Malev v. United States

Background

Yaroslav Malev, representing himself, filed a form complaint in the San Francisco Superior Court naming the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the defendant. The form indicated possible injury to a person or property and professional negligence, along with wage loss, loss of use of property, and loss of earning capacity. But the complaint contained no factual allegations and did not identify a cause of action. The opinion also says the federal government may not have been properly served.

The United States removed the case to the Northern District of California. The opinion explains that the United States is the proper defendant for a tort claim against the federal government under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2679. The United States moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not state a legally sufficient claim.

Court’s analysis

The court said that complaints filed by people without lawyers receive a liberal reading, but they still must meet Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and include facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. The court found that Malev’s form complaint had no meaningful content to construe, even under that liberal standard.

Disposition

The court granted dismissal of the complaint. It also granted leave to file an amended complaint consistent with the order by February 1, 2023. The court expressed considerable doubt that amendment would be worthwhile, but it did not dismiss the case with prejudice at this stage. It warned that failure to meet the deadline or otherwise comply with the order would result in dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(b). Judge James Donato signed the order.