Kelly v. Obama

Filing 4

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. # 2 ] is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue, because the complaint is legally frivol ous and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B). FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for counsel [Doc. #3] is DENIED as moot.A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 04/17/2015. (CLK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL RAY KELLY,
Plaintiff,
v.
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:15CV616 HEA

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon plaintiff=s motion for leave to commence
this action without prepayment of the filing fee [Doc. #2]. Upon consideration of the
financial information provided with the motion, the Court finds that plaintiff is
financially unable to pay any portion of the filing fee. As a result, plaintiff will be
granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915.
Additionally, after carefully reviewing the complaint, 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 may 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 against a defendant who is
immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if Ait lacks an arguable basis in

either law or in fact.@ Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if does not plead Aenough facts
to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.@ Bell Atlantic Corp. V.
Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1974 (2007).
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 brings this action for monetary damages against defendant Barack
Hussein Obama. Plaintiff claims that on November 7, 2012, he was supposed to
have received the reward money for the capture of “Usama Bin Laden.” Plaintiff
states, inter alia, that the FBI emailed him and “reported that President Barrack
Obama took [his] financial information to pay the Rewards for Justice, for [the]
capture and death of Usama Bin Laden in the amount of $25 million, and an
additional $50 million brought up by Secretary of State Clinton [in] 2011.” The
complaint is 54 pages long; however, the Court is unable to ascertain the precise
nature of any other claims plaintiff may be attempting to bring.

2

Discussion
Having carefully reviewed the complaint, the Court concludes that plaintiff
has failed to state sufficient facts to give fair notice of the claims asserted. The
factual allegations are fanciful, incoherent, and delusional, and even affording the
complaint a liberal construction, the Court is unable to ascertain the nature of
plaintiff's claims.
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. 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, because the complaint is legally frivolous and fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B).

3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for counsel [Doc. #3]
is DENIED as moot.
A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.
Dated this 17th day of April, 2015

___________________________________
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4