KELLER v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Paula Idele Keller appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing Keller's action alleging federal and state law claims arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 1996). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Keller's action without prejudice because the allegations in the complaint were vague, confusing, and failed to connect Keller's claims to defendants’ conduct. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (requiring that a pleading contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief”); McHenry, 84 F.3d at 1179-80 (affirming dismissal under Rule 8, and recognizing that “[p]rolix, confusing complaints ․ impose unfair burdens on litigants and judges”).

Because Keller failed to allege a claim under the Truth in Lending Act in her complaint, we reject as without merit her contention that the district court should have granted her leave to amend this claim.

All pending motions and requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.