Opinion
Case Number: 13-21556-CIV-MORENO
06-19-2013
RONALD JOEL FOUNTAIN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant.
ORDER DISMISSING CASE AND DENYING ALL PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. For the reasons set forth below, this case is DISMISSED. Additionally, all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
In his in forma pauperis complaint, the Plaintiff lists various federal laws, without any substantive allegations to support a claim for $3.5 billion. He lists the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He attaches postal receipts and news articles to the complaint, without rhyme or reason. From the attachments to the complaint, it appears that the Plaintiff is a repeat filer and his cases have been dismissed in other district courts.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), a court "shall dismiss the [in forma pauperis action] at any time if the court determines that . . . the action . . . is frivolous or malicious." According to the United States Supreme Court, a complaint is frivolous "where it lacks an arguable basis in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (discussing dismissals under former section 1915(d), which contained the same language as current section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)). A court may dismiss claims under section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) where the claims rest on an indisputably meritless legal theory or are comprised of factual contentions that are clearly baseless. Id. at 327.
In Neitzke, the Supreme Court provided several examples of frivolous or malicious claims. Where the defendant is clearly immune from suit, or where the plaintiff alleges infringement of a legal interest which obviously does not exist, then the claim is founded on an indisputably meritless legal theory. Id. at 327. Claims detailing fantastic or delusional scenarios fit into the factually baseless category. Id. at 327-28. Finally, this Court also notes that a pro se plaintiff must be given greater leeway in pleading her complaint. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972).
Mindful of these principles, the Court proceeds to evaluate Plaintiffs in forma pauperis complaint. Plaintiff's complaint is a mere list of federal laws. Without any factual allegations to support a federal cause of action, the Court finds Plaintiff's complaint is frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I). Simply stated, the complaint does not contain "an arguable basis in law or in fact." Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. After reviewing the entire complaint, the Court concludes that the claims are indisputably meritless. Accordingly, it is
ADJUDGED that this case is DISMISSED, and all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. This case is CLOSED. ,
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 19th day of June, 2013.
______________
FEDERICO A. MORENO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies provided to:
Counsel and Parties of Record