Ink v. U.S. Government

Filing 6

OPINION AND ORDER: I GRANT the Application to Proceed in forma pauperis 1 , but I DISMISS the Complaint 2 without service of process. Signed on 6/19/17 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION

GUS WHO INK,
No. 3:17-cv-00830-MO
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
U.S. GOVERNMENT,
Defendant.
MOSMAN, J.,
Pro se Plaintiff Gus Who Ink filed a Complaint [2] against the “U.S. Government et al.”
based on his assertion that he predicted an earth quake and now seeks to stop all fracking in the
Oklahoma area. Plaintiff Who also filed an Application to Proceed in forma pauperis [1].
Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. But for the reasons
set forth below, Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED without service of process.
DISCUSSION
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), a complaint filed in forma pauperis must be
dismissed before service of process if it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.
The plaintiff must allege “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); see also, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556

1 – OPINION AND ORDER

U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Thus, the complaint must contain “well-pleaded facts” that “permit the
court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679.
Here, the face of the Complaint fails to allege sufficient facts to state a cause of action
that is plausible on its face. Mr. Who also fails to show he has standing to bring his claims
against the U.S. Government and that the U.S. Government has waived its sovereign immunity.
Thus, I GRANT the Application to Proceed in forma pauperis [1], but I DISMISS the Complaint
[2] without service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19th
DATED this ______ day of June, 2017.

/s/ Michael W. Mosman
_____________________________
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
Chief United States District Judge

2 – OPINION AND ORDER