Steele v. MSNBC ( 2024 )

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 ROBERT STEELE, Case No. 2:23-cv-02153-JAD-NJK 6 Plaintiff, ORDER 7 v. [Docket No. 1] 8 MSNBC, et al., 9 Defendants. 10 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and has requested 11 authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. Docket No. 1. Plaintiff also 12 submitted a complaint. Docket No. 1-2.1 13 I. In Forma Pauperis Application 14 Plaintiff filed the affidavit required by § 1915(a). Docket No. 1. Plaintiff has shown an 15 inability to prepay fees and costs or give security for them. Accordingly, the request to proceed 16 in forma pauperis will be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Clerk’s Office is further 17 INSTRUCTED to file the complaint on the docket. The Court will now review Plaintiff’s 18 complaint. 19 II. Screening the Complaint 20 Upon granting an application to proceed in forma pauperis, courts additionally screen the 21 complaint pursuant to § 1915(e). Federal courts are given the authority to dismiss a case if the 22 action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, 23 or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). 24 When a court dismisses a complaint under § 1915, the plaintiff should be given leave to amend the 25 complaint with directions as to curing its deficiencies, unless it is clear from the face of the 26 27 28 1 The Court liberally construes the filings of pro se litigants. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). 1 complaint that the deficiencies could not be cured by amendment. See Cato v. United States, 70 2 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 3 Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for dismissal of a complaint 4 for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Review under Rule 12(b)(6) is 5 essentially a ruling on a question of law. See Chappel v. Lab. Corp. of Am., 232 F.3d 719, 723 6 (9th Cir. 2000). A properly pled complaint must provide a short and plain statement of the claim 7 showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 8 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Although Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, it 9 demands “more than labels and conclusions” or a “formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause 10 of action.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 11 286 (1986)). The court must accept as true all well-pled factual allegations contained in the 12 complaint, but the same requirement does not apply to legal conclusions. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. 13 Mere recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported only by conclusory allegations, do 14 not suffice. Id. at 678. Secondly, where the claims in the complaint have not crossed the line from 15 conceivable to plausible, the complaint should be dismissed. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. 16 Allegations of a pro se complaint are held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted 17 by lawyers. Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 & n.7 (9th Cir. 2010) (finding that liberal 18 construction of pro se pleadings is required after Twombly and Iqbal). 19 Plaintiff alleges that Defendants are conspiring with the Hamas terrorist organization to 20 use marketing techniques to alter the minds of children and undermine the United States Marines. 21 Docket No. 1-2 at 1. Pro se litigants have no authority to represent anyone other than themselves. 22 See Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 664 (9th Cir. 2008) (non-attorney plaintiff may not 23 attempt to pursue a claim on behalf of others in a representative capacity). Additionally, Plaintiff 24 must allege his own specific injury to demonstrate standing. “In accordance with Article III of the 25 United States Constitution, a plaintiff must have standing to bring a claim before a federal court.” 26 Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992). To satisfy Article III’s standing 27 requirement, a plaintiff must assert (1) an injury in fact that is (a) concrete and particularized and 28 (b) actual or imminent; (2) a causal connection between the injury and a defendant’s conduct; and 1 (3) a likelihood that judicial relief will redress the injury. Id. Plaintiff bears the burden of 2 establishing standing. Id. Plaintiff has alleged no injury and, looking at Plaintiff’s complaint in 3 the light most favorable to him, any injury alleged is that of other individuals and entities, which 4 Plaintiff cannot use to bring a claim as a pro se litigant. 5 Accordingly, Plaintiff fails to establish standing to bring this case in this Court. Although 6 it appears unlikely that Plaintiff could cure the deficiencies identified herein, the Court will provide 7 him one opportunity to do so if he believes he can. 8 III. Conclusion 9 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 10 1. Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. Plaintiff is not required 11 to pay the filing fee. Plaintiff is permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without 12 the necessity of prepayment of any additional fees or costs or the giving of a security 13 therefor. This order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis shall not extend to the 14 issuance and/or service of subpoenas at government expense. 15 2. The Clerk’s Office is INSTRUCTED to file Plaintiff’s complaint on the docket. 16 3. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff will have until February 17 6, 2024, to file an amended complaint, if the noted deficiencies can be corrected. If 18 Plaintiff chooses to amend the complaint, Plaintiff is informed that the Court cannot 19 refer to a prior pleading (i.e., the original complaint) in order to make the amended 20 complaint complete. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint 21 supersedes the original complaint. Local Rule 15-1(a) requires that an amended 22 complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. Once a plaintiff 23 files an amended complaint, the original complaint no longer serves any function in the 24 case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and 25 the involvement of each Defendant must be sufficiently alleged. 26 27 28 1 4. Failure to comply with this order will result in the recommended dismissal of this 2 case. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: January 9, 2024 he. nited States. agistrate Judge , é 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28