Connie Denice Watson v. Kendra Glenn

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan dismissed Connie Denice Watson’s pro se complaint against Kendra Glenn without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court concluded that the complaint failed to state viable claims under the cited criminal statutes and civil RICO, and did not comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8.

Holdings

1. A complaint filed by a plaintiff proceeding without prepayment of fees or costs must be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) when it is frivolous or fails to state a claim.
2. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 287, and 1028 do not provide a private right of action.
3. A civil RICO claim is inadequately pleaded when the complaint does not allege sufficient plausible facts showing racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt under 18 U.S.C. § 1962.
4. A complaint must provide a short and plain statement of the grounds for jurisdiction, the claim showing entitlement to relief, and the relief sought, and each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint should be dismissed during screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim or frivolousness.
2. Whether 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 287, and 1028 provide a private right of action.
3. Whether the complaint pleaded sufficient facts to state a civil RICO claim under 18 U.S.C. § 1962.
4. Whether the complaint complied with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 8(d)(1).

Disposition

dismissed