Futrell v. Imperial Security

Filing 4

ORDER granting 1 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Plaintiff makes no allegation that Defendant failed to hire him because of unlawful discrimination. The Cour nevertheless is satisfied that 2 Complaint should be dismissed because it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 06/06/2013. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION

TYRONE LEE FUTRELL, SR.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
IMPERIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

No. 3:13CV00140 SWW

Memorandum and Order
Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis in a Title VII complaint.
There is a two-step process to be followed by the district court in considering whether a
pro se plaintiff should be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Martin-Trigona v. Stewart,
691 F.2d 856 (8th Cir. 1982). First there is a determination of whether the plaintiff qualifies by
economic status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). If he does, the complaint is permitted to be filed. Id.
Second, assuming the allegation of poverty is not untrue, a determination is made under §
1915(e)(2)(B) of whether the cause of action stated in the complaint is frivolous or malicious,
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a
defendant who is immune from such relief. If so, the complaint is to be dismissed. Because it
appears that plaintiff's economic situation qualifies him for in forma pauperis status, the Court
hereby grants plaintiff's application to so proceed [docket entry 1].
The Court next determines whether, pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(B), this action should be
dismissed because it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be
granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. Plaintiff

brings his complaint pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et
al. He fails to attach to his complaint a copy of the charge of discrimination he filed with the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) on May 28, 2013. He complains that
even though he has applied for jobs with the defendant, he has never been called on the phone or
had an interview. He states he has both an Associate and Bachelor Degree.
Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer to fail or refuse to hire an individual because
of his race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1). Plaintiff makes no
allegation that defendant failed to hire him because of unlawful discrimination. Acknowledging
that sua sponte dismissals are expressly disfavored, Nash v. Black, 781 F.2d 665 (8th Cir. 1986),
the Court nevertheless is satisfied that this complaint should be dismissed because it fails to state
a claim on which relief may be granted.
SO ORDERED this 6th day of June, 2013.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2