Foss v. United States Marshals Service

MEMORANDUM

Raymond Foss appeals the district court’s dismissal of his claims at the screening stage under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, for failure to state a claim. We must determine whether Foss’s complaint, “taking all well-pleaded factual allegations as true, [ ] contains enough facts to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ ” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1987 , 178 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009)). Because Foss was pro se before the district court, we “construe the pleadings liberally and [] afford the [plaintiff] the benefit of any doubt.” Id. at 342.

1. Although Foss admits that he signed a waiver of extradition, he claims that the waiver was not “knowing and voluntary” and therefore invalid. Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412, 421 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 , 89 L.Ed.2d 410 (1986). Even assuming that the waiver was invalid, Foss cannot state a claim for relief against any defendants for actions taken after he signed it, as the waiver was facially valid. Mills v. Graves, 930 F.2d 729, 732 (9th Cir.1991); see also Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 641 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97…