Case 3:17-cv-01611-WQH-WVG Document 10 Filed 09/01/17 PageID.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PETER RONALD SOLLENNE, CASE NO. 17cv1611-LAB (BLM) 11 Plaintiff, 12 ORDER OF DISMISSAL vs. 13 JAY K. BRAY, et al., 14 Defendants. 15
16 The Court ordered Peter Sollenne to file a memorandum explaining why the Court 17 shouldn’t dismiss this action for lack of jurisdiction, and for failure to comply with the basic 18 rules of pleading. Sollenne responded that the Court has “jurisdiction over this matter in 19 Equity” under The New Federal Equity Rules of 1912. That’s incorrect and insufficient. 20 When courts adopted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938, actions in law 21 and equity simply became a civil action. And to file a civil action, litigants need to comply 22 with the Federal Rules. In particular, that means filing a complaint that contains “a short and 23 plain statement” laying out why the court has jurisdiction to hear the dispute, and, why the 24 plaintiff is entitled to relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. 25 The Court must “liberally construe the inartful pleading of pro se litigants.” Boag v. 26 MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982). But this isn’t a case of inartful pleading. Sollenne 27 hasn’t explained why this court has jurisdiction, what his claim is, or why he’s entitled to 28 relief. Accordingly, the action is dismissed without prejudice. If Sollenne thinks he can fix
Case 3:17-cv-01611-WQH-WVG Document 10 Filed 09/01/17 PageID.
1 the problems the Court’s identified, then he may file an amended complaint on or before 2 September 14, 2017. If he fails to file a complaint that complies with the Federal Rules, the 3 Court will dismiss the action.
4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated:
6 HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28