RICHES v 700 BILLION BAILOUT PLAN, et al

Filing 8

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 1 Complaint filed by JONATHAN LEE RICHES : It is recommended that Plaintiffs complaint, doc. 1 , be DISMISSED as frivolous and that the order adopting this report and recommendation direct the clerk of court to note on the docket that this cause was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and constitutes a strike within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE ALLAN KORNBLUM on 11/24/2008. Internal deadline for referral to district judge if objections are not filed earlier: 12/22/2008. (kdm)

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JONATHAN LEE RICHES, Plaintiff, vs. SENATE BANKING COMMITTEE, et al, Defendants. / REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff brings this cause of action against a laundry list of t.v. personalities, cabinet members, banks, senators, funds, and other persons and entities, seeking a "few billion" from them for his person "bail out" from federal prison. (Doc. 1). As an initial matter, the complaint is not on the proper forms, but it is the opinion of the undersigned that it would be a continued waste of judicial resources to require this technical compliance with our local rules, and is herein recommending that the complaint be dismissed sua sponte. A court may dismiss a case proceeding in forma pauperis if the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Pro se CASE NO. 1:08CV224-MP/AK

complaints are to be held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by an attorney. Wright v. Newsome, 795 F.2d 964, 967 (11th Cir. 1986), citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-1, 92 S. Ct. 594, 596, 30 L. Ed. 2d 652 (1972). However, a plaintiff is still

Page 2 of 3

required to "set forth factual allegations, either direct or inferential, respecting each material element necessary to sustain recovery under some actionable legal theory." Worst v. Hart, 1995 WL 431357, *2 (N.D. Fla. 1995). It cannot be assumed that a Plaintiff will prove facts which have not been alleged. Quality Foods de Centro America, 711 F.2d at 995, citing Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of Carpenters, 459 U.S. 519, 103 S. Ct. 897, 902, 74 L. Ed. 2d 723 (1983). Hence, even though the pleading standard for a pro se complaint is quite liberal, "bald assertions and conclusions of law will not suffice." Leeds v. Meltz, 85 F.3d 51, 53 (2d Cir. 1996). Additionally, the court's duty to construe a plaintiff's complaint liberally is not the equivalent of a duty to rewrite it. Peterson v. Atlanta Housing Auth., 998 F.2d 904, 912 (11th Cir. 1993). The Court is required to dismiss a complaint at any time if it is determined to be frivolous. 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(I). Typically, a court should serve the complaint and have benefit of the defendant's response before making such a determination, but there are compelling reasons for immediately dismissing frivolous suits by prisoners since they unduly burden the courts, obscure meritorious claims, and require innocent parties to expend significant resources in their defense. Williams v. Secretary for the Department of Corrections, 131 Fed. Appx. 682, 686 (11th Cir. 2005). Dismissal prior to service is also appropriate when the Court determines from the face of the complaint that the factual allegations are clearly baseless or that the legal theories are indisputably meritless. Williams, supra; Carroll v. Gross, 984 F.2d 392, 393 (11th Cir. 1993).

No. 1:08cv224-MP/AK

Page 3 of 3

Additionally, Plaintiff is incarcerated at Federal Correctional Institution in Salters, S.C., and there is no jurisdictional basis for bringing this lawsuit against any of the Defendants who do not reside in the Northern District of Florida. Consequently, there is no venue for this cause of action. In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's complaint, doc. 1, be DISMISSED as frivolous and that the order adopting this report and recommendation direct the clerk of court to note on the docket that this cause was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and constitutes a "strike" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). IN CHAMBERS at Gainesville, Florida, this 24th day of November, 2008.

s/ A. KORNBLUM ALLAN KORNBLUM UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 10 days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

No. 1:08cv224-MP/AK