Cheryl Lynn JOSSIE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CVS PHARMACY, Defendant-Appellee.
Cheryl Lynn Jossie appeals the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of her amended complaint against defendant CVS Pharmacy for failing to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). We affirm.
Ms. Jossie’s amended complaint, even when read in conjunction with her initial complaint, does not assert any specific cause of action against CVS. Ms. Jossie identifies eight state and federal statutes, but does not explain how CVS violated them, under what statutory authority she can sue CVS to seek monetary redress, or what damages she suffered. Citing to eight statutes does not equate to asserting eight causes of action, and nowhere does Ms. Jossie adequately explain the legal or factual nature of her grievance or the basis for her lawsuit.
Accordingly, the district court did not err in concluding that Ms. Jossie’s complaint failed to state a claim on which relief may be granted, and because Ms. Jossie is indigent and had filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, the district court properly dismissed the complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (“the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that the action or appeal fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted”) (emphasis added).