Bussie v. Boehner et al

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis Doc. # 2 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 2/27/14. (ARL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
ANTHONY BUSSIE,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN BOEHNER, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:14-CV-345-JAR

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Anthony Bussie’s motion for leave
to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #2].1 Plaintiff, an inmate at the Philadelphia-FDC
in Pennsylvania has filed at least three previous cases that were dismissed as frivolous,
malicious, or for failure to state a claim.2 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), therefore, the
Court may not grant the motion unless plaintiff was “under imminent danger of

1

Although the caption of the complaint lists a second plaintiff, Taron Bussie,
this individual has neither signed the complaint, nor has he paid the filing fee or
submitted a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Moreover, there are no allegations
in the complaint pertaining to Taron Bussie. As such, the Court will liberally construe
the complaint as having been brought solely by Anthony Bussie.
2

See Bussie v. Attorney General, Case No. 3:13-CV-476-WMC (W.D. Wis.);
Bussie v. Federal Election Comm’n, Case No. 3:13-CV-477-WMC (W.D. Wis.);
Bussie v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp., Case No. 1:13-CV-23000-UU (S.D. Fla.); Bussie
v. United States, Case No. 3:11-CV-1475-FLW (D. N.J.); Bussie v. Brauman, Case
No. 3:13-CV-1055-AWT (D. Conn.).

serious physical injury” at the time the complaint was filed. See Martin v. Shelton,
319 F.3d 1048, 1050 (8th Cir. 2003) (imminent danger of serious physical injury must
exist at the time the complaint is filed).
After reviewing the complaint, the Court finds no allegations indicating that
plaintiff was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed his
complaint.3 As a result, the Court will deny the motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis and will dismiss this action without prejudice to refiling as a fully-paid
complaint.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis [Doc. #2] is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED, without
prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

3

For relief, plaintiff seeks $2.4 trillion dollars. To the extent that one can be
discerned, the theme of the complaint appears to be that two United States
congressmen are corrupt. Plaintiff’s rambling, disjointed allegations are legally
frivolous and delusional.
-2-

A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.
Dated this 27th day of February, 2014.

JOHN A. ROSS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-3-