Clark v. Corporation Service Company obo Wells Fargo & Company
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 LASHONDA LYNN CLARK, Case No. 22-cv-03476-JD
Plaintiff,
ORDER RE DISMISSAL
v.
CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY OBO WELLS FARGO & CO, et al., 11 Defendants.
12 Pro se plaintiff Lashonda Clark has sued Wells Fargo and a host of other defendants, and appears to allege that they wrongfully repossessed her vehicle. Dkt. No. 1. Clark was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Dkt. No. 8. The Court may “at any time” dismiss an IFP complaint that fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The standard is the same as under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). As a pro se plaintiff, Clark gets a liberal construction of her complaint and the benefit of any doubts, but she still must satisfy the requirements of Rule 8 and state facts sufficient to allege a plausible claim. Nguyen Gardner v. Chevron Capital Corp., No. 15-cv-01514-JD, 2015 WL …