Moon v. Trump

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia grants the pro se 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 allegations of conspiracy, stalking, attempted murder, theft, and related misconduct are irrational, wholly incredible, and insufficient to establish a plausible claim or invoke subject-matter jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. A complaint must be dismissed on initial review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) when it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact, alleges irrational or wholly incredible events, or is plainly abusive of the judicial process. Plaintiff's complaint met those criteria because its allegations were rambling, incomprehensible, irrational, and fanciful.
2. Federal courts lack power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction when the claims are so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit. Because the complaint fell into that category, the court could not exercise subject matter jurisdiction over it.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint was frivolous or maliciously abusive of the judicial process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
2. Whether the district court could exercise subject matter jurisdiction over claims that were so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit.

Disposition

dismissed