Travis Johnny Smith v. Bank of America

Smith v. Bank of America · United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio · March 24, 2026 · No. 1:25 CV 2774

Summary

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio grants Travis Johnny Smith’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses his complaint against Bank of America under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court concludes that the complaint’s unclear and conclusory allegations concerning the use of his state EIN numbers fail to state a plausible claim, and certifies that an appeal could not be taken in good faith.

Court
United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Pamela A. Barker
Jurisdiction
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Decision date
March 24, 2026
Docket number
1:25 CV 2774
Procedural posture
A pro se prisoner filed an in forma pauperis civil complaint against Bank of America. The district court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) before service.
Standard of review
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court screens an in forma pauperis complaint and must dismiss it if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from an immune defendant. For failure to state a claim, the complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a facially plausible claim and must provide fair notice of the legal claims and their factual grounds.
Precedential value
Unpublished district court memorandum opinion; precedential status is unknown
Parties
Travis Johnny Smith v. Bank of America
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

motions to dismisspleadingscivil procedurecommercial litigation

Practice areas

Civil procedureFederal pleadingIn forma pauperis screeningCommercial litigation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the complaint stated a plausible claim for relief against Bank of America under the federal pleading standards.
  2. Whether the complaint was subject to dismissal during mandatory screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Holdings

  1. The complaint failed to state a plausible claim because its unclear and conclusory allegations did not identify a cognizable legal claim or provide sufficient factual matter showing that Bank of America was liable.
  2. The court dismissed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

Key quotations

A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. (2)
Even liberally construed, the unclear and purely conclusory assertions set forth in his complaint fail to meet basic pleading requirements or suggest he has any plausible claim against the Defendant upon which the Court may grant him relief. (2)

Factual background

Travis Johnny Smith, a prisoner in Kentucky proceeding pro se, filed an in forma pauperis complaint against Bank of America. The complaint appeared to concern an account with the bank, but it did not clearly identify factual allegations or legal claims. Smith alleged only that Bank of America took his state EIN numbers and put them under his Social Security numbers, and he requested that the bank perform its job correctly and stop taking people's property.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed a brief complaint concerning alleged misuse of state EIN numbers and requested that Bank of America correct its conduct. The court granted Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, screened the complaint, and dismissed it for failure to state a plausible claim. The court also certified that an appeal could not be taken in good faith.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…