Summary
This memorandum and order from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania addresses a pro se plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and his underlying civil complaint. After granting leave to proceed without prepayment of fees, the court screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and found the allegations to be factually baseless, legally meritless, and unintelligible. Consequently, the court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, concluding that amendment would be futile.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the complaint is frivolous and fails to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8.
Holdings
- The complaint is dismissed with prejudice as frivolous because it lacks a factual and legal basis and fails to state a plausible claim within the Court's jurisdiction.
- The court grants Aristilde leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
Key quotations
“To the extent the Court can understand Aristilde’s allegations, they lack a basis in fact and law and also fail to state a plausible claim within the Court’s jurisdiction.”
Factual background
Aristilde filed a private criminal complaint in state court naming a Jane Doe neighbor and alleges a conspiracy involving landlords, police, and other actors that allegedly controlled his devices, caused financial harm, and prevented personal relationships. He claims arrests, seizure of his car, loss of credit, and job opportunities, but provides no clear relief sought.
Procedural history
Plaintiff Stanley Aristilde filed a pro se complaint alleging a vast conspiracy against him. The court required him to file a proper complaint and an in forma pauperis motion, which he subsequently filed. The court now rules on the motion and the complaint.