United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division
OPINION AND ORDER
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN, J.
Abdul Khalis Calhoun is proceeding pro se in this
civil rights action. On December 14, 2017, he filed an
Amended Complaint, a Memorandum of Points and Authorities, a
Declaration of Service of his Amended Complaint, and a Jury
Trial Demand for Resolution of Dispute in Commercial Law.
Portland Police Bureau ("PPB") and American Medical
Response ("AMR") Defendants each filed Motions to
Dismiss the Amended Complaint under Rules 12(b) and 41(b),
and PPB Defendants moved to strike documents Mr. Calhoun
filed with his Amended Complaint and in support of his
Response opposing the Motions to Dismiss. The Parties have
fully briefed the Motions, and as explained below, I GRANT
Defendants' Motions to Dismiss [55 and 56], and DENY the
PPB Defendants' Motions to Strike [55 and 64].
attorney represented Mr. Calhoun when he filed this case in
June 2017. The initial Complaint named AMR, Inc., the City of
Portland, Joshua Dery, Kyle Stutevoss, Ronald Hoesly, and D.
Sean Burns as defendants. (Compl., dkt. no. 1). Mr.
Calhoun's then-counsel prepared a summons for issue by
the Clerk of the Court. Mr. Calhoun's then-counsel
directed the summons for AMR, Inc. to Lori A.E. Evans, who
the summons described as "AMR's authorized
representative." (Summons, dkt. no.3).
September, Mr. Calhoun's attorney moved to withdraw.
(Mot. to Withdraw as Counsel, dkt. no. 27). During the
hearing on the motion to withdraw at which Mr. Calhoun, his
then-attorney, and counsel for Defendants personally
appeared, the Court granted Mr. Calhoun's
then-counsel's motion to withdraw and gave Mr. Calhoun
sixty days to find new counsel. (Min. of Proceedings, dkt.
no. 33). At a telephone status conference in early December,
Mr. Calhoun indicated he planned to proceed pro se,
and the Court granted his oral request for leave to file an
Amended Complaint but specified that the Amended Complaint
could not add any new parties to the case. (Min. of
Proceedings, dkt. no. 50). Shortly after the status
conference, Mr. Calhoun filed his Amended Complaint, which
Defendants now move to dismiss.
must liberally construe documents filed by pro se
litigants, and must hold a. pro se complaint,
"however inartfully pleaded, " to a "less
stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by
lawyers." Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94
(2007) (citations omitted). Cf. Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 8(e)
("Pleadings must be construed as to do justice").
The rule, however, "applies only to a plaintiffs factual
allegations." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S.
319, 330 n.9 (1989). '"[A] liberal interpretation of
a civil rights complaint may not supply essential elements of
the claim that were not initially pled.'" Brims
v. Nat'l Credit Union Admin., 122 F.3d 1251, 1257
(9th Cir. 1997) (quoting Ivey v. Bd. of Regents, 673
F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982)).
Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short
and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled to relief." Specific facts are not necessary,
but a plaintiff must allege facts that establish "more
than a sheet possibility that a defendant has acted
unlawfully" and "raise a right to relief above the
speculative level." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
662, 678 (2009). Put another way, a claim for relief must be
plausible, not just possible. Id. When ruling on a
defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a
claim brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6),
a judge must accept as true all of the factual allegations
contained in the complaint. Id.
Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(5) allows a judge to dismiss a
complaint for insufficient service of process. A plaintiff
must serve process on a defendant within 120 days after a
complaint is filed. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m).
Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) allows a defendant to move to
dismiss claims against it if a plaintiff fails to comply with
a court order.
Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) allows a court to strike
"redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous
The PPB Defendants' Motions to Strike.
Defendants move to strike the "Citation" and
Memorandum of Points and Authorities that Mr. Calhoun filed
along with his Amended Complaint as well as the document
identified as a copy of the original Complaint in this matter
that Mr. Calhoun filed in support of his Response in
Opposition to the Motions to Dismiss. While the PPB
Defendants correctly identify the ...