Opinion
CASE NO. C13-5189 BHS
03-20-2013
TODD ROY GIBBONS, Plaintiff, v. BOB FERGUSON, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS AND DISMISSING
COMPLAINT
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Todd Roy Gibbons's ("Gibbons") application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 1) and Gibbons's proposed complaint (Dkt. 1-1).
On March 14, 2012, Gibbons filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis and a proposed complaint. Gibbons alleges that the United States, through the Washington Attorney General and local medical facilities, has caused him to receive an improper medical diagnosis in early 2005. Dkt. 1-1. Gibbons alleges that the improper diagnosis caused the unfavorable decision in his recent claim for social security benefits. Id.
The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed in forma pauperis upon completion of a proper affidavit of indigency. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). However, the "privilege of pleading in forma pauperis . . . in civil actions for damages should be allowed only in exceptional circumstances." Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328 (9th Cir. 1986). Moreover, the court has broad discretion in denying an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598 (9th Cir. 1963), cert. denied 375 U.S. 845 (1963).
A federal court may dismiss sua sponte pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) when it is clear that the plaintiff has not stated a claim upon which relief may be granted. See Omar v. Sea Land Serv., Inc., 813 F.2d 986, 991 (9th Cir. 1987) ("A trial court may dismiss a claim sua sponte under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) . . . . Such a dismissal may be made without notice where the claimant cannot possibly win relief.").
In this case, Gibbons's complaint fails to establish that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction. Under the Federally Supported Health Centers Assistance Act ("FSHCAA"), tort claims against qualified and federally funded physicians and clinics are claims against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"). 42 U.S.C. § 233. Gibbons has failed to allege that the physicians or clinics that diagnosed him were qualified under the FSHCAA. Although these deficiencies may be solved by amending the complaint, the more fundamental problem of filing an administrative claim within the statute of limitations may not be solved by any amendment. On this issue, the statutory language is clear that a court does not have jurisdiction before administrative remedies have been exhausted, and a court must dismiss any action that is initiated prematurely. McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106, 111 (1993). Gibbons has failed to show that he has exhausted his administrative remedies under the FTCA within the two- year statute of limitations. Therefore, the Court DENIES Gibbons's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 1) because it must DISMISS his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________
BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge