Warren v. Federal Government

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. 2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint, because it is legally frivolous and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 8/22/13. (LGK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
REV. CALVIN WARREN,
Plaintiff,
v.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:13-CV-1560-RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the application of Rev. Calvin Warren for
leave to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fee pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915. Upon consideration of the financial information provided with the
application, the Court finds that plaintiff is financially unable to pay any portion of
the filing fee, and therefore, plaintiff will be granted in forma pauperis status. For the
reasons stated below, the Court will dismiss this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B).
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must dismiss a complaint
filed in forma pauperis if the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
from such relief. An action is frivolous if it "lacks an arguable basis in either law or

fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action is malicious if it is
undertaken for the purpose of harassing the named defendants and not for the purpose
of vindicating a cognizable right. Spencer v. Rhodes, 656 F. Supp. 458, 461-63
(E.D.N.C. 1987), aff'd 826 F.2d 1059 (4th Cir. 1987). An action fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead “enough facts to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,570
(2007).
To determine whether an action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted, the Court must engage in a two-step inquiry. First, the Court must identify
the allegations in the complaint that are not entitled to the assumption of truth.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1950-51 (2009).

These include "legal

conclusions" and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that are]
supported by mere conclusory statements." Id. at 1949. Second, the Court must
determine whether the complaint states a plausible claim for relief. Id. at 1950-51.
This is a "context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its
judicial experience and common sense." Id. at 1950. The plaintiff is required to
plead facts that show more than the "mere possibility of misconduct." Id. The Court
must review the factual allegations in the complaint "to determine if they plausibly
suggest an entitlement to relief."

Id. at 1951.
-2-

When faced with alternative

explanations for the alleged misconduct, the Court may exercise its judgment in
determining whether plaintiff's conclusion is the most plausible or whether it is more
likely that no misconduct occurred. Id. at 1950, 51-52.
In reviewing a pro se complaint under § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must give the
complaint the benefit of a liberal construction. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520
(1972). The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff,
unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 3233 (1992).
The Complaint
Plaintiff seeks three hundred trillion dollars in this action brought for the
violation of his constitutional rights.

The named defendants are the Federal

Government, President Barack Obama, Jessie Jackson, Jr., “the whole black race,”
“the whole white race,” Billy Graham, James Williams, Hillary Clinton, The Nation
of Islam, “Judges of America,” and numerous other entities.
Plaintiff alleges that the Federal Government, President Obama, and the Nation
of Islam “tried to give [him] aids.” He further alleges that defendants are stalking him
and are denying him a job. Plaintiff claims that defendants are trying to murder him
and “are premediately[sic] aggravatedly [sic] beating [his] brother Rev. John Warren
while he is in intensive care in the hospital in Little Rock, Arkansas.”
-3-

Although a pro se complaint is to be liberally construed, the complaint must
contain a short and plain summary of facts sufficient to give fair notice of the claim
asserted. Means v. Wilson, 522 F.2d 833, 840 (8th Cir. 1975). The Court will not
supply additional facts or construct a legal theory for plaintiff that assumes facts that
have not been pleaded.

Having carefully reviewed the complaint, the Court

concludes that plaintiff’s factual allegations are delusional and fail to state a claim or
cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of
Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,403 U.S. 388 (1971). For these reasons, the complaint will
be dismissed, without prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause
process to issue upon the complaint, because it is legally frivolous and fails to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.
Dated this 22nd day of August, 2013.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-4-