Opinion
C22-1706JLR
01-03-2023
ORDER
JAMES L. ROBART, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the court are (1) pro se plaintiff John Robert Demos Jr.'s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (IFP App. (Dkt. # 1)); (2) Magistrate Judge Theresa L. Fricke's report and recommendation recommending the court deny Mr. Demos's IFP application and dismiss his proposed complaint with prejudice (R&R (Dkt. # 2); see Prop. Compl. (Dkt. # 1-1)); and (3) Mr. Demos's objections to the report and recommendation (Obj. (Dkt. # 3)). Having carefully reviewed the foregoing documents and the governing law, the court ADOPTS IN PART the report and recommendation.
A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation on dispositive matters. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). “The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to.” Id. The court has independently reviewed Mr. Demos's objections and agrees, on de novo review, with Magistrate Judge Fricke's conclusions that (1) Mr. Demos has failed to allege any nexus between his substantive claim regarding a plot to kidnap or assassinate the President of the United States and any alleged “imminent danger of serious physical injury” as required to proceed IFP under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and (2) Mr. Demos's proposed complaint is frivolous because it has no arguable basis in law or fact. (See generally R&R; Obj.) The court, however, finds that Mr. Demos's proposed complaint should be dismissed without prejudice in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and standing bar orders. See In re John Robert Demos, MC91-269CRD (W.D. Wash. Jan. 16, 1992); In re Complaints and Petitions Submitted by John Robert Demos (W.D. Wash. Dec. 15, 1982).
Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows:
1. the report and recommendation (Dkt. # 2) is ADOPTED IN PART;
2. Mr. Demos's IFP application (Dkt. # 1) is DENIED; and
3. Mr. Demos's proposed complaint (Dkt. # 1-1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.