Shakoor-Bey v. Obbish et al

Filing 5

WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Samuel Der-Yeghiayan on 1/24/2012: For the reasons stated below, the instant action is hereby ordered dismissed. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 4 is denied as moot. Civil case terminated. [For further details see written opinion.] Mailed notice.(mr, )

Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Name of Assigned Judge
or Magistrate Judge

Samuel Der-Yeghiayan

CASE NUMBER

12 C 324

CASE
TITLE

Sitting Judge if Other
than Assigned Judge

DATE

1/24/2012

Sheik Abdul-Musawwir Shakoor-Bey vs. James M. Obbish, et al.

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

For the reasons stated below, the instant action is hereby ordered dismissed. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis [4] is denied as moot. Civil case terminated.

O[ For further details see text below.]

Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Sheik Abdul-Musawuir Shakoor-Bey’s (Shakoor-Bey)
motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (Section 1915(e)),
“[n]otwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the
case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be
granted. . . .” Id. Shakoor-Bey has filed a complaint pro se, and thus the court construes the complaint
liberally. McCormick v. City of Chicago, 230 F.3d 319, 325 (7th Cir. 2000)(stating that “pro se complaints
are to be liberally construed and not held to the stringent standards expected of pleadings drafted by
lawyers”).
In his pro se complaint, Shakoor-Bey alleges that he is a Moorish American National. Shakoor-Bey
also alleges that on February 11, 2011, Chicago Police Officers arrested him, fingerprinted him, and charged
him with a crime under the name Abul Masww Bey, which he claims is “fictitious.” (Compl. 4). ShakoorBey further alleges that the state prosecuted him for a crime and that such prosecution was an
“unlawful/illegal denationalization tactic[]” done “to extract riches of this world.” (Compl. 4). In addition,
Shakoor-Bey alleges that, as a foreign citizen, any proceeding against him initiated by the state, including
Page of
12C324 Sheik Abdul-Musawwir Shakoor-Bey vs. James M. Obbish,1et al. 2

STATEMENT
criminal proceedings, “must originate in the Supreme Court of the United States;” otherwise, the state has
committed a tort against him. (Compl. 2). Shakoor-Bey has sued for injunctive relief and $100,000.00 in
compensatory and punitive damages.
Not only are Shakoor-Bey’s claims based upon an incorrect reading of the United States Constitution,
his claims are also dependent upon his assertion that he is a foreign citizen by virtue of his membership in the
Moorish Science Temple of America. The Seventh Circuit has clearly rejected such arguments. See, e.g.,
United States v. James, 328 F.3d 953, 954 (7th Cir. 2003). In addition, to the extent that Shakoor-Bey is
seeking to appeal a state court criminal conviction, this court is not the proper forum for such an appeal.
Even when construed liberally, Shakoor-Bey’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted. Therefore, based on the above, the instant action is dismissed, and Shakoor-Bey’s motion for leave
to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot.

Page of
12C324 Sheik Abdul-Musawwir Shakoor-Bey vs. James M. Obbish,2et al. 2