Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. JFM-10-1299.
June 4, 2010
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, a resident of Baltimore, Maryland who holds himself out as a "Professor" and Department of Justice employee, filed this 28 U.S.C. § 1331 action on May 17, 2010, against Dukes Motel. His statement of facts alleges that:
"Forcing out of the hotel before the time in order to exposed to gun fire."
Paper No. 1 at 2.
In his relief request, plaintiff seeks the award of $997,000,000,000,000.00 and court order "forcing the motel to rent the disputed hotel for me indefinitely" and imposing life imprisonment for approximately twenty five unidentified individuals and the death penalty for thirty-five other individuals, including a federal district court judge. Although plaintiff's indigency application contains information the court finds questionable, he shall be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
Plaintiff claims that he receives $3,063.00 in monthly retirement income; has been employed by the U.S. Department of Justice since July of 2009; and has $200,000.00 accumulated at three separate banks. Paper No. 2.
This court may preliminarily review the complaint allegations before service of process and dismiss them sua sponte if satisfied that the complaint has no factual or legal basis. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989); see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); Cochran v. Morris, 73 F.3d 1310, 1314 (4th Cir. 1996); Nasim v. Warden, 64 F.3d 951 (4th Cir. 1995). As explained by the Supreme Court in Neitzke: "Examples of [factually baseless lawsuits] are claims describing fantastic or delusional scenarios, with which federal district judges are all too familiar." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. at 328.
Even when affording the pro se complaint and accompanying materials a generous construction, the court finds no basis to allow the action to go forward or to require supplementation. The complaint shall be summarily dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). A separate Order follows.