United States District Court, W.D. Washington
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
L. GLEASON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Ellen McCracken has filed an amended complaint at Docket 13
pursuant to this Court's order at Dockets 10 and 11. For
the reasons set forth below, this Court dismisses this action
with prejudice for failure to state a claim.
the Court addresses the fact that this case has been filed
under seal. Ms. McCracken has asserted that this is a qui tam
suit under the False Claims Act. That Act prohibits false or
fraudulent claims for payment to the United States, and
authorizes civil actions to remedy such fraud, including
actions by private individuals in the Government's
name. Neither Ms. McCracken's original
complaint nor her more recently amended complaint at Docket
13, liberally construed, constitute any such claim.
Therefore, the entire case should be unsealed. Unsealing the
case is particularly warranted so that this case is in the
public record in the event Ms. McCracken seeks to file
another case with these same or similar
Court's order of May 9, 2018, the Court dismissed Ms.
McCracken's first complaint, but accorded her an
opportunity to file an amended complaint. The order gave Ms.
McCracken the following directions as to how to draft a
complaint that states a claim upon which relief may be
[A] complaint should set out separate claims for relief. Each
claim should identify the specific harm that [Ms. McCracken]
is alleging has occurred, when and where that harm was
caused, who she is alleging caused that specific harm, and
what specific law she is alleging was violated as to that
specific harm. If she is asserting a claim against a judicial
officer, she should explain why she believes the doctrine of
judicial immunity would not apply to that
McCracken has not complied with these directions and her
amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted. She has completed a form Complaint for
Violation of Civil Rights, which repeatedly references a
document she titles a “Relator's Report.”
That document is a 198-page document that she filed with the
amended complaint at Docket 15. On review, it appears to
contain very much the same information, if not identical
statements in a somewhat different order, as the first
198-page complaint that the Court previously rejected for
failure to state a claim. In the section of the complaint
form where she is asked to “[s]tate as briefly as
possible the facts of your case, ” she responded,
“Ellen M. McCracken cannot relive these incidents
without suffering PTSD. She needs medical care, supervision,
support, and legal assistance by appointment of counsel to
revisit the scene of the crimes.” When asked to
specify the “date and approximate time” that the
events giving rise to the claim occurred, she responded
“2008-2018.” These are only a few examples of the
many deficiencies in the filing. The amended complaint has
many of the same deficiencies as the original complaint and
will be dismissed for failure to state a claim.
complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim, the
Court “should freely give leave when justice so
requires.” However, leave to amend is properly denied
as to those claims for which amendment would be
futile. “Leave to amend may also be denied
for repeated failure to cure deficiencies by previous
amendment.” “The district court's discretion
to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where plaintiff
has previously amended the complaint.” Because Ms.
McCracken has repeatedly failed to state a valid claim for
relief, both in this Court and in the prior cases described
in this Court's previous order, the dismissal of the
amended complaint shall be with prejudice and without leave
IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
Clerk of Court is directed to unseal this case, as it is not
a qui tam action under the False Claims Act.
Complaint filed at Docket 13 is hereby DISMISSED with
prejudice for failure to state a claim. Leave to amend is not
granted, for the reasons set forth herein.
Clerk of Court is directed to enter a final judgment
 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a).