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
United States District CourtFor the Northern District of CaliforniaIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CHARLES MUHAMMAD,
Plaintiff,
v.
DON KASSIG, et al.
Defendants
/
No. C 06-5362 MMC
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; DENYING
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS; DENYING
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER
Before the Court is plaintiff Charles Muhammad’s complaint, application to proceed
in forma pauperis, and application for a temporary restraining order, each filed August 31,
2006. When a party seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, the district court is required to
dismiss the case if the court determines that the plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
To state a claim upon which relief can be granted, a plaintiff must comply with Rule
8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires that a complaint contain a
“short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” See
Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 8(a)(2). Plaintiff’s complaint fails to comply with this requirement.
Plaintiff’s complaint, in addition to listing the names of the defendants, disclosing plaintiff’s
mailing address, and pleading a prayer for relief, alleges only that “[d]efendants violated the
Fourth Amendment,” “[d]efendants violated the Fifth Amendment,” “[d]efendants violated
Case 3:06-cv-05362-MMC Document 4 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 1 of 2
Muhammad v. Kassig et al
Doc. 4
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
2
the Sixth Amendment,” and “[d]efendants violated the Eighth Amendment.” There being no
factual allegations in the compliant indicating how each particular defendant violated the
four constitutional provisions referenced in the complaint, plaintiff has failed t