Ford v. Bichotte-Hermelyn, Gotlieb, and Campanelli

Summary

This proposed findings and recommendation addresses a pro se plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment of fees in a civil action against Rodneyse Bichotte-Hermelyn, Brian Gotlieb, and Joy Campanelli. The magistrate judge recommends dismissal without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, improper venue, and malicious or frivolous filing. It also recommends denying the fee application as moot and declaring the plaintiff a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling injunction.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to allege any basis for federal-question or diversity jurisdiction and should be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 12(h)(3).
2. The complaint failed to state a claim because its conclusory allegations did not provide sufficient factual content to make entitlement to relief plausible.
3. The action should be dismissed as frivolous and malicious because it was wholly insubstantial, duplicative, and apparently intended to harass or abuse the judicial process.
4. The apparent ghost plaintiff should be declared a vexatious litigant and subjected to a narrowly tailored prefiling screening injunction addressing the identified abuse of the in forma pauperis privilege.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint alleged a basis for federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
2. Whether the complaint stated a plausible claim for relief under Rule 8 and the Rule 12(b)(6) standard.
3. Whether venue was proper in the Southern District of West Virginia.
4. Whether the action was frivolous or malicious under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
5. Whether the court should impose a narrowly tailored prefiling injunction against the apparent vexatious litigant.

Disposition

other