Rowe v. SSID
Opinion and Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 4/18/16 granting the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the action under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e). The Court further certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a)(3). (Related Docs. 1 and 2 ) (D,MA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
CASE NO. 1:16 CV 721
JUDGE JAMES S. GWIN
OPINION AND ORDER
On March 23, 2016, plaintiff pro se Charles Rowe filed this in forma pauperis action
against “SSID.” For the reasons stated below, this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
The one-page complaint states in its entirety as follows:
Benifits in my name do to Mothers mental health, Physical well being, and current
arrangements, also, families conditions. Not to mention responsibilities on my behalf.
I’m only trying to be fair and help myself and others the best way I can and/or could
and the best way I know how as far as my experiences in life have been!
Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364,
365 (1982) (per curiam), the district court is required to dismiss an action under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e) if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable
basis in law or fact.1 Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989); Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468,
470 (6th Cir. 2010).
A cause of action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it lacks
“plausibility in the complaint.” Bell At. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 564 (2007). A
pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78 (2009). The factual allegations
in the pleading must be sufficient to raise the right to relief above the speculative level on the
assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. The
plaintiff is not required to include detailed factual allegations, but must provide more than “an
unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (2009).
A pleading that offers legal conclusions or a simple recitation of the elements of a cause of
action will not meet this pleading standard. Id.
Even construing the complaint liberally in a light most favorable to the plaintiff,
Brand v. Motley, 526 F.3d 921, 924 (6th Cir. 2008), it does not contain allegations reasonably
suggesting he might have a valid federal claim. See, Lillard v. Shelby County Bd. of Educ,,
76 F.3d 716 (6th Cir. 1996)(court not required to accept summary allegations or unwarranted
legal conclusions in determining whether complaint states a claim for relief).
Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted and this action is
An in forma pauperis claim may be dismissed sua sponte, without prior notice to the
plaintiff and without service of process on the defendant, if the court explicitly states that
it is invoking section 1915(e) [formerly 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)] and is dismissing the claim
for one of the reasons set forth in the statute. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp. v. Smith,
507 F.3d 910, 915 (6th Cir. 2007); Gibson v. R.G. Smith Co., 915 F.2d 260, 261 (6th Cir.
1990); Harris v. Johnson, 784 F.2d 222, 224 (6th Cir. 1986).
dismissed under section 1915(e). Further, the court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 18, 2016
s/ James S. Gwin
JAMES S. GWIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?