From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodgers v. T-Mobile

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Dec 2, 2024
3:24-cv-188-DPM (E.D. Ark. Dec. 2, 2024)

Opinion

3:24-cv-188-DPM

12-02-2024

TONYA SHARITY RODGERS PLAINTIFF v. T-MOBILE, Assurance/Metro; SHERLISA THOMAS; CANDICE NEWTON; and DOES, All Microsoft Inc. Workers DEFENDANTS


ORDER

D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge

1. Rodgers's application to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. 1, is granted. She reports living on social security disability income.

2. The Court must screen Rodgers's complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). She claims that, without her knowing, she was subjected to research that made her cochlear hearing aid implants compatible with electronic devices. She also says she has been subjected to an online scam resulting in her email address being available for anyone's use. She seeks $385 million and asks the Court to change her social security number and date of birth. The Court sees no actionable federal or state claim. Her allegations that the defendants studied her without her permission are fanciful and fail to state a claim. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The Court will dismiss the case without prejudice.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Rodgers v. T-Mobile

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Dec 2, 2024
3:24-cv-188-DPM (E.D. Ark. Dec. 2, 2024)
Case details for

Rodgers v. T-Mobile

Case Details

Full title:TONYA SHARITY RODGERS PLAINTIFF v. T-MOBILE, Assurance/Metro; SHERLISA…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas

Date published: Dec 2, 2024

Citations

3:24-cv-188-DPM (E.D. Ark. Dec. 2, 2024)