# Brown v. Gerston > District Court, D. Nevada · April 2, 2024 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10302213 ## Case - **Court:** District Court, D. Nevada - **Decided:** April 2, 2024 - **Opinion:** 100trialcourt - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10302213 ## Opinion text 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * * 7 Jessica Brown, Case No. 2:24-cv-00472-MMD-BNW 8 Plaintiff, ORDER 9 v. 10 Joseph Gerston, 11 Defendant. 12 13 Pro se plaintiff Jessica Brown filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis on March 14 29, 2024. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff submitted the affidavit required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) showing 15 an inability to prepay fees or costs or give security for them. Accordingly, this Court will grant 16 her request to proceed in forma pauperis. This Court now screens Plaintiff’s complaint. 17 I. ANALYSIS 18 A. Screening standard 19 Upon granting a request to proceed in forma pauperis, a court must screen the complaint 20 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). In screening the complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims 21 and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be 22 granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. 23 § 1915(e)(2). Dismissal for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard 24 for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 25 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient 26 factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft 27 v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints and may only 1 his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678). 3 In considering whether the complaint is sufficient to state a claim, all allegations of 4 material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Wyler 5 Summit P’ship v. Turner Broad. Sys. Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). 6 Although the standard under Rule 12(b)(6) does not require detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff 7 must provide more than mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 8 544, 555 (2007). A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action is insufficient. Id. 9 Unless it is clear the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured through amendment, a pro se 10 plaintiff should be given leave to amend the complaint with notice regarding the complaint’s 11 deficiencies. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 12 B. Screening the Complaint 13 Plaintiff sues Joseph Gerston for a violation of her due process rights. ECF No. 1-1 at 3. 14 Plaintiff checked the box on the form indicating the violation was related to “access to the court.” 15 Id. Beyond that, it is hard to decipher Plaintiff’s handwriting. As a result, it is not entirely clear 16 exactly what are the underlying alleged facts substantiating the claim. As a result, this Court will 17 dismiss her complaint with leave to amend. 18 C. Instructions for Amendment 19 Plaintiff is advised that her handwriting must be neat. In addition, she must specify the 20 facts that give rise to the alleged violation and the way in which Mr. Gerston is alleged to be 21 involved in the violation. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading 22 policy, Plaintiff still must give defendants fair notice of each of the claims she is alleging against 23 each defendant. 24 Plaintiff is also advised that if she chooses to file an amended complaint, the original 25 complaint no longer serves any function in this case. As such, if she files an amended complaint, 26 each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be alleged sufficiently. The court cannot 27 refer to a prior pleading or to other documents to make his amended complaint complete. The 1 || amended complaint must be complete in and of itself without reference to prior pleadings or to 2 || other documents. 3 || IL. CONCLUSION 4 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis 5 || CECF No. 4) is GRANTED. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly instructed to detach and 7 || separately file Plaintiff's complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 8 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed with leave to amend. If Plaintiff 9 || chooses to amend, she must do so by May 3, 2024. Failure to amend by that deadline may result 10 |) in a recommendation that the case be dismissed. 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly instructed to mail a copy of 12 || the Civil Rights Complaint form approved by this District for use by inmates. 13 14 DATED: April 2, 2024 □□ pr la BRENDA WEKSLER 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10302213. Public record. Not legal advice.