Banks v. Davenport et al
ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. An in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is granted. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 8/27/13. (kpr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
DAVENPORT; CHARLES SAMUELS;
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS;
ANTHONY HAYNES; TRACIE FENNER;
DANIEL NELLOR; CUCCIO; ROBERTS;
USA; PRICE; SALVATION ARMY; DOES 1-13
Frederick Banks is a "notoriously frivolous filer" who recently was
prohibited from filing any future pleadings in this District without prior
approval. Banks v. Antitrust Division, Case No. 4:13-cv-455-BSM (E. D. Ark. 12
Aug. 2013). After Banks was released from prison but before he became a
restricted filer, he filed a prose action complaint alleging that prison officials
in Forrest City, Arkansas violated his constitutional rights by using "remote
neural monitoring" to "monitor, record, converse, and harass" him. NQ 1.
Banks also has filed a motion demonstrating that he does not have sufficient
funds to pay the $350 filing fee. Ng 2.
The motion to proceed in forma pauperis, NQ 2, is granted. Banks's
frivolous complaint, NQ 1, is dismissed without prejudice for failing to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). An in
forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?