Moon v. Bang

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia grants the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The court concludes that the rambling allegations of a broad conspiracy and other wrongdoing are irrational, incomprehensible, and insufficient to invoke subject matter jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to state a plausible claim because its allegations were rambling, largely incomprehensible, and did not contain sufficient factual matter supporting relief.
2. A complaint is frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact or alleges irrational or wholly incredible events, and a complaint that is plainly abusive of the judicial process may be treated as malicious. Plaintiff's complaint was both frivolous and malicious.
3. The court could not exercise subject matter jurisdiction over the complaint because the claims were so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit, and the complaint was required to be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a plausible claim for relief.
2. Whether the complaint was frivolous or malicious because it lacked an arguable basis in law or fact and alleged irrational or wholly incredible events.
3. Whether the court was required to dismiss the complaint during in forma pauperis screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

Disposition

dismissed