Schroeder v. The United States Government Its Agencies, Officers and Employees

• Court: District Court, D. Guam
• Decided: August 8, 2024
• Docket: 1:24-cv-00010
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

6 THE DISTRICT COURT OF GUAM 7 DOUG R. SCHROEDER JR., CIVIL CASE NO. 24-00010 8 Plaintiff, 9 ORDER vs. 10 THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 11 ITS AGENCIES, OFFICERS, AND EMPLOYEES, 12 Defendants. 13

14 This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Doug R. Schroeder Jr.’s Complaint (ECF No. 15 1) and Amended Violation of Civil Rights Complaint (ECF No. 4) (together referred to herein as 16 the “Complaint”);1 and the Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or 17 Costs (the “Application to Waive Fees”) (ECF No. 2). The court has reviewed the pleadings, the 18 relevant law, and finds this matter suitable for submission without oral argument. 19 For the reasons stated herein, the court hereby DISMISSES the Plaintiff’s Complaint 20 without prejudice and grants leave to amend. 21 22

23 1 A comparison of the Original Complaint and the Amended Complaint reveals no substantive difference between the two. See Compls., ECF Nos. 1 and 4. 1 I. Application to Waive Fees 2 The Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se, without an attorney, and has requested to 3 proceed without prepaying fees or costs.2 Section 1915(a)(1) permits a court to authorize a 4 person to commence a civil action without prepaying the required filing fee if said person 5 “submits an affidavit [stating] . . . that the person is unable to pay such fees or give security 6 therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Under this statute, federal courts can authorize the filing of a 7 lawsuit without prepayment of fees or security by a person who submits an affidavit that includes 8 a statement setting forth all the person’s assets and demonstrates an inability to pay such costs or 9 give such security. 10 The court has reviewed the Plaintiff’s Application to Waive Fees and finds that he does 11 not clearly demonstrate whether he is currently receiving income or if the amounts he lists under 12 the “Other Income” section were one-time payments. Appl. at 1, ECF No. 2. On the one hand, 13 the Plaintiff notes that he has not been gainfully employed since July 2023, his gross wages are 14 zero, and his take home pay is zero. Id. On other hand, the Plaintiff lists the following income

15 that he has received in the last 12 months, without identifying dates, in the “Other Income” 16 section: $5,000.00 in gross pay for “On Call Staffing Phx Az.”; $2,500.00 from “360 Industrial 17 Phx Az.”; $90.00 from “Details Unlimited Tamuning Guam”; $231.00 for “Guam dept of 18 Labor”; $0.86 from a Bank of Guam account; $144.00 from “Department of Public Heath Social 19 Services cash assistance/no longer receiving”; and $430.00 in food stamps monthly for eight 20 21 22 2 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and the Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, a $405 filing fee is required from 23 the party instituting any civil action in federal court. 1 months.3 Id. The court notes that the Plaintiff also noted on the form “no further income except 2 food stamps.” Id. 3 The court will construe the Plaintiff’s Application to Waive Fees as having demonstrated 4 that he is not currently receiving income because he notes having received financial assistance 5 and monthly food stamps. Id. Therefore, the court finds that based on the Application to Waive 6 Fees, the Plaintiff does not have an income to pay the filing fee. However, this does not end the 7 court’s inquiry. The court must still subject the Plaintiff’s Complaint to mandatory screening 8 before allowing the case to move forward and issue summons, requiring an answer or responsive 9 pleading. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). 10 II. Screening Complaint 11 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the court is required to review the complaint and 12 dismiss the case if the court determines that the action is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a 13 claim upon which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is 14 immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii); Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1126-27 (stating

15 that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) “not only permits but requires” the court to sua sponte dismiss an in 16 forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim). “A complaint is frivolous within the 17 meaning of § 1915(d) if it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Cato v. United States, 18 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992)). 19 When screening a complaint, the court is mindful that allegations of a pro se complaint 20 are held to less stringent standards than the pleadings drafted by attorneys. Erickson v. Pardus, 21 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (“A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed, and a pro se

22 3 The Plaintiff writes the amount of $3,448.00 next to the note where he states that he received food stamps in the amount of $430.00 monthly for eight months. Id. The court will construe the notation of $3,448.00 to signify the 23 total amount in food stamps he received over eight months. Additionally, the court’s calculation demonstrates that food stamps in the amount of $430.00 monthly for eight months is equal to $3,440.00 and not $3,448.00. 1 complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal 2 pleadings drafted by lawyers.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); Hebbe v. Pliler, 3 627 F.3d 338, 342 n.7 (9th Cir. 2010) (finding that liberal construction of pro se pleadings is 4 required after Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2007)). However, pro se litigants “should not be 5 treated more favorably than parties with attorneys of record,” Jacobsen v. Filler, 790 F.2d 1362, 6 1364 (9th Cir. 1986); rather, they must follow the same rules of procedure that govern other 7 litigants. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995). 8 A complaint must meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, which 9 mandates that a complaint include the following: 10 (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim 11 needs no new jurisdictional support;

12 (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and 13 (3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the 14 alternative or different types of relief.

15 FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a). 16 The facts in the Complaint are hard to discern, but the Plaintiff appears to be alleging that 17 the United States Government has been violating his Fifth Amendment rights since 2020, starting 18 when he was incarcerated by the Arizona Department of Corrections, and continuing until April 19 2024. Compl. at 3-20, ECF No. 4. The Plaintiff alleges the following eight claims: 20 • Claim 1: “Violating the 5th Amendment by depriving me of Life Liberty or Property Without Due Process of Law. By interfering with 21 my ability to use any and all law enforcement agencies to investigate on My behalf. As well as contacting an attorney to assist me. In the 22 US and Guam.” Id. at 21.

23 • Claim 2: “Violating the 5th Amendment by depriving me of the 1 ability to be self supporting. Going To every job I had and verbally and sexually harassing me also spraying me with pepper spray to The 2 point I could no longer work and keep a job. In the US and Guam.” Id. 3 • Claim 3: “Violating the 5th Amendment by going to every place I 4 tried to live and spraying my Dwelling with pepper spray pesticides CO2 gas and other unknown chemical agents. In the US and Guam.” 5 Id.

6 • Claim 4: “Violating the 5th Amendment by interfering with my medical care at my primary Physcian [sic] Jatin Dass and hospitals by 7 instructing them not to treat or test me for toxic gas poisning [sic] Or physical assaults in the US and Guam. Done by the United States 8 gov.” Id.

9 • Claim 5: “Violating the 5th Amendment by Using the government imitation sun over Guam to Spot light [sic] me stay right over top of 10 me any where I go many hours a day over heat me to the point Of heat exhaustion and sun burn on several occasions and control my 11 movements essentially Being used as a weapon and to track me.” Id.

12 • Claim 6: “Violating the 5th Amendment by Psychological manipulation and what I call Torture. Using themselves and over 100 13 people on Guam to harass me with what I think is an extension of Gas Lighting but on an advanced government level.” Id.

14 • Claim 7: “Violating the 5th amendment by drugging me in some 15 unknown way with many different Substances in order to facilitate and enhance the effects of the psychological manipulation. And I 16 believe experiment on me. In the US but more extensively on Guam.” Id.

17 • Claim 8: “Physical assaults by means of unknown chemical agents or unknown drugs, Psychological Manipulation and harassment are all 18 crimes even by a government agency or the people it uses. Causing me bodily harm and scars. Along with unknown psychological 19 damage.” Id.

20 In support of the above-mentioned claims, the Plaintiff recounts at length instances in 21 which the United States Government allegedly violated his Fifth Amendment rights during the 22 time period alleged. Id. at 3-20. The events in the Complaint take place mainly in Arizona and in 23 Guam. Id. In summary, the Plaintiff alleges that the United States Government has continuously 1 pepper sprayed him; put unknown substances in his food and exposed him to these unknown 2 substances in some unknown way; used an “imitation sun” on him in Guam and placed it above 3 the Plaintiff’s person; that “strange events of a psychological [n]ature have taken place around 4 [him] to attempt to confuse [him]” which he alleges is an advanced form of gaslighting; that 5 people were sent to make one syllable noises for the purpose of annoying him; and that music 6 with annoying beats were played around him while he slept in order to harass him. Id. These are 7 just some of the Plaintiff’s allegations. 8 The Complaint contains no cognizable claim. Even with respect to Claim 1, which seems, 9 in part, to allege that he was deprived of his right to an attorney, the Plaintiff fails to allege any 10 facts to support the claim that would enable the court to deem it cognizable. Compl. at 21, ECF 11 No. 4. The allegations in the Complaint are “fantastic” and “delusional,” see Neitzke v. Williams, 12 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989), and “rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible,” 13 Denton, 504 U.S. at 33. The court finds that the Complaint is therefore frivolous and fails to state 14 a claim on which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii).

15 The Complaint also fails to demonstrate that this court has jurisdiction to hear any of the 16 alleged claims. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. 17 As such, the court DISMISSES the Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice. 28 U.S.C. § 18 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii). 19 III. Leave to Amend 20 The court finds that dismissal with leave to amend is warranted. It is not clear, based on 21 the facts alleged, whether Plaintiff’s claims would be futile. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d at 1128 and 22 see also Chappel v. Lab. Corp. of Am., 232 F.3d 719, 725-26 (9th Cir. 2000) (“A district court 23 acts within its discretion to deny leave to amend when amendment would be futile [.]”). The 1 court construes pro se pleadings liberally and gives the Plaintiff any benefit of the doubt. Butler 2 v. Long, 752 F.3d 1177, 1180 (9th Cir. 2014). 3 If the Plaintiff chooses to file a Second Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff must 4 demonstrate to the court: 5 1. who the defendant or defendants are with specificity and which defendants relate 6 to which claims; 7 2. the basis for the court’s jurisdiction: 8  if diversity jurisdiction, the Plaintiff must demonstrate the amount in 9 controversy is more than $75,000 and the matter is between citizens of 10 different states or subjects of a foreign state; or, 11  if federal question jurisdiction, the Plaintiff must demonstrate a specific 12 constitutional or statutory right the Plaintiff believes was violated. 28 13 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332; and 14 3. a cognizable claim that comports with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). To

15 comport with Rule 8(a), the complaint must include a short and plain statement 16 that demonstrates, in addition to the basis for the court’s jurisdiction as discussed 17 above, that the pleader is entitled to relief and under what law or laws the Plaintiff 18 seeks relief under, and a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in 19 the alternative or different types of relief. FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a). 20 The Second Amended Complaint must be rewritten entirely and may not incorporate any 21 part of the dismissed Complaint by reference. Any cause of action not raised in the Second 22 Amended Complaint will be deemed waived. 23 Page 8 of 8

1 IV. Conclusion 2 For the foregoing reasons, the court DISMISSES the Plaintiffs Complaint without 3 || prejudice. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)() and (ii). The Plaintiff has 30 days from the filing of this 4 to file a Second Amended Complaint in compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil 5 || Procedure. Failure to file the Second Amended Complaint by the deadline may result in the 6 || automatic dismissal of the above-captioned matter without further notice from the court. 7 SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 /s/ Frances M. Tydingco-Gatewood 11 ne. Chief Judge ’ & Dated: Aug 08, 2024 ae A

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24