United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND
BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge.
matter comes before the Court on review of Plaintiff June
Elizabeth Brogdon's (“Brogdon”) amended
complaint. Dkt. 8.
April 22, 2019, Brogdon filed a motion to proceed in
forma pauperis and a proposed complaint. Dkts. 1, 1-1.
On May 6, 2019, United States Magistrate Judge Theresa Fricke
granted Brogdon's motion and recommended that the Court
review the complaint before ordering service. Dkt. 4. On May
30, 2019, the Court identified deficiencies in Brogdon's
complaint, dismissed the complaint, and granted Brogdon leave
to amend. Dkt. 7. On June 10, 2019, Brogdon filed an amended
complaint. Dkt. 8.
alleges that Defendants illegally seized her children in May
2012 and requests that the Court (1) clear her record with
the Children's Administration, (2) reverse the adoptions
of her children, (3) restore her parental rights, (4) return
her children, and (5) award actual and punitive damages.
Id. at 6.
review of the complaint, the Court finds that dismissal is
warranted. See Omar v. Sea Land Serv., Inc., 813
F.2d 986, 991 (9th Cir. 1987) (“A trial court may
dismiss a claim sua sponte under Fed.R.Civ.P.
12(b)(6) . . . . Such a dismissal may be made without notice
where the claimant cannot possibly win relief.”).
Brogdon's claims for violations of her constitutional
rights are insufficient because they are conclusory. To state
a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff must allege
facts showing how a defendant caused or personally
participated in causing the harm alleged in the complaint.
Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628, 633 (9th Cir. 1988). A
person subjects another to a deprivation of a constitutional
right when committing an affirmative act, participating in
another's affirmative act, or failing to perform an act
which is legally required. Johnson v. Duffy, 588
F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978). Sweeping conclusory
allegations against an official are insufficient to state a
claim for relief. Leer, 844 F.2d at 633. Further, a
§ 1983 suit cannot be based on vicarious liability alone
but must allege the defendant's own conduct violated the
plaintiff's civil rights. City of Canton v.
Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 385-90 (1989).
case, Brogdon fails to state a claim against any individual
defendant or provide any detailed allegations against the
entity defendants. The amended complaint lists only the
Children's Administration as a defendant, which is not
subject to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Will v.
Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 64, 71
(1989)(“Neither a State nor its officials acting in
their official capacities are ‘persons' under
§ 1983.”). Moreover, all of the alleged violations
appear to have happened in 2012 and any § 1983 claim
would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
See Montero v. Washington State Patrol, C05-1092C,
2005 WL 3500832, at *3 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 21, 2005) (“the
Court finds that Plaintiffs' cause of action under §
1983 is subject to a three-year limitations period.”).
Therefore, the Court sua sponte dismisses her
final question is whether the Court should grant Brogdon
leave to amend. “A pro se litigant must be given leave
to amend his or her complaint, and some notice of its
deficiencies, unless it is absolutely clear that the
deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by
amendment.” Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d
1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). However, “[t]he trial
court's discretion to deny [leave to amend] is
particularly broad where, as here, a plaintiff previously has
been granted leave to amend.” Griggs v. Pace Am.
Grp., Inc., 170 F.3d 877, 879 (9th Cir. 1999).
case, the Court finds that leave to amend is not warranted.
The Court granted Brogdon leave to amend and Brogdon failed
to correct the identified deficiencies. Additionally, Brogon
asserted similar claims in a previous suit that was
dismissed. See Brodgon v. State of Washington,
C16-6017-RBL, (W.D. Wash. April 10, 2017) (order denying
motion to proceed in forma pauperis). Therefore, the
Court dismisses Brogdon's complaint for failure to state
a claim and without leave to amend. The Clerk shall terminate
the pending motions, enter a JUDGMENT, and close this case.