Portnov v. United States

Background

Abraham Portnov, who represented himself and was proceeding without paying the filing fee, sued the United States based on an unidentified claim related to unsuccessful lawsuits he had filed in federal district courts. He alleged that federal employees, including judges, clerks, and Department of Justice personnel, had violated laws in handling those cases. He also alleged that Senator Dianne Feinstein’s office did not return his documents or call him back.

The opinion noted that courts had previously dismissed claims by Portnov based on judicial immunity, which can protect judges from certain lawsuits over their judicial actions, and sovereign immunity, which can restrict lawsuits against the United States.

Screening analysis

Because Portnov was proceeding without paying the filing fee, the court was required to screen the complaint before directing the United States Marshal to serve it. The screening statute requires dismissal if a complaint is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted, or seeks money from a defendant who is immune from that relief.

The court held that the complaint failed to state a legally cognizable claim. Portnov did not identify the legal basis for his claim. In the section asking what law or right was violated, he wrote only, “I am pro se and don’t want to make mistake of law name.” He also did not provide specific claims or supporting factual allegations. The court explained that a self-represented plaintiff’s complaint is read liberally, but it still must give the defendant fair notice of the claims and the facts supporting them.

Disposition

The court gave Portnov leave to amend the complaint by February 1, 2021, if he could correct the deficiencies. It instructed him to identify each claim and state the specific facts and actors connected to each claim. The court also reminded him of the earlier rulings concerning judicial immunity and sovereign immunity and attached those rulings.

The order did not itself dismiss the case. If Portnov did not file an amended complaint, the court stated that the case would be reassigned to a district judge and that the newly assigned judge would be asked to consider recommending dismissal. Portnov could instead file a one-page notice of voluntary dismissal, which would operate as a dismissal without prejudice and allow him to pursue the claims later. The order was signed by United States Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler.