Briggs v. Addenton ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 RONNIE L. BRIGGS, Case No. 23-cv-04919-EMC (EMC) 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, ORDER DENYING IFP 9 v. APPLICATION WITHOUT PREJUDICE 10 BRIAN ADDENTON, et al., Docket No. 6 11 Defendants. 12 13 Plaintiff Ronnie Briggs filed the instant action against Brian Addenton, Aaron Baker, 14 “Anderson,” the Pittsburg Police Department, and Julie Nie. See Docket No. 5 (“Complaint”). 15 The Complaint is dismissed because Mr. Briggs does not identify any wrong committed by 16 any Defendant. Mr. Briggs states that “Brian Addenton played with the court paperwork and had 17 me sent here,” but does not explain how either action harmed Mr. Briggs. See id. at 2. Mr. Briggs 18 does not identify any action taken by the other Defendants, much less a wrongful action. See id. 19 The Court will give Mr. Briggs one chance to amend to state a claim. If Mr. Briggs 20 chooses to amend, he must identify what each Defendant did; where and when this occurred; and 21 how the Defendant’s actions harmed Mr. Briggs. Mr. Briggs is encouraged to write clearly and in 22 natural language. The initial Complaint is largely illegible, and the Court cannot act on Mr. 23 Briggs’s allegations if it does not know what those allegations are. 24 Mr. Briggs also applied for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See Docket No. 6. 25 Mr. Briggs’s IFP application is DENIED. First, the application is incomplete. Mr. Briggs did not 26 “submit a certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent),” as he is 27 required to do. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (requiring such a statement for all prisoners). Second, Mr. 1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (“In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a 2 civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, 3 while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United 4 States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim 5 upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious 6 physical injury.”). The Court has discovered the following strikes: 7 • Briggs v. Addenton et al., Case No. 20-1117-WHA (N.D. Cal. March 2, 2020) 8 (dismissing claims as “delusional and clearly baseless,” and failing to state a claim 9 under § 1983); 10 • Briggs v. City of Pittsburg, Case No. 20-1439-WHA (N.D. Cal. May 4, 2020) 11 (dismissing for failure to state a claim); 12 • Briggs v. Addenton et al., Case No. 20-1440-WHA (N.D. Cal. May 4, 2020) 13 (dismissing for failure to state a claim); and 14 • Briggs v. Addenton et al., Case No. 20-7165-WHA (N.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2020) 15 (dismissing for failure to state a claim). 16 Mr. Briggs may renew his IFP application if he both files the required account statement, and 17 shows either that he faces imminent danger or that at least two of the identified cases are not 18 strikes. 19 I. CONCLUSION 20 The Complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. Mr. Briggs must file an amended 21 complaint that complies with the directions in this order no later than November 1, 2024, and 22 must include the caption and civil case number used in this order and the words AMENDED 23 COMPLAINT on the first page. 24 Mr. Briggs is cautioned that his amended complaint must be a complete statement of his 25 claims, except that he may not repeat claims the court has dismissed without leave to amend and 26 may not repeat allegations against defendants the court has dismissed from this action. See Lacey 27 v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc) (“For claims dismissed with 1 amended complaint to preserve them for appeal. But for any claims voluntarily dismissed, we will 2 consider those claims to be waived if not repled.”). If Mr. Briggs does not file an amended 3 complaint by the deadline, the case will be dismissed with prejudice. 4 Mr. Briggs’s IFP application is DENIED for the reasons stated above. Docket No. 6. Mr. 5 Briggs may renew his IFP application no later than November 1, 2024, or alternatively may pay 6 the filing fee for this action. If Mr. Briggs does not take one of these steps by the deadline, this 7 action will be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee. 8 This order disposes of Docket No. 6. 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: September 19, 2024 13 14 ______________________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN 15 United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27