United States District Court, D. Oregon
Justine Hamburg Plaintiff Pro Se
OPINION & ORDER
HERNANDEZ, District Judge
plaintiff Justine Hamburg brings this action against
"D.H.S. E. County, " Scott Harris "D.D.A,
" and possibly other Defendants. Plaintiff moves to
proceed in forma pauperis. Because she has no
appreciable income or assets, I grant the motion. However,
for the reasons explained below, I dismiss the Complaint.
Further, as explained below, I deny Plaintiff's motion
for appointment of counsel.
complaint filed in forma pauperis may be dismissed
at any time, including before service of process, if the
court determines that:
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal-
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989) (sua sponte
dismissals under section 1915 "spare prospective
defendants the inconvenience and expense of answering"
complaints which are "frivolous, malicious, or
repetitive"); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122,
1126 n.7 (9th Cir. 2000) (section 1915(e) applies to all
in forma pauperis complaints, not just those filed
by inmates). A complaint is frivolous "where it lacks an
arguable basis in either law or in fact."
Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 325.
filing her case, Plaintiff used a form designed for pro se
litigants. Compl., ECF 2. In the caption of the Complaint,
Plaintiff names "D.H.S. E. County" and "Scott
harris D.D.A." as Defendants. Compl. at p. 1. However,
on the next page, she adds "David Udlock - D.HS."
and "Mary Kane Child's lawyer" as Defendants.
Id. at p. 2. In the part of the Complaint requiring
her to name each individual Defendant and provide that
Defendant's address and contact information, Plaintiff
named only "D.H.S. E. County David Udlock D.H.S.
worker" and "Scott Harris Deputy District