Milaudi Karboau v. Oregon Department of Corrections;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MILAUDI KARBOAU,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 13-35121
D.C. No. 6:11-cv-06312-JO
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Robert E. Jones, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 13, 2014**
Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Former Oregon state prisoner Milaudi Karboau appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging, among
others, various constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
FILED
MAY 30 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1291. We review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000)
(dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194
(9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)); Dominguez v.
Miller (In re Dominguez), 51 F.3d 1502, 1508 n.5 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Karboau’s action because, despite an
opportunity to amend and multiple extensions of time, Karboau failed to set forth
“a short and plain statement” of his claims, and instead, alleged approximately 83
unrelated causes of action against more than 100 defendants for conduct occurring
over more than six years of incarceration at various state correctional facilities.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (a)(2); see also McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.
1996) (Rule 8 requires that each averment of a pleading be simple, concise, and
direct, stating which defendant is liable to the plaintiff for which wrong).
AFFIRMED.
13-35121 2

-- 2 of 2 --