1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3 * * *
4 Sergey Mkhitaryan, Case No. 2:22-cv-00221-JAD-BNW
5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.
7 County of Clark, 8
Defendant. 9
10 11 Pro se Plaintiff filed documents initiating this case on February 4, 2022. ECF No. 1. 12 Plaintiff paid the filing fee, but he is a prisoner suing a government entity. See id. Accordingly, 13 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court must screen Plaintiff’s complaint. 14 I. ANALYSIS 15 A. Screening standard 16 In screening the complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims and dismiss claims 17 that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted or seek monetary 18 relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Dismissal for 19 failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard for failure to state a claim 20 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 21 2012). To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as 22 true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 23 678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints and may only dismiss them “if it 24 appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which 25 would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 26 556 U.S. at 678). 27 In considering whether the complaint is sufficient to state a claim, all allegations of 1 Summit P’ship v. Turner Broad. Sys. Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). 2 Although the standard under Rule 12(b)(6) does not require detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff 3 must provide more than mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 4 544, 555 (2007). A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action is insufficient. Id. 5 Unless it is clear the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured through amendment, a pro se 6 plaintiff should be given leave to amend the complaint with notice regarding the complaint’s 7 deficiencies. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 8 B. Screening the Complaint 9 The Court reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint. See ECF No. 1. What exactly Plaintiff is 10 alleging and trying to bring suit for is unclear. See id. Plaintiff makes various allegations (all 11 seemingly related to his underlying criminal case) ranging from Defendant illegally raising his 12 bail, disobeying orders, delaying the production of Brady material, violating international law by 13 kidnapping Plaintiff, filing an indictment without dismissing an information, violating Plaintiff’s 14 speedy trial rights, the court lacking jurisdiction, etc. See id. 15 Even liberally construing Plaintiff’s complaint, the Court is unable to determine exactly 16 what claims Plaintiff is attempting to allege and cannot evaluate whether Plaintiff states any 17 claims for relief. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and 18 with leave to amend to file a more manageable complaint. See Dietz v. Bouldin, 136 S.Ct. 1885, 19 1891 (2016) (holding that the Supreme Court “has long recognized that a district court possesses 20 inherent powers that are ‘governed not by rule or statute but by the control necessarily vested in 21 courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of 22 cases.’”). To help Plaintiff file a properly formatted complaint, the Court now advises Plaintiff of 23 the following requirements under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff is also advised 24 that failure to comply with these rules when drafting and filing his amended complaint may result 25 in this action being dismissed. 26 First, Plaintiff is advised that he must specify which claims he is alleging against which 27 defendant(s). Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading policy, 1 defendant. Specifically, he must allege facts showing how each named defendant is involved and 2 the approximate dates of their involvement. Put another way, Plaintiff should tell the Court, in 3 plain language, what each defendant did to him and when. “While legal conclusions can provide 4 the framework of a complaint, they must be supported with factual allegations.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 5 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). 6 Second, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must be short and plain. The simpler and more 7 concise Plaintiff’s complaint, the easier it is for the Court to understand and screen it. The Federal 8 Rules also require this. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, Plaintiff’s amended complaint 9 must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that [Plaintiff] is entitled to 10 relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). “Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.” Fed. R. 11 Civ. P. 8(d)(1). “A party must state its claims or defenses in numbered paragraphs, each limited 12 as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). “[E]ach claim 13 founded on a separate transaction or occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.” Id. 14 Third, Plaintiff may not raise multiple unrelated claims in a single lawsuit. The Federal 15 Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit a litigant to raise unrelated claims involving different 16 defendants in a single action. A basic lawsuit is a single claim against a single defendant. Federal 17 Rule of Civil Procedure 18(a) allows a plaintiff to add multiple claims to the lawsuit when those 18 claims are against the same defendant. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) allows a plaintiff to 19 add multiple parties to a lawsuit where the right to relief arises out of the “same transaction, 20 occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2)(A). “However, 21 unrelated claims that involve different defendants must be brought in separate lawsuits.” Bryant v. 22 Romero, No. 1:12-CV-02074-DLB PC, 2013 WL 5923108, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2013) (citing 23 George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007)). This rule is intended to avoid confusion, 24 which arises out of bloated lawsuits. 25 Lastly, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must be complete in and of itself.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3 * * *
4 Sergey Mkhitaryan, Case No. 2:22-cv-00221-JAD-BNW
5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.
7 County of Clark, 8
Defendant. 9
10 11 Pro se Plaintiff filed documents initiating this case on February 4, 2022. ECF No. 1. 12 Plaintiff paid the filing fee, but he is a prisoner suing a government entity. See id. Accordingly, 13 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court must screen Plaintiff’s complaint. 14 I. ANALYSIS 15 A. Screening standard 16 In screening the complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims and dismiss claims 17 that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted or seek monetary 18 relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Dismissal for 19 failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard for failure to state a claim 20 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 21 2012). To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as 22 true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 23 678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints and may only dismiss them “if it 24 appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which 25 would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 26 556 U.S. at 678). 27 In considering whether the complaint is sufficient to state a claim, all allegations of 1 Summit P’ship v. Turner Broad. Sys. Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). 2 Although the standard under Rule 12(b)(6) does not require detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff 3 must provide more than mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 4 544, 555 (2007). A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action is insufficient. Id. 5 Unless it is clear the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured through amendment, a pro se 6 plaintiff should be given leave to amend the complaint with notice regarding the complaint’s 7 deficiencies. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 8 B. Screening the Complaint 9 The Court reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint. See ECF No. 1. What exactly Plaintiff is 10 alleging and trying to bring suit for is unclear. See id. Plaintiff makes various allegations (all 11 seemingly related to his underlying criminal case) ranging from Defendant illegally raising his 12 bail, disobeying orders, delaying the production of Brady material, violating international law by 13 kidnapping Plaintiff, filing an indictment without dismissing an information, violating Plaintiff’s 14 speedy trial rights, the court lacking jurisdiction, etc. See id. 15 Even liberally construing Plaintiff’s complaint, the Court is unable to determine exactly 16 what claims Plaintiff is attempting to allege and cannot evaluate whether Plaintiff states any 17 claims for relief. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and 18 with leave to amend to file a more manageable complaint. See Dietz v. Bouldin, 136 S.Ct. 1885, 19 1891 (2016) (holding that the Supreme Court “has long recognized that a district court possesses 20 inherent powers that are ‘governed not by rule or statute but by the control necessarily vested in 21 courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of 22 cases.’”). To help Plaintiff file a properly formatted complaint, the Court now advises Plaintiff of 23 the following requirements under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff is also advised 24 that failure to comply with these rules when drafting and filing his amended complaint may result 25 in this action being dismissed. 26 First, Plaintiff is advised that he must specify which claims he is alleging against which 27 defendant(s). Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading policy, 1 defendant. Specifically, he must allege facts showing how each named defendant is involved and 2 the approximate dates of their involvement. Put another way, Plaintiff should tell the Court, in 3 plain language, what each defendant did to him and when. “While legal conclusions can provide 4 the framework of a complaint, they must be supported with factual allegations.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 5 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). 6 Second, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must be short and plain. The simpler and more 7 concise Plaintiff’s complaint, the easier it is for the Court to understand and screen it. The Federal 8 Rules also require this. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, Plaintiff’s amended complaint 9 must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that [Plaintiff] is entitled to 10 relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). “Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.” Fed. R. 11 Civ. P. 8(d)(1). “A party must state its claims or defenses in numbered paragraphs, each limited 12 as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). “[E]ach claim 13 founded on a separate transaction or occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.” Id. 14 Third, Plaintiff may not raise multiple unrelated claims in a single lawsuit. The Federal 15 Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit a litigant to raise unrelated claims involving different 16 defendants in a single action. A basic lawsuit is a single claim against a single defendant. Federal 17 Rule of Civil Procedure 18(a) allows a plaintiff to add multiple claims to the lawsuit when those 18 claims are against the same defendant. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) allows a plaintiff to 19 add multiple parties to a lawsuit where the right to relief arises out of the “same transaction, 20 occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2)(A). “However, 21 unrelated claims that involve different defendants must be brought in separate lawsuits.” Bryant v. 22 Romero, No. 1:12-CV-02074-DLB PC, 2013 WL 5923108, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2013) (citing 23 George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007)). This rule is intended to avoid confusion, 24 which arises out of bloated lawsuits. 25 Lastly, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must be complete in and of itself. If Plaintiff 26 chooses to file an amended complaint, he is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the 27 original complaint and, thus, the amended complaint must be complete by itself. See Hal Roach 1 || “[t]he fact that a party was named in the original complaint is irrelevant; an amended pleading 2 || supersedes the original”); see also Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) 3 || cholding that for claims dismissed with prejudice, a plaintiff is not required to reallege such 4 || claims in a subsequent amended complaint to preserve them for appeal). Plaintiff's amended 5 |} complaint must contain all claims, defendants, and factual allegations that Plaintiff wishes to 6 || pursue in this lawsuit. Moreover, Plaintiff must file his amended complaint on this Court’s 7 || approved form, which the Clerk of Court will send Plaintiff. 8 || IL. CONCLUSION 9 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint (ECF No. 1) is dismissed 10 || without prejudice and with leave to amend. 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mail Plaintiff a copy of the 12 || prisoner, pro se form complaint. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to amend his complaint, he must 14 || do so by March 8, 2022. If Plaintiff chooses not to amend his complaint, this Court will 15 || recommend that his case be dismissed. 16 17 DATED: February 8, 2022. 18 Giswt Ween BRENDA WEKSLER 19 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28