Tijerino v. USA Pawn Jewelry

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedApril 8, 2022
Docket2:22-cv-00552
StatusUnknown

This text of Tijerino v. USA Pawn Jewelry (Tijerino v. USA Pawn Jewelry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tijerino v. USA Pawn Jewelry, (D. Ariz. 2022).

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Breanick Tijerino, No. CV-22-00552-PHX-DJH

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 USA Pawn Jewelry,

13 Defendant. 14 15 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Application for Deferral or Waiver of Court 16 Fees or Costs and Consent to Entry of Judgment (Doc. 2). The Court infers from this filing 17 that Plaintiff wishes to proceed in this United States District Court without prepaying fees 18 or costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, the filing Plaintiff made appears to be a form 19 used in Arizona state court. 20 Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.3 requires that actions sought to be filed in forma 21 pauperis (“IFP”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, be “accompanied by an affidavit of 22 inability to pay costs or give security.” The Local Rule also lists several requirements that 23 the declaration must contain. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s Application satisfies those 24 requirements, including that Plaintiff file the Application under penalty of perjury. 25 Upon review, the Application indicates that Plaintiff is financially unable to pay the 26 filing fee. The Court grants Plaintiff’s Application and will allow Plaintiff to proceed IFP. 27 I. Review of Plaintiff’s Complaint 28 When a party has been granted IFP status, the Court must review the complaint to 1 determine whether the action: 2 (i) is frivolous or malicious; 3 (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or 4 (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 5 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). In conducting this review, “section 1915(e) not only 6 permits but requires a district court to dismiss an [IFP] complaint that fails to state a claim.” 7 Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation omitted). 8 Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require complaints to contain “a 9 short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” While 10 Rule 8 does not demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, 11 the defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 12 (2009).1 “Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere 13 conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Id. A complaint “must contain sufficient factual 14 matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. (quoting 15 Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “when 16 the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference 17 that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 18 556). A complaint that provides “labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of the 19 elements of a cause of action will not do.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. Nor will a complaint 20 suffice if it presents nothing more than “naked assertions” without “further factual 21 enhancement.” Id. at 557. 22 In addition, the Court must interpret the facts alleged in the complaint in the light 23 most favorable to the plaintiff, while also accepting all well-pleaded factual allegations as 24 true. Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000). That rule does not apply, 25

26 1 “Although the Iqbal Court was addressing pleading standards in the context of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the Court finds that those standards also apply in the initial screening of 27 a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A since Iqbal discusses the 28 general pleading standards of Rule 8, which apply in all civil actions.” McLemore v. Dennis Dillon Automotive Group, Inc., 2013 WL 97767, at *2 n. 1 (D. Idaho Jan. 8, 2013). 1 however, to legal conclusions. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. The Court is mindful that it must 2 “construe pro se filings liberally when evaluating them under Iqbal.” Jackson v. Barnes, 3 749 F.3d 755, 763-64 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 4 2010)). 5 I. Discussion 6 Upon review, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim on 7 which relief may be granted. The Complaint alleges Defendant discriminated against 8 Plaintiff because of Plaintiff’s sexual orientation and identity, and it alleges that Plaintiff 9 suffered from retaliation when Plaintiff reported the misconduct and was subsequently 10 terminated from employment. (Doc. 1 at 5). But simply stating that Plaintiff suffered from 11 discrimination and retaliation is insufficient to give rise to a plausible claim. See Iqbal, 12 556 U.S. at 678. Without more factual detail, such as how Defendant discriminated against 13 Plaintiff, the Court cannot infer a plausible claim. Id. The Complaint, therefore, fails to 14 state a claim and must be dismissed. 15 II. Leave to Amend 16 In accordance with the well-settled law in this Circuit, because “it is not ‘absolutely 17 clear’ that [Plaintiff] could not cure [the Complaint’s] deficiencies by amendment,” the 18 Court will grant him the opportunity to do so. See Jackson v. Barnes, 749 F.3d 755, 767 19 (9th Cir. 2014) (citations omitted); see also Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1131 (en banc) (internal 20 quotation marks and citations omitted) (holding that a pro se litigant must be given leave 21 to amend his complaint “if it appears at all possible that the plaintiff can correct the defect” 22 in the complaint); Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) (leave to amend should be “freely” given “when 23 justice so requires[]”). The Complaint’s deficiencies could be cured by amendment, and 24 so the Court will permit Plaintiff the opportunity to file an amended complaint. 25 If Plaintiff files an amended complaint, it must address the deficiency identified 26 above. In addition, Plaintiff’s amended complaint should follow the form detailed in Rule 27 7.1 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure (“LRCiv”). Examples of different types of 28 complaints demonstrating the proper form can be found in the appendix of forms that is 1 contained with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (forms 11–21).2 Each claim or cause 2 of action must be set forth in a separate count. The amended complaint must also state why 3 venue is proper in this District Court. The Court also recommends Plaintiff review the 4 information available in the District Court’s Handbook for Self-Represented Litigants, 5 which is available online.3 6 Plaintiff may submit an amended complaint within thirty (30) days from the date 7 of entry of this Order.

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

Related

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Hebbe v. Pliler
627 F.3d 338 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff
963 F.2d 1258 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
Michael Lacey v. Joseph Arpaio
693 F.3d 896 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Frederick Jackson v. Michael Barnes
749 F.3d 755 (Ninth Circuit, 2014)
McHenry v. Renne
84 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)
Lopez v. Smith
203 F.3d 1122 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
Shwarz v. United States
234 F.3d 428 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Tijerino v. USA Pawn Jewelry, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tijerino-v-usa-pawn-jewelry-azd-2022.