Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Aminian v. Social Security Administration

United States District Court, D. Oregon

September 14, 2018

AVIDEH AMINIAN, Plaintiff,
v.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, JAMES HAWTHORNE PROPERTY, Defendants

          OPINION & ORDER

          MARCO A. HERNANDEZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Pro se Plaintiff Avideh Aminian brings action against Defendants Social Security Administration (SSA) and James Hawthorne Property. Compl. at pp. 1-2, ECF 1. 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.

         STANDARDS

         A 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; or
(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 either in law or in fact." Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 325; Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1989).

         DISCUSSION

         I. Allegations

         In the Complaint, Plaintiff asserts that federal question is the basis for federal court jurisdiction. Compl. at p. 4. However, in the space requesting that Plaintiff list specific federal statutes, treaties, or constitutional provisions at issue in the case, Plaintiff wrote only this: "I have police report federal trace consumer code 963-841-29 for rent [undecipherable but possibly abatement or assessment] as tenant and landlord. to protect myself as [undecipherable but possibly safely or safety]." Id. Although Plaintiff did not check the box for diversity jurisdiction, she did complete the section supporting such jurisdiction, indicating that James Hawthorne Property and an individual named Steve Black, who is not otherwise mentioned in the Complaint, has its principal place of business in Portland, Oregon. Id. at p. 5. Plaintiff also resides in Portland. Id.

         The Complaint itself contains no other facts at all. In an Exhibit to the Complaint, Plaintiff mentions a letter sent to her by the SSA on or about July 20, 2018, and some action on July 19, 2018 by the property management company regarding a "wrong violation." Compl., Ex. 1 at p. 1, ECF 1-2. Additional pages to the Exhibit include a rental agreement between Plaintiff and "Infinity Property Management" of Sherwood, Oregon regarding a property named "Bridgeview/James Hawthorne," with an address of 1508 S.W. 13th Avenue in Portland, for a fixed lease term of July 29, 2013 to January 31, 2014. Id. at p. 2. The next page shows a lease term from March 1, 2014 to August ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.