United States District Court, D. Hawaii
ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DENYING AS
MOOT APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
OKI MOLLWAY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
March 13, 2019, Plaintiff Elgene Luzon De-Amor, proceeding
pro se, filed a Complaint in this matter along with
an Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying
Fees and Costs (“IFP Application”). See
ECF Nos. 1 & 2. This court dismissed the original
Complaint and denied as moot the IFP Application. De-Amor was
given leave to file an Amended Complaint. See ECF
March 19, 2019, De-Amor filed an Amended Complaint along with
a second IFP Application. See ECF Nos. 6 & 7. On
March 27, 2019, De-Amor filed two other documents that appear
to be intended to supplement her Amended Complaint.
See ECF Nos. 8 & 9.
proceed in forma pauperis, De-Amor must demonstrate
that she is unable to prepay the court fees and that she
sufficiently pleads claims. See Lopez v. Smith, 203
F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000). Even if De-Amor
could demonstrate that she cannot afford to prepay the costs
of initiating this action, this court may dismiss her Amended
Complaint at the outset if it appears from the facts alleged
that the action is frivolous, that the action fails to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary
relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Tripati v. First Nat.
Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th
Amended Complaint fails to state a claim on which the court
can grant relief. While De-Amor refers to many Defendants,
there is no factual detail alleged with respect to what each
may have done. The Amended Complaint is therefore dismissed,
and the second IFP Application is denied as moot. The Amended
Complaint's allegations are insufficient to survive a
Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Not only are they often
illegible, what can be read consists of rambling, conclusory
statements unsupported by coherent factual detail. See
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007).
Accord Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)
(Rule 8 “does not require ‘detailed factual
allegations,' but it demands more than an unadorned,
the-defendant-unlawfully- harmed-me accusation”).
court has attempted to decipher De-Amor's handwriting,
but still cannot tell what claims De-Amor might be asserting
or who allegedly harmed her by doing what. For example,
Please all Rebuke and remove abolish all. demolish all they
did against us--these all Lists Defendants. It is their own
crimed Crime owned--bad credit they owned. It is their own
Law crimed Crime murderer Inflictions against us. EL and 2
children and my Family Sisters & brother Agrifino.
We've been sick body-head-dangered harmed and damaged.
Physical nature. The are all badevil unhuman Spirit and
anemic, insomnia, long term head sores, hair white, ie legs
ECF No. 6, PageID # 49 (quotation marks omitted).
Too much invasion dangerous Acts. harmful Slasher Acts--I no
reason doing this to us/me. Also bad spyer out earth &
image crime nature. ?!why?! to much obstructions and
Inflictions Radiations harmful to True human like me/us all.
Why this??? They are creating Domestic Violence here and
other place! U.S. Police and Security in here Ignore these
man Griff . . .
8, PageID # 135 (quotation marks and emphasis omitted).
De-Amor fails to allege any viable claim over which this
court has subject matter jurisdiction, this court dismisses
her Amended Complaint, but grants her leave to file a Second
Amended Complaint no later than April 30, 2019. This document
must be complete in itself; it may not incorporate by
reference anything previously filed with this court. The
court provides some guidance to De-Amor should she decide to
file a Second Amended Complaint.
De-Amor should attempt to write as legibly as possible. This
court cannot easily decipher De-Amor's cursive
handwriting and encourages her to write in print.
De-Amor should not write in the margins, as that makes it
even harder to determine what she is alleging. If De-Amor
uses the court form but needs more space, she may say,
“See Attachment 1” and then may label a
separate sheet of paper as “Attachment 1” and
continue her writing on “Attachment 1.” Then, if
she comes to a later part of the court form where she again
needs more space, she may say, “See Attachment
2” and may label ...