Opinion
Civil Action 1:23-cv-1345 (CJN)
08-06-2024
HAROLD JEAN-BAPTISTE, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
CARL J. NICHOLS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pro se plaintiff Harold Jean-Baptiste has filed yet another complaint alleging that he has been targeted by the FBI. See, e.g., Jean-Baptiste v. DOJ, No. 23-cv-1054, 2023 WL 336770, at *1 (D.D.C. May 31, 2023) (dismissing complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because it was frivolous); Jean-Baptiste v. DOJ, No. 23-cv-2298, ECF No. 18 (prohibiting Jean-Baptiste from filing new actions without first obtaining leave).
Jean-Baptiste's “allegations regarding a federal government conspiracy” against him have previously been dismissed “for patent insubstantiality.” Jean-Baptiste, 2023 WL 336770, at *1 (quoting Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009)) (explaining that patently insubstantial complaints must be dismissed sua sponte for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction); see also Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536 (1974) (stating that Courts cannot exercise subjectmatter jurisdiction over complaints that are “so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit” (cleaned up); Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330 (D.C. Cir. 1994). This complaint is more of the same, so the result is the same: The Court will dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Jean-Baptiste's motion for sanctions, ECF No. 19, is also frivolous and is also denied.
It is therefore ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
The Clerk is directed to terminate this case.
This is a final appealable order.