complaint 26 states a claim on which relief may be granted. 27 When the complaint has been filed by a pro se plaintiff, a court must “construe the 1 pleadings liberally and . . . afford the petitioner the benefit of any doubt.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 2 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted). But “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a 3 cause of action . . . do not suffice,” and a court need not credit “legal conclusions” or “mere 4 conclusory statements.” See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678–79 (2009). The factual 5 allegations in the complaint “must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” 6 Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). A complaint must demonstrate “facial 7 plausibility” by pleading “factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference 8 that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. In other words, 9 the Complaint needs to include facts, not just the type of legal claim the plaintiff asserts. 10 Justin alleges that Defendant Donald Trump, Jr., violated 18 U.S.C. § 2261A (stalking) and 11 35 U.S.C. § 271 (patent infringement). ECF No. 1 (Compl) at 5. His claims, in their entirety, 12 read: “Infriment patented invention make uses offers to sells illegally without permission plus his 13 threating to kill and injure along with harass.” Id. His complaint includes no statement of facts. 14 See id. at 3. 15 Justin’s stalking claim fails for two reasons. First, 18 U.S.C. § 2261A criminalizes 16 stalking under certain circumstances, but criminal laws in Title 18 of the U.S. Code generally can 17 only be enforced by the federal government, not by individual civil plaintiffs. See McIntosh v. 18 Thomaz, No. 19-cv-00800-JCS, 2019 WL 3363792, at *2 (N.D. Cal. May 14, 2019), 19 recommendation adopted, 2019 WL 3804671 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2019). This particular statute is 20 no exception: “Case law is . . . unanimous that no private right of action is available under 21 § 2261A.” Cain v. Christine Valmy Int’l Sch. of Esthetics, Skin Care, & Makeup, 216 F. Supp. 3d 22 328, 335 (S.D.N.Y. 2016). Second, Justin includes no factual allegations beyond his conclusory 23 statement that Defendant is “threating to kill and injure along with harass.” Compl. at 5. If Justin 24 wishes to proceed with his claim that Defendant threatened or harassed him, he must identify the 25 law he is suing under, the law must allow for private causes of action, and he must allege facts in 26 support of his claim, including (but not necessarily limited to) when Defendant threatened or 27 harassed him and what the harassment entailed. 1 allegations that would entitle him to relief. If Justin wishes to proceed with this case, he must file 2 an amended complaint that states the facts of his claim, including (but not necessarily limited to) 3 || what if any patent Justin owns, and what he believes Defendant did to infringe upon that patent. 4 Justin is therefore ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why, if his application to proceed in 5 || forma pauperis is granted, his Complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim on 6 || which relief may be granted, by filing a response or amended complaint no later than May 28, 7 |} 2025. 8 || I. CONCLUSION 9 Justin must file no later than May 28, 2025: (1) a response answering the missing questions 10 || onhis application to proceed in forma pauperis and explaining how he meets basic needs; and 11 (2) either an amended complaint stating the facts supporting his claims, or a response arguing why 12 || his current Complaint is sufficient. An amended complaint would completely replace Justin’s 5 13 || current Complaint, and therefore must include all of the facts that he would like to allege and 14 || claims he would like to pursue, without reference to the current Complaint. 3 15 If Justin’s response does not correct the defects identified in this Order, the undersigned 16 || magistrate judge will recommend either denial of his application to proceed in forma pauperis or 3 17 || dismissal of his Complaint. If Justin does not respond at all, the undersigned may recommend 18 dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute. 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: May 7, 2025 22 23 Fi LI CIS OS Un States Magistrate Judge 25 26 27 28