Singe

1

2

3

4

5

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

9 RENAE SINGE, Case No. 1:25-cv-01590-SKO

10 Plaintiff, FIRST SCREENING ORDER

11 v. (Doc. 1)

12 JESSICA SANDOVAL, et al., THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

13 Defendants.

14

15 Plaintiff Renae Singe, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint on

16 November 19, 2025. (Doc. 1 (“Compl.”).) Upon reviewing the complaint, the Court concludes

17 that the complaint fails to state any cognizable claims.

18 Plaintiff has the following options as to how to proceed. Plaintiff may file an amended

19 complaint, which the Court will screen in due course. Alternatively, Plaintiff may file a statement

20 with the Court stating that Plaintiff wants

21 to stand on this complaint, and have it reviewed by the presiding district judge in which case the

22 Court will issue findings and recommendations to the district judge consistent with this order. If

23 Plaintiff does not file anything, the Court will recommend that the case be dismissed.

24 I. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

25 In cases where the plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the Court is required to screen

26 each case and shall dismiss the case at any time if the Court determines that the allegation of poverty

27 is untrue, or that the action or appeal is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which

28

1 relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

2 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995) (district

3 court has discretion to dismiss in forma pauperis complaint); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193

4 (9th Cir. 1998) (affirming sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim). If the Court determines

5 that a complaint fails to state a claim, leave to amend may be granted to the extent that the

6 deficiencies of the complaint can be cured by amendment. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130

7 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc).

8 In determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the Court uses the same pleading

9 standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). A complaint must contain “a short and

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

11 Detailed factual allegations are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause

12 of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.

13 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). A complaint

14 may be dismissed as a matter of law for failure to state a claim based on (1) the lack of a cognizable

15 legal theory; or (2) insufficient facts under a cognizable legal theory. See Balistreri v. Pacifica

16 Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). The plaintiff must allege a minimum factual and

17 legal basis for each claim that is sufficient to give each defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff’s

18 claims are and the grounds upon which they rest. See, e.g., Brazil v. U.S. Dep’t of Navy, 66 F.3d

19 193, 199 (9th Cir. 1995); McKeever v. Block, 932 F.2d 795, 798 (9th Cir. 1991).

20 In reviewing the pro se complaint, the Court is to liberally construe the pleadings and accept

21 as true all factual allegations contained in the complaint. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94

22 (2007). The Court, however, need not accept a plaintiff’s legal conclusions as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S.

23 at 678. “Where a complaint pleads facts that are merely consistent with a defendant’s liability, it

24 stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.” Id. (quoting

25 Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557) (internal quotation marks omitted).

26 II. SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

27 Plaintiff has used a form “Complaint in a Civil Case” and names “Jessica Sandoval” and

28 Housing [Authority].” (Compl. at 2). Plaintiff has checked the box for “Federal question” in the

1 section entitled “Basis for Jurisdiction.” (Id. at 3). The complaint lists “five hundred thousand” as

2 the amount in controversy and states “She yeld (sic) at me. She lied to me.” as the “Statement of

3 Claim.” (Id. at 5). In the “Relief” section of the form, Plaintiff has written “She embarrassed me

4 and manipulated me. I want her fired.” (Id. at 6).

5 III. DISCUSSION

6 For the reasons discussed below, the Court finds that the complaint does not state any

7 cognizable claims. Plaintiff shall be provided with the legal standards that appear to apply to the

8 claims and will be granted an opportunity to file an amended complaint to correct the identified

9 deficiencies.

10 A. Jurisdiction

11 Plaintiff fails to allege a basis for federal jurisdiction. Federal courts are courts of limited

12 jurisdiction and their power to adjudicate is limited to that granted by Congress. United States v.

13 Sumner, 226 F.3d 1005, 1009 (9th Cir. 2000). Federal courts are, therefore, presumptively without

14 jurisdiction over civil actions, and the burden to establish the contrary rests upon the party asserting

15 jurisdiction. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). “A complaint that

16 lacks a basis for federal-court subject-matter jurisdiction is subject to dismissal.” Spitters v. Miceli,

17 No. 18-CV-04917-LB, 2018 WL 6816110, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2018), report and

18 recommendation adopted, No. 18-04917 WHA, 2018 WL 6822626 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 15, 2018).

19 B. Rule 8

20 Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that a complaint must contain “a short

21 and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P.

22 8(a)(2). Here, Plaintiff’s complaint violates Rule 8 because it does not contain a short and plain

23 statement of the claims demonstrating that they are entitled to relief.

24 Although the Federal Rules use a flexible pleading policy, a Plaintiff is required to give fair

25 notice to the defendants of the basis of their claims and must allege facts that support the elements

26 of the claims plainly and succinctly. A complaint must contain sufficient factual allegations to give

27 the defendant fair notice of the claim and the grounds upon which it rests. Twombly, 550 U.S. at

28

1 555. A complaint is also required to contain sufficient factual content for the Court to draw the

2 reasonable conclusion that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at

3 678.

4 Plaintiff’s complaint falls short of the requirements of Rule 8 in several ways. First, the

5 complaint does not make clear what rights Plaintiff seeks to vindicate.

6 Second, there are no discernable factual allegations beyond the barebones statement of

7 grievance “She yeld (sic) at me. She lied to me.” (Compl. at 5). Plaintiff’s statement of claim does

8 not allege any specific facts giving rise to any specific theory of liability by the named defendants.

9 In short, it is unclear to the Court how the alleged conduct by the defendants establishes the claims

10 that Plaintiff purports to bring against them. “It is Plaintiff’s duty to articulate [their] claim[s]—

11 neither the Court nor the defendants are required to try to decipher what claims Plaintiff is asserting

12 in the action.” Zavala v. Regiosa, No. 1:21-cv-01631-NONE-SKO, 2022 WL 428158, at *2 (E.D.

13 Cal. Feb. 11, 2022).

14 In sum, Plaintiff has failed to plead a short and plain statement of the claim showing that he

15 is entitled to relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). In light of these deficiencies, the Court will grant

16 Plaintiff leave to amend the complaint to allege a valid basis for federal jurisdiction and to set forth

17 their claims more clearly. If Plaintiff elects to amend the complaint, Plaintiff must (1) properly

18 allege a basis for federal jurisdiction and (2) state the legal basis for the claim, identifying how the

19 facts alleged support and show that the defendants committed the violation asserted as the legal

20 basis for the claims. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Simply listing the parties and providing a brief

21 expression of grievance is insufficient.

22 C. Legal Standards

23 In the event Plaintiff amends the complaint, the Court provides the following legal standards

24 that may be relevant to the action:

25 1. Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction

26 Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and their power to adjudicate is limited to

27 that granted by Congress. Sumner, 226 F.3d at 1009. Federal courts are presumptively without

28 jurisdiction over civil actions, and the burden to establish the contrary rests upon the party asserting

1 jurisdiction. Kokkonen, 511 U.S. at 377. Generally, there are two bases for subject matter

2 jurisdiction: federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332.

3 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, federal district courts have federal question jurisdiction over

4 “all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” “A case

5 ‘arises under’ federal law either where federal law creates the cause of action or ‘where the

6 vindication of a right under state law necessarily turn[s] on some construction of federal law.’”

7 Republican Party of Guam v. Gutierrez, 277 F.3d 1086, 1088–89 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting

8 Franchise Tax Bd. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 8–9 (1983)). The presence

9 or absence of federal question jurisdiction is governed by the “well-pleaded complaint rule.”

10 Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 392 (1987). Under this rule, “federal jurisdiction exists

11 only when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiff’s properly

12 pleaded complaint.” Id.

13 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, district courts have diversity jurisdiction only over “all civil

14 actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest

15 and costs,” and the action is between: (1) “citizens of different States;” (2) “citizens of a State and

16 citizens or subjects of a foreign state;” (3) “citizens of different States and in which citizens or

17 subjects of a foreign state are additional parties;” and (4) “a foreign state . . . as plaintiff and citizens

18 of a State or of different States.”

19 The complaint does not provide a basis for federal jurisdiction. If Plaintiff elects to amend

20 the complaint, Plaintiff must allege facts establishing the existence of subject matter jurisdiction to

21 proceed in federal court.

22 D. Leave to Amend

23 The Court has screened Plaintiff’s complaint and finds that it fails to establish federal

24 jurisdiction and fails to state any cognizable claims. Under Rule 15(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of

25 Civil Procedure, “[t]he court should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.”

26 Accordingly, the Court will provide Plaintiff with time to file an amended complaint so Plaintiff

27 can set forth a basis for subject matter jurisdiction and specify the claims with additional factual

28 allegations. Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1130.

1 Plaintiff’s amended complaint should be brief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), but it must identify what

2 causes of action are being pursued, identify the improper actions or basis for liability of each

3 defendant, and the factual allegations must demonstrate plausible claims, Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678–

4 79. Although accepted as true, the “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a right to relief

5 above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citations omitted). Each claim and the

6 involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged.

7 Plaintiff is further advised that an amended complaint supersedes all prior complaints filed

8 in an action, Lacey v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012), and must be “complete

9 in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading,” Local Rule 220. Therefore, in an

10 amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant

11 must be sufficiently alleged.

12 The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “First Amended Complaint,”

13 refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed under penalty of perjury. Although

14 Plaintiff has been given the opportunity to amend, it is not for the purpose of changing the nature

15 of this suit or adding unrelated claims. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (no

16 “buckshot” complaints).

17 Plaintiff has a choice on how to proceed. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint as

18 described above, which will be screened in due course. Alternatively, Plaintiff may choose to stand

19 on their complaint subject to the Court issuing findings and recommendations to a district judge

20 consistent with this order. Lastly, Plaintiff may file a notice of voluntary dismissal.

21 IV. ORDER

22 Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that:

23 1. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall either:

24 a. File a First Amended Complaint;

25 b. Notify the Court in writing that Plaintiff wants to stand on the current

26 complaint; or

27 c. File a notice of voluntary dismissal.

28

1 2. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, Plaintiff shall caption the amended

2 complaint “First Amended Complaint” and refer to case number 1:25-cv-01590-

3 SKO.

4 3. Failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6

7 Dated: November 24, 2025 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28