(GGH) (PS) Fallon v. United States Government, No. 2:2006cv00544 - Document 3 (E.D. Cal. 2006)

Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge John F. Moulds on 03/21/06. ORDERING that Plaintiff's 03/15/06 Application to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is GRANTED. Additiionally is is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's complaint filed 03/15/06, be dismissed with prejudice. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr., (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF

(GGH) (PS) Fallon v. United States Government Doc. 3 Case 2:06-cv-00544-FCD-PAN Document 3 Filed 03/22/2006 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 DAVID ANTHONY FALLON, 13 14 15 16 17 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0544 FCD PAN PS vs. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, ORDER and Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / 18 Plaintiff proceeds in pro se and seeks authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to 19 proceed in forma pauperis. This action was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302(c)(21). 20 Plaintiff’s affidavit demonstrates he is unable to prepay fees and costs or give 21 security thereof. Accordingly, plaintiff’s March 15, 2006 application to proceed in forma 22 pauperis is granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 23 A federal court must dismiss the complaint of a plaintiff proceeding in forma 24 pauperis if at any time the court determines the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a 25 claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is 26 immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), (iii). In addition, the complaint 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:06-cv-00544-FCD-PAN Document 3 Filed 03/22/2006 Page 2 of 3 1 must demonstrate the court’s jurisdiction and comply with general rules of pleading as set forth 2 in Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). 3 A complaint, or portion thereof, should only be dismissed for failure to state a 4 claim if it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the claim or 5 claims that would entitle him to relief. Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984) 6 (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957)); Palmer v. Roosevelt Lake Log Owners 7 Ass'n, 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 8 court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Rex 9 Hosp. Trustees, 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976), construe the pleading in the light most favorable to 10 plaintiff, and resolve all doubts in plaintiff's favor, Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 11 (1969). 12 The complaint seeks “five trillion dollars” from the U.S. Government for the 13 denial of medical treatment to plaintiff after he was beaten during an armed robbery in 1980. 14 The complaint and attached “statement of non-medical treatment” allege that the beating 15 occurred upon plaintiff’s release from a California prison; that plaintiff reported the matter (and 16 submitted a five-page handwritten document) to the local police department; that an officer 17 escorted plaintiff to a nearby hospital where a physician explained “there was nothing they could 18 do” and advised plaintiff to “sleep in that employee’s car, which was in the Parking Lot;” that 19 when plaintiff woke up the next day “after passing out,” he was left with a permanent scar 20 attributable to his lack of treatment. The complaint also alleges that plaintiff’s imprisonment was 21 due to his mistaken belief he could break the law after witnessing the shooting death of his father 22 by plaintiff’s brother without legal repercussion. 23 This complaint, like many of plaintiff’s prior complaints filed in this court, fails to 24 state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff’s claims are legally frivolous. 28 25 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii). See Nietzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-28 (1989) (a 26 complaint is frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 if it contains “fanciful factual allegations” and 2 Case 2:06-cv-00544-FCD-PAN Document 3 Filed 03/22/2006 Page 3 of 3 1 “inarguable legal conclusion[s]”). Amendment of the complaint would not cure these 2 deficiencies. The complaint should therefore be dismissed with prejudice. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. Plaintiff's March 15, 2006 application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. 5 Additionally, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 6 1. Plaintiff’s complaint filed March 15, 2006, be dismissed with prejudice. 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 8 Judge assigned to this case. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Written objections may be filed within ten 9 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. The document should be 10 captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The failure to 11 file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 12 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 13 DATED: March 21, 2006. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 006:fall0544.ord&fr 22 23 24 25 26 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.