What is the test for dismissing a frivolous, implausible and insubstantial complaint?
The following excerpt is from Employees' Sec. Co. v. Fed. Reserve Bank Dist. Cities Dist. 3 & 12, No. 2:19-cv-0241-MCE-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. 2019):
Here, the allegations of plaintiff's complaint, as outlined above, are plainly frivolous, implausible, and insubstantial. Therefore, the court recommends that the case be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the substantiality doctrine. Although the court ordinarily liberally grants a pro se litigant leave to amend her complaint to correct pleading deficiencies, the nature of the allegations here suggests that leave to amend would be futile. See Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 80 F.3d 336, 339 (9th Cir. 1996).
Page 3
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
