Cleveland v. United States Department of Agriculture

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

TIMOTHY CLEVELAND, Case No.: 2:19-cv-01255-APG-NJK Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, et al., 10 Defendant(s). 11 On August 9, 2019, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend for violating Fed.R.Civ.P. 8. Docket No. 3. The Court advised Plaintiff that a properly pled complaint must provide a short and plain statement of the claim that shows that the pleader is entitled to relief. Id. at 2 (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2); Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Moreover, “[a]lthough Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, it demands ‘more than labels and conclusions’ or a ‘formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.’” Id. (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). “[T]o comply with Rule 8, a complaint must set forth coherently who is being sued, for what relief, and on what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery.” McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 1995)). Although the Court construes pleadings from pro se litigants liberally,…