Opinion
Civil Action 21-2671 (UNA)
10-15-2021
DENNIS SHELDON BREWER, Plaintiff, v. CHRISTOPHER WRAY, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JAMES E. BOASBERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter is before the court on its initial review of plaintiff's pro se complaint (“Compl.”), ECF No. 1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. The Court will grant the in forma pauperis application and dismiss the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), by which the Court is required to dismiss a case “at any time” if it determines that the action is frivolous. Plaintiff has also submitted a request for emergency restraining order, ECF No. 3, which will be denied.
Generally, plaintiff alleges that defendants have subjected him to “Brain Remote Management Technology (BRMT).” Compl. at 6 (page numbers designated by CM/ECF). Through BRMT and other technologies, plaintiff alleges that defendants control his body movements, speech and thought, see, e.g., id. at 9-12, and thus have caused physical and psychological injury, see, e.g., Id. at 6-7, for which he demands damages of $15 million and an order enjoining defendants from deploying BRMT, see id. at 7.
“A complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009), quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A complaint that lacks “an arguable basis either in law or in fact” is frivolous, Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989), and a “complaint plainly abusive of the judicial process is properly typed malicious, ” Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305, 1309 (D.C. Cir. 1981). On review of the complaint, the Court concludes that its factual allegations are incoherent, irrational or wholly incredible, rendering the complaint subject to dismissal as frivolous. See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992) (“[A] finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible[.]”).
The Court will grant Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as frivolous. A separate order will issue.