1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. C 06-4893 JF (HRL)
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ETC.
(JFLC2)
NOT FOR CITATION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
CHARLES MUHAMMAD,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE, and DEPARTMENT OF
TREASURY,
Defendants.
Case Number C 06-4893 JF (HRL)
ORDER (1) DENYING
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS; (2) DISMISSING
COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO
AMEND; AND (3) DENYING
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER
[re: doc. nos. 2 and 3]
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
Plaintiff Charles Muhammad (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, commenced this action by
filing a one-page document entitled “ORIGINAL PETITION” on August 14, 2006. This
document, which the Court construes as a civil complaint, alleges that Defendants – the United
States Departments of Labor, Commerce and Treasury – violated Plaintiff’s rights under the
Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the United States Constitution, requests a jury
trial and damages, and requests leave to proceed on behalf of a class. The complaint does not,
Case 5:06-cv-04893-JF Document 5 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 1 of 5
Muhammad v. Department of Labor et al
Doc. 5
Dockets.Justia.com
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1 Plaintiff filed a similar complaint against other federal agencies on August 15, 2006.
That complaint is addressed in a separate order.
2
Case No. C 06-4893 JF (HRL)
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ETC.
(JFLC2)
however, allege any facts in support of these allegations.1
In conjunction with filing the complaint in this action, Plaintiff filed an application to
proceed in forma pauperis. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, a district court may authorize the
commencement of a civil action in