From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Valero v. Obama

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Aug 8, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-1140 (D.D.C. Aug. 8, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-1140

08-08-2011

Raymond Valero, Plaintiff, v. President Barack Obama et al. Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff's pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (requiring dismissal of a prisoner's complaint upon a determination that the complaint, among other grounds, is frivolous).

Plaintiff, a Texas inmate confined in Lovelady, Texas, sues President Barack Obama, the United States, the State of Texas, a Texas judge, and an attorney. See Compl. at 4. He claims that "[t]he president and former presidents . . . [have] been cruelly hurting the poor American citizen . . . with these cruelly and painfully slavery (federal and state prison & jail)." Compl. at 5. Plaintiff "demand[s]" that this Court enter a judgment of acquittal and seeks $7 billion in damages. Id.

The complaint not only presents the type of fantastic or delusional scenarios found to justify immediate dismissal as frivolous, Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989); Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C. Cir. 1994), but it is frivolous also because it lacks "an arguable basis in law and fact." Brandon v. District of Columbia Bd of Parole, 734 F.2d 56, 59 (D.C. Cir. 1984). A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

________________________________

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Valero v. Obama

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Aug 8, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-1140 (D.D.C. Aug. 8, 2011)
Case details for

Valero v. Obama

Case Details

Full title:Raymond Valero, Plaintiff, v. President Barack Obama et al. Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Date published: Aug 8, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-1140 (D.D.C. Aug. 8, 2011)