Weaver v. Board of Regents/Georgia State University
Filing
5
ORDER AND OPINION dismissing this action without prejudice. Signed by Judge Julie E. Carnes on 7/26/13. (ddm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
DALVARO A.K. WEAVER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO.
1:10-cv-2432-JEC
BOARD OF REGENTS/GEORGIA STATE
UNIVERSITY,
Defendant.
ORDER & OPINION
The above-entitled matter is presently before the Court for a
frivolity determination under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 [2].
The Court
concludes that, for the reasons set forth below, the case should be
DISMISSED.
I.
PLAINTIFF’S PRESENT COMPLAINT
As set out below, plaintiff is a frequent filed of pro se
complaints.
The
present
frivolity determination.
complaint
is
before
the
Court
for
a
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), a case
is frivolous if it is “without arguable merit either in law or fact,”
or “when it appears the plaintiff has little or no chance of
success.”
Bilal v. Driver, 251 F.3d 1346, 1349 (11th Cir. 2001)
(internal citations omitted).
AO 72A
(Rev.8/82)
On
August
2,
2010,
this
Court
received
a
complaint
from
plaintiff Dalvaro Weaver, purporting to state a cause of action
against Georgia State University for the deprivation of unspecified
constitutional rights, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985.
Plaintiff complains that on an unspecified date an unnamed Georgia
State police officer issued a trespass citation to him after he had
used the bathroom at one of Georgia State’s buildings.
Plaintiff does not elaborate on how the issuance of a citation
to him for trespass violated his constitutional rights.
deny that he was trespassing.
He does not
Moreover, he offers no explanation as
to what has happened since issuance of the citation.
To the extent
that he was later adjudicated guilty on the citation, plaintiff does
not
explain
in
what
constitutional rights.
way
that
process
would
have
violated
his
Further, even had he such a complaint, he
would have been required to exhaust state remedies, which he also
does not allege.
On its face, plaintiff’s complaint appears to be frivolous.
Indeed, this would not be the first time that plaintiff has filed a
frivolous or non-meritorious claim. The list below shows other cases
filed by the plaintiff, only to be later dismissed.
•
Weaver v. DeKalb County, et al., 1:10-cv-00314-JEC
(complaint dismissed for failure to respond to defendant’s
meritorious motion to dismiss);
2
AO 72A
(Rev.8/82)
•
•
Weaver v. State of Georgia in DeKalb County, 1:08-cv-02495JEC (complaint dismissed as frivolous);
Weaver v. State of Georgia, et al., 1:08-cv-01895-JEC
(complaint dismissed as frivolous);
•
Weaver v. State of Georgia, 1:06-cv-02252-JEC (removal
petition of state criminal case dismissed);
•
Weaver v. Fulton County Jail System, 1:05-cv-02888-JEC
(complaint dismissed for lack of standing);
•
Weaver v. U.S. District Court, et al., 1:05-cv-02870-JEC
(denial of plaintiff’s FOIA request for the personnel
records of this Court, the United States Marshals, and the
General Services Administration);
•
Weaver v. Hilton Hotel,
dismissed as frivolous);
•
Weaver v. DeKalb County Library System et al., 1:05-cv00644-JEC (complaint dismissed for failure to serve
defendants);
•
Weaver v. Kroger Co., 1:05-cv-00643-JEC (complaint
dismissed for failure to respond to defendant’s meritorious
motion to dismiss); and
•
Weaver v. Phillips, et al., 1:99-cv-00058-JEC (defendants’
motions to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint granted).
1:05-cv-02565-JEC
(complaint
Nor can the Court give plaintiff an opportunity to amend his
complaint to provide more specificity, as it has no valid address for
plaintiff.
That is, when filing his complaint, plaintiff indicated
that his mailing address was 3767 Treebark Trail, Decatur, GA 30034.
The Office of the Clerk has attempted to send correspondence to Mr.
Weaver concerning his case at that address, but the post office has
notified the Clerk that this is not a valid address for this
recipient [4].
Thus, per Local Rule 83.1D(3), NDGa, Mr. Weaver’s
3
AO 72A
(Rev.8/82)
claim is DISMISSED for failure to keep the clerk’s office informed as
to a change in his mailing address, as well as for being frivolous.
CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, it is Ordered that the present civil
action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
The Clerk is directed to
close this civil action.
SO ORDERED, this 26th day of JULY, 2013.
/s/ Julie E. Carnes
JULIE E. CARNES
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4
AO 72A
(Rev.8/82)
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?