Warren v. Federal Government
Filing
3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs 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 fri volous 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 16th day of September, 2013. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 9/16/2013. (KMS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
REV. CALVIN WARREN,
Plaintiff,
v.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:13-CV-1780-CEJ
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Rev. Calvin Warren’s motion for leave to
commence this action without prepayment of the filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915
[Doc. #2]. The Court will grant plaintiff in forma pauperis status. However, for the
reasons stated below, the Court also 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 district 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, a 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. 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.
-2-
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, 32-33 (1992).
The Complaint
Plaintiff seeks damages in the amount of nine hundred trillion dollars based on
allegations that his constitutional rights have been violated. The defendants he names
are the Federal Government, President Barack Obama, “Marshall Obama,” “the whole
prejudice black race,” “the whole prejudice white race,” “the prejudice white policies,”
and the “prejudice black policies.” Plaintiff alleges that defendants are stalking and
plotting to murder him, his mother, his two sons, and his sons’ wives. He claims that
defendants have slandered them and that they physically assaulted plaintiff’s son. In
addition, plaintiff claims that the Obama Administration is “using racism, and terrorism,
and satanism” against him and his family.
Discussion
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
-3-
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 16th day of September, 2013.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-4-
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?