Opinion
Case: 1:15-cv-01122
07-07-2015
George Lee Odemns III, Plaintiff, v. NRA et al., Defendants.
Jury Demand
Assigned To : Unassigned
Assign. Date : 7/13/2015
Description: Pro Se Gen. Civil F Deck
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on review of the plaintiff's pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the case will be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), which requires the Court to dismiss a complaint upon a determination that it, among other grounds, is frivolous.
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident, alleges that since his birth in October 1980, the thirteen named defendant entities "have been collecting data (sounds, words, thoughts, dreams) from me for financial profit without consent . . . ." Compl. at 2. He further alleges that the data "was transmitted straight to the source(s) (computer/super computer, teleprompter) and then distributed to company employees and contractors." Id. (parentheses in original). Plaintiff "thought maybe that [he] wasn't getting compensated because of identity protection purposes but it has become clear that [he is] a technological slave." Id. Plaintiff seeks $3 million in "compensation." Id. at 3.
The instant complaint presents the type of fantastic and delusional scenarios warranting dismissal of the case under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as frivolous. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); see Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (a court may dismiss claims that are "essentially fictitious"-- for example, where they suggest "bizarre conspiracy theories . . . [or] fantastic government manipulations of their will or mind") (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305, 1307-08 (D.C. Cir. 1981) ("A court may dismiss as frivolous complaints . . . postulating events and circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind."). Furthermore, a frivolous dismissal is warranted when, as here, the complaint 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.
/s/_________
United States District Judge
Date: July 7th , 2015