Strubel v. SAIF Corporation et al, No. 6:2018cv00881 - Document 16 (D. Or. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER AND OPINION: The Notice, which the Court construes as an Amended Complaint, 15 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court again defers ruling on plaintiff's Application to Proceed IFP 2 . Plaintiff is granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint within thirty days of the date of this order. Signed on 10/23/2019 by Judge Ann L. Aiken. (Mailed to Pro Se party on 10/23/2019.) (ck)

Download PDF

Strubel v. SAIF Corporation et al Doc. 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION JACK ALFRED STRUBEL, JR., Civ. No. 6:18-cv-00881-AA ORDER AND OPINION Plaintiff, v. SAIF CORPORATION and CHEMEKETA COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Defendants. AIKEN, District Judge. The Court previously dismissed plaintiffs complaint without prejudice because the complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to establish this Court's subject-matter jurisdiction over the case. (doc. 10) The Court did so in considering plaintiffs Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("IFP"). (doc. 2) In screening plaintiffs complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court found that plaintiff failed to allege either a federal cause of action or diversity between the Page 1 -OPINION & ORDER Dockets.Justia.com parties. The Court also outlined other deficiencies and granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. As part of its previous order, the Court partially granted plaintiffs request for appointment of pro bono counsel. Counsel was appointed for the limited purpose of reviewing the case with plaintiff and discuss his options to proceed. (doc. 11) That appointment has occurred and been completed. (doc. 12) Plaintiff subsequently filed a notice styled as "Opinions and Regulations." (doc. 15) In the interest of fairness, the Court construes this document as an amended complaint. As outlined the last order, plaintiff alleges that he suffered an injury in the course of his employment with defendant Chemeketa Community College and then tried to access state provided worker's compensation benefits. It is unclear whether he was denied or granted benefits. He does allege that he was only examined by one doctor provided by defendant, SAIF Corporation ("SAIF''). Plaintiff alleges that he requested to be seen by a second doctor, but the request was denied. Plaintiff alleges that he continues to suffer from his injuries, and he expects "to be compensated for this trauma in the amount of 5 million dollars." Pl's. Not. 2. In his notice, plaintiff alleges that his claim is based on a "constitutional right to be given a second opinion." Id. The Court notes that it can find no such right in the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, or case law. Again, the limited nature of the factual allegations makes it difficult for the Court to determine precisely what happened regarding plaintiffs injury and the actions of defendant SAIF. At a minimum, this subsequent notice fails to satisfy the requirement that a Page 2 -OPINION & ORDER civil complaint must include a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Further, plaintiff claims to have "went through State Court, appeals court and the Supreme Court for the State of Oregon." Pl's Not. 2. There are not sufficient facts in plaintiffs filings to discern whether he lost that case or if that determination is at the core of the present action. As mentioned in the previous order, it is likely that this action is barred by the Rooher-Feldman doctrine which bars federal courts, other than the U.S. Supreme Court, from hearing cases aimed at correcting state court judgments. Rooher v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 41516 (1923); Dist. of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 483 n. 16 (1983). The Court remains aware of the latitude given to pro se litigants. Thus, the Court grants plaintiff leave to draft another amended complaint. In drafting his amended complaint, plaintiff should take care to include sufficient factual detail to allow the Court to better understand his claims, although not so much detail that the amended complaint is not "short and plain," as required by Rule 8. Plaintiff is also reminded that he should plead an appropriate legal basis which would allow this Court to exercise its limited jurisdiction. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Notice, which the Court construes as an Amended Complaint, (doc. 15) is DISMISSED "WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court again defers ruling on plaintiffs Application to Proceed IFP. (doc. 2) Plaintiff is Page 3 -OPINION & ORDER granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint within thirty days of the date of this order. It is so ORDERED this .::?3 ~y of October, 2019. ANN AIKEN United States District Judge Page 4 -OPINION & ORDER

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.