Warren v. City of Henderson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: October 21, 2025
• Docket: 24-4482
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 21 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALLANNA WARREN, No. 24-4482 D.C. No. 2:23-cv-01503-GMN-NJK Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM* CITY OF HENDERSON; HENDERSON POLICE DEPARTMENT; HOLLIE CHADWICK; DOE COLEMANM; CLARK COUNTY NEVADA; MICHELLE ROMERO; TIM BUCHANAN; GINA WATERS; STEPHANIE NICKSON; LISA KELSO,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 15, 2025**

Before: FRIEDLAND, MILLER, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.

Allanna Warren appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing her

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various claims. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Pickern v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc., 457 F.3d

963, 968 (9th Cir. 2006) (compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8);

Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Warren’s action for failure to comply

with Rule 8 because Warren failed to include “a short and plain statement of the

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2);

Pickern, 457 F.3d at 968 (“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires that the

allegations in the complaint give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff’s

claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” (citation and internal quotation

marks omitted)); Nevijel v. N. Coast Life Ins. Co., 651 F.2d 671, 674 (9th Cir.

1981) (explaining that a complaint that is “verbose, confusing and conclusory”

violates Rule 8). The district court provided an opportunity to amend, and Warren

did not do so.

All pending motions and requests are denied. The clerk will maintain Docket

Entry No. 9 under seal because an independent review suggests the documents may

warrant sealing.

AFFIRMED.

2 24-4482