Yacoub v. United States of America et al

Filing 4

ORDER OF DISMISSAL without prejudice by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (RS, )

Yacoub v. United States of America et al

Doc. 4

Case 2:07-cv-01415-RSM

Document 4

Filed 09/20/2007

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Kais Yacoub, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this complaint against numerous defendants, alleging that they have poisoned him with toxic chemicals and used other means to gain control of his mind and cause other injury. The Court has reviewed the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and finds that it should be dismissed as frivolous. Congress provided with respect to in forma pauperis cases that a district court "shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines" that the "allegation of poverty is untrue" or that the "action or appeal" is "frivolous or malicious," "fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted," or "seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). While much of § 1915 outlines how prisoners can file proceedings in forma pauperis, § 1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis proceedings, not just those filed by prisoners. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F. 3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000). Further, "[i]t is also clear that section 1915(e) not only permits but requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim." Id. Therefore, this court v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants. KAIS YACOUB, Plaintiff, CASE NO. C07-1415RSM ORDER OF DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

must dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint if it fails to state a claim under§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), or if it is ORDER OF DISMISSAL - 1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:07-cv-01415-RSM

Document 4

Filed 09/20/2007

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

frivolous or malicious under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). "[A] complaint, containing both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Furthermore, "a finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or wholly incredible, whether or not there are judicially recognized facts available to contradict them." Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992). Dismissal is appropriate when the

facts alleged are "clearly baseless," "fanciful," "fantastic," and/or "delusional." Id. Plaintiff's complaint falls into the category of "the irrational or wholly incredible." In a detailed, single-spaced, twenty-one page complaint, he alleges that the defendants have used toxic chemicals, telepathy, color coding, astral bodies, electromagnetic waves, and other methods to control his mind and bodily functions. The named defendants include the United States of America and its agencies the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the countries of Iraq, Israel, India, France, and England; organizations such as the Knights of Columbus and American Zionist Movement; businesses such as Staples, Safeway, Fred Meyer, and AT & T; various hospitals, physicians, and dentists; the Washington State Patrol; Bellevue Police Department; and others. He alleges jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, federal question. The Court finds that plaintiff's allegations rise to the level of being fanciful, delusional, and factually incredible. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. at 33. Accordingly, the Court shall dismiss the

complaint as frivolous, without putting any defendant to the task of responding. The Court further finds that the defects in the complaint are incurable, so that plaintiff shall not be granted leave to amend. The complaint and action are accordingly DISMISSED without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Dated this 20th day of September, 2007.

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ORDER OF DISMISSAL - 2