Jones v. USA

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis under 42:1983 (prisoner) filed by Plaintiff William Jones; motion is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall pay an initial filing fee of $1.50 within t hirty (30) days of the date of this Order (Initial Partial Filing Fee due by 2/24/2016). Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to Clerk, United States District Court, and to include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case number; and (4) that the remittance is for an original proceeding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue, because subject matter jurisdiction is lacking. A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 1/25/16. (CAR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

WILLIAM JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:15-CV-1524-RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for leave to commence
this action without payment of the required filing fee [Doc. #2]. After reviewing
plaintiff’s financial information, the Court will grant the motion and plaintiff will
be assessed an initial partial filing fee of $1.50, which is twenty percent of his
six-month average monthly deposit. See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(b)(1). Furthermore,
based upon a review of the complaint, the Court finds that this action should be
dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
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 it does not plead Aenough
facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.@ Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (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, an inmate at the South Central Correctional Center, brings this
action for unspecified monetary damages against “US# Sates.” Plaintiff states
that he is illegally being charged postage for a letter he wants to send to “the
Governor [sic] office.”
Discussion
At the outset, the Court will liberally construe this action as having been
brought against the United States of America pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
2

“It is axiomatic that the United States may not be sued without its consent
and that the existence of consent is a prerequisite for jurisdiction.”

United States

v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206, 212 (1983). The government’s waiver of sovereign
immunity cannot be implied, but “must be unequivocally expressed in statutory
text.” Lane v. Pena, 518 U.S. 187, 192 (1996). Plaintiff does not allege or
reference any statute that purportedly waives sovereign immunity for his claim.
As such, this action will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff=s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall pay an initial filing fee of
$1.50 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff is instructed to
make his remittance payable to AClerk, United States District Court,@ and to
include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case
number; and (4) that the remittance is for an original proceeding.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or
cause process to issue, because subject matter jurisdiction is lacking.

3

A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and
Order.
Dated this 25th day of January, 2016.

___________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4