Opinion
1:24CV706
12-02-2024
TRAE JAVAR COMPTON, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants.
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Joi Elizabeth Peake United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff, a federal prisoner, submitted what the Court treated as a civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The form of the Complaint is such that serious flaws make it impossible to further process the Complaint. The problems are:
1. The filing fee was not received nor was a proper affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis submitted, with sufficient information completed and signed by Plaintiff, to permit review.
2. The Complaint is not on forms prescribed for use by this Court, nor is the information requested by such forms and necessary to process the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A contained in Plaintiff's submission. See LR 7.1(d).
Consequently, the Complaint should be dismissed, but without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a new complaint, on the proper forms, which corrects the defects of the present Complaint. The Court also notes that Plaintiff's claims are not understandable. He labeled his filing a “Notice” and includes two numbered points. The first states that Plaintiff is “a private citizen so [he] cant do martial, and [he doesn't] want to be co mingled with enemy belligerent so show cause why [his] private citizen status should be co mingled with enemy belligerent in public domain so it has to be sealed record.” [sic] (Complaint [Doc. #1] at 1.) The second states that “[t]here is no more current because there cant be, so there is only exclusive and if there is only exclusive then any letter [Plaintiff] write[s] have to be acknowledge under exclusive equity.” [sic] (Id.) These claims are nonsensical and Plaintiff must explain any claims he seeks to set out. To the extent Plaintiff chooses to file a new Complaint, the Court also notes that it appears that the potential defendants may be located in the District of South Carolina, where Plaintiff is housed. The events challenged in the Complaint are may have occurred or be occurring there as well. Therefore, it appears that venue would be proper in that District, and Plaintiff may obtain forms and instructions from the Clerk's Office for filing in that District. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). The address is: Matthew J. Perry, Jr. Courthouse, 901 Richland Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201.
If Plaintiff chooses to re-file his complaint here in this District, he should correct all of the matters noted above and should also include a statement addressing the proper venue in this case, for the Court's consideration in determining whether this case must be transferred to a proper district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406.
In forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that In forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a new complaint, on the proper forms and in the proper district, which corrects the defects cited above.