Pittman v. City of San Jose

Background

Pro se plaintiff Randy Dewayne Pittman sued the City of San José and several city officials. He alleged violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act based on the defendants’ alleged failure to ensure access to an accessible parking space within 200 feet of his apartment building.

Pittman applied to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court granted that application and screened his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), which requires screening in qualifying fee-waiver cases. In an earlier order, the court found that the complaint failed to state a claim under either the Americans with Disabilities Act or Section 504. The court dismissed the case at that stage but allowed Pittman to amend his complaint. It warned that failing to file an amended complaint by December 1, 2025, would result in dismissal with prejudice.

Ruling

Pittman did not file an amended complaint. Relying on its earlier order, the court dismissed the case with prejudice for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

The court also denied Pittman’s pending motion to compel the perfection of service and motion for sanctions. The supplied opinion text ends during the description of the sanctions-related motion, so any additional wording or separate relief associated with that motion cannot be determined from the text provided.

Effect

The case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning the order states that the dismissal bars refiling the same case. The court’s ruling was based on failure to state a claim and Pittman’s failure to amend after receiving permission to do so.