(PS) Strange v. US Army
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LEVI GARCIA STRANGE, No. 2:20–cv–2408–JAM–KJN PS Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO
DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
v. U.S. ARMY, et al., Defendants. 16 On December 4, 2020, plaintiff filed a complaint and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (authorizing the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees or security” by a person that is unable to pay such fees). (ECF Nos. 1, 2.) The court found plaintiff’s application deficient, and ordered him to supplement his declaration by December 30, 2020. (ECF No. 3.) The deadline has now passed without a response. Further, plaintiff’s complaint alleging a tort against the U.S. fails to allege facts concerning participation in an administrative process. See Gillespie v. Civiletti, 629 F.2d 637, 640 (9th Cir. 1980) (“The timely filing of an administrative claim . . . should be affirmatively alleged in the complaint.”). The court included in its IFP…