United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
ORDER RENOTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA
J. BRYAN, United States District Judge
matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to
Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Dkt. 3) and on review of
the proposed complaint (Dkt. 1). The Court has considered the
application and the remainder of the file herein.
August 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed a proposed civil rights
complaint and an application to proceed in forma
pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without paying
the $400 filing fee. Dkt. 1. Plaintiff was notified by the
Clerk of the Court that his IFP application was insufficient.
Dkt. 2. Plaintiff has now filed the proper form. Dkt. 3.
for Granting Application for IFP.
district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed
in forma pauperis upon completion of a proper
affidavit of indigency. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(a). However, the court has broad discretion in denying
an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598 (9th Cir.
1963), cert. denied 375 U.S. 845 (1963). A district
court may deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis at
the outset if it appears from the face of the proposed
complaint that the action is frivolous or without
merit.” Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152 F.3d
1113 (9th Cir. 1998)(quoting Tripati v. First
Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th
of the Complaint.
Court has carefully reviewed the proposed complaint in this
matter. Because Plaintiff filed this complaint pro
se, the Court has construed the pleadings liberally and
has afforded Plaintiff the benefit of any doubt. See
Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dep't, 839 F.2d
621, 623 (9th Cir.1988).
proposed complaint names the Pierce County, Washington
Corrections Center (“jail') as the Defendant. Dkt.
1. Other than stating, “no other defendants are
involved, ” (Dkt. 1, at 3), Plaintiff does not plead
any facts or request any relief in his proposed complaint.
Dkt. 1. He attached a form to the proposed complaint entitled
“Claim for Damages - Pierce County.” Dkt. 1. In
this “Claim for Damages” form, Plaintiff asserts
that “doctors came to the jail performed 2 surgeries
then after multiple complaints that my finger was injured,
they ignored my complaint and said that I was asulanated
[sic], ignore me, then rushed me to Tac-General Hosp. for
emerg. surgery for 7 days.” Dkt. 1, at 5. Plaintiff
then states they “then sent me back with a pic [sic]
line IV back to jail with population.” Id. To
his proposed complaint, Plaintiff also attaches a Washington
State Department of Heath form entitled, “Health Care
Providers and Facilities Complaint Form.” Dkt. 1, at
7-9. In this form, when asked to describe his complaint,
Plaintiff contends that:
I requested several times for medical attention. I kept
complaining about my finger, felt like it was falling off.
Took 2 mos. To get medical attn. They did 2 surgeries in
corr. fac. then noticed how bad the injuries were, then took
me to Tac. General had surg. there, after 6-7 days they
released me back to corr. fac. with pic line IV in a corr.
ctr. that it could have gotten worse because of the place
they put me back in. It all stemed [sic] from them saying
they didn't take me serious and the condition was bad,
because they were talking about amputation of finger because
they waited to [sic] long and the infection got in my joint
and blood stream.
Dkt. 1, at 9.
the proposed complaint, the Court cannot fully determine
whether it has jurisdiction, the basis of the claim[s], or
what relief the Plaintiff wants. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8
pleading that states a claim for relief must contain:
(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the
court's jurisdiction, unless the court already has
jurisdiction and the claim needs ...