Larrimore v. U.S. Government

Filing 4

ORDER. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT, and Plaintiff shall have until December 18, 2023, to file an amended complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 11/15/2023. (JWM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION
VINSTON A. LARRIMORE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 5:23-cv-610-BJD-PRL

U.S. GOVERNMENT,
Defendant.
ORDER
Plaintiff, Vinston A. Larrimore, who is proceeding pro se, filed this action against
Defendant “U.S. Government.” (Doc. 1). Plaintiff seeks to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc.
2). For the reasons explained below, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis will be
taken under advisement, and, in an abundance of caution, Plaintiff will be given an
opportunity to amend the complaint.
I.

Legal Standards

An individual may be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis if he declares in an
affidavit that he is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
However, before a plaintiff is permitted to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court is obligated
to review the complaint to determine whether it is frivolous, 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. Id. § 1915(e)(2). If the complaint is deficient, the Court is required
to dismiss the suit sua sponte. Id.

II.

Discussion

Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) consists of seven pages and is submitted on a prepared
form. Plaintiff’s complaint largely consists of vague complaints against the government and
allegations that the Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies have
improperly used military weapons, and that Plaintiff is the victim of assault and harassment.
To begin, Plaintiff’s complaint appears to reference his prior military service. To that
end, at least some of his complaints may addressed by the appropriate agency, such as via the
Department of Veterans Affairs claims process.
Otherwise, Plaintiff’s allegations are largely incomprehensible. The complaint consists
of rambling statements that reference being inseminated with nanobites, harassment, being
affected by “directed energy,” “gang stalking,” assault, and intimidation. Plaintiff’s
allegations, if they can be described as such, also reference “directed energy weapon,” lasers,
rays, “electro magnetic radiation,” and “constant surveillance with virtual imprisonment,
satellite 3D image by way of Metaverse.” (Doc. 1 at 2-5). Plaintiff requests relief from “this
inhuman practice with these military weapons and to arrest and charge the person or persons
responsible and made money from government contracts.”(Doc. 1 at 6). Plaintiff also requests
compensation for “being tortured these many years and being an experiment.” (Doc. 1 at 6).
Although Plaintiff has checked the box on the form complaint to indicate he brings his claims
for violation of federal law, he fails to specify which law has been violated and his rambling
allegations are far from sufficient to state a claim.
As an initial matter, Plaintiff’s complaint does not meet the pleading requirements set
forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff’s complaint does not contain a short
plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, as required by Rule

-2-

8. Although Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he is “still required to conform to procedural rules,
and the court is not required to rewrite a deficient pleading.” Washington v. Dept. of Children
and Families, 256 F. App’x 326, 327 (11th Cir. 2007).
Moreover, and significantly, Plaintiff has not alleged any viable basis for his claim
under federal law or otherwise. The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. Although it appears highly doubtful that Plaintiff would be able to allege any viable
claim, out of an abundance of caution, the Court will provide Plaintiff with an opportunity to
file an amended complaint to clarify the bases for his claim. Plaintiff must provide the Court
with sufficient information and in a coherent manner so that it can perform the review
required under § 1915. The amended complaint must clearly state the legal theory or theories
upon which Plaintiff seeks relief and explain with factual allegations how defendant(s) are
responsible. Plaintiff should carefully consider whether he can allege a claim in good faith
because pursuing frivolous claims could lead to the imposition of sanctions.
III.

Conclusion

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is TAKEN
UNDER ADVISEMENT, and Plaintiff shall have until December 18, 2023, to file an
amended complaint. The amended complaint must comply with all pleading requirements
contained in Rules 8, 9, 10, and 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as well as those
contained in the Local Rules of the Middle District of Florida. Failure to comply with this
Order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute
pursuant to Local Rule 3.10.
Further, Plaintiff is cautioned that despite proceeding pro se, he is required to comply
with this Court’s Local Rules, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Federal Rules

-3-

of Evidence. Plaintiff may obtain a copy of the Local Rules from the Court’s website
(http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov) or by visiting the Office of the Clerk of Court. Also,
resources and information related to proceeding in court without a lawyer, including a
handbook entitled Guide for Proceeding Without a Lawyer, can be located on the Court’s
website (http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/pro_se/default.htm). Plaintiff should also consult
the Middle District of Florida’s Discovery Handbook for a general discussion of this
District’s

discovery

practices

(see

http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/civil-discovery-

handbook).
DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on November 15, 2023.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Parties

-4-