Gremmels v. Apple

Background

Christian Gremmels, representing himself, filed a complaint against Apple and other defendants and applied to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. The court found that he showed he could not pay the fee and granted the application.

Screening of the Complaint

Because Gremmels received permission to proceed without prepaying fees, the court was required to screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The court must dismiss a case at this stage if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim for relief. The court also explained that it must dismiss a case if it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court lacks legal authority to hear the dispute.

The court found that the complaint did not clearly state what claim or claims Gremmels intended to bring. It also grouped all defendants together, so the court could not determine what each defendant allegedly did. The court directed Gremmels to identify the actions by each defendant, the laws or rights allegedly violated, and the harm he suffered.

The court further required clarification of the basis for federal jurisdiction. If Gremmels relied on federal law, he had to identify the statute and facts supporting the claim. If he relied on diversity jurisdiction, he had to identify the citizenship of all parties and allege facts showing that more than $75,000 was at stake. If he asserted state-law claims, he had to explain how they were connected to a sufficient federal claim for the court to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.

Disposition

Judge Allie Kim dismissed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 but granted leave to amend. The deadline for an amended complaint was October 8, 2021. The order stated that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed. The order did not decide the merits of any claim.