McKoby et al v. State of Washington et al

Filing 7

ORDER dismissing the 6 Complaint with prejudice and dismissing Plaintiff's 3 Motion to Appoint Counsel as moot. Signed by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM)

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

WILLIAM MCKOBY,

10

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. C17-0456-JCC
ORDER

v.

11
12

STATE OF WASHINGTON,

13

Defendant.

14
15

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff William McKoby’s complaint (Dkt. Nos.

16

1-1 and 6). Mr. McKoby is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (Dkt. No. 5.) Under

17

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), district courts have authority to review IFP complaints and must dismiss

18

them if “at any time” it is determined that a complaint is frivolous or fails to state a claim on

19

which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also id. § 1915A(b)(1); Lopez v. Smith,

20

203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000) (clarifying that Section 1915(e) applies to all IFP

21

proceedings, not just those filed by prisoners).

22

Mr. McKoby sues Defendants Jay Inslee, Robert Ferguson, and the State of Washington,

23

to name a few, for apparently rewriting the motor vehicle code using tricky wording, which

24

violates “State and Supreme Federal Law.” (Dkt. No. 6 at 2.) Mr. McKoby alleges that “the

25

evidence shows it was a Plot of Extortion, Malfeasance, Misfeasance, [and] Treason against the

26

People.” (Id. at 5.) The Court has determined that Mr. McKoby’s case is frivolous and fails to

ORDER
PAGE - 1

1

state a claim on which relief may be granted. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES Mr.

2

McKoby’s complaint (Dkt. No. 6) with prejudice. Mr. McKoby’s motion for court-appointed

3

counsel (Dkt. No. 3) is DISMISSED AS MOOT.

4
5

DATED this 10th day of April 2017.

6
7
8

A

9
10
11

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

ORDER
PAGE - 2