Walton v. Johnson et al

Filing 5

ORDER Granting 2 Application to Proceed Without Prepaying Fees or Costs; and DISMISSING 1 Complaint, Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
LEROY WALTON,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 17-12250
v.
Hon. John Corbett O’Meara
RUTH JOHNSON,
Defendant.
___________________________/

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED
IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT

Appearing pro se, Plaintiff Leroy Walton filed a complaint and application
to proceed without prepayment of fees on July 6, 2017. The court finds Plaintiff’s
application to proceed in forma pauperis to be facially sufficient and, therefore,
grants Plaintiff’s motion to proceed without prepayment of fees. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(a); Gibson v. R.G. Smith Co., 915 F.2d 260, 262 (6th Cir. 1990).
Once a court grants a plaintiff permission to proceed in forma pauperis, it
must review the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court “shall
dismiss” the case if the court finds that it is “(i) frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to
state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a
defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), a complaint must contain “a short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Although this
standard does not require “detailed factual allegations,” it does require more than
“labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Rather, the
plaintiff must allege facts that, if accepted as true, are sufficient “to raise a right to
relief above the speculative level” and to “state a claim to relief that is plausible on
its face.” Id. at 570. See also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949-50 (2009).
Plaintiff’s complaint, which is devoid of factual allegations, does not meet
this standard. Although Plaintiff asserts in a conclusory manner that his rights
have been violated, he has not provided any factual allegations indicating how and
why Defendant is liable. Even viewing the complaint liberally in light of his pro se
status, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s complaint is
DISMISSED.
s/John Corbett O’Meara
United States District Judge

Date: August 2, 2017

-2-

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties of record on this date, August 2, 2017, using the ECF system and/or
ordinary mail.

s/William Barkholz
Case Manager

-3-