Williams v. Kassebaum

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Plaintiff Troy Williams is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint, because it is legal ly frivolous and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2)(B). A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on March 12, 2014. (MCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
TROY WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY KASSEBAUM,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:14CV00434 ERW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the application of Troy Williams for leave to
commence this action without prepayment of the filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915. Upon consideration of the application, plaintiff will be granted in forma pauperis
status. In addition, and for the reasons stated below, the Court will dismiss this action
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
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. When faced with alternative explanations for the alleged misconduct, the Court

-2-

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, 32-33
(1992).
The Complaint
Plaintiff, a resident at the Northwest Missouri Psychiatric Rehabilitation Center,
brings this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action Nancy Kassebaum (a former senator for the State
of Kansas).
Plaintiff alleges that, when he resided at the Farmington State Hospital in 1995,
he wrote to defendant Kassebaum about his idea to cure numerous diseases. Plaintiff
states that he sent defendant his “feet spray formula,” but afterwards, a man with
herpes entered his room and “made [plaintiff] release his idea without a patent.”
Plaintiff goes on to make other unintelligible allegations about the advertising of the
foot spray, and he asks the Court to “tell Nancy Kassebaum she can keep all proceeds.”
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
-3-

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 [ECF No. 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.
So Ordered this 12th day of March, 2014.
________________________________________
E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-4-