MUHAMMAD v. STAR et al, No. 1:2009cv00980 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 5/5/09. (ls, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Faraud K. Muhammad, Plaintiff, v. Secret CIA Agent Star et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. MAY 262009 u.s. District and Bankruptcy Courts Clerk, 09 0980 MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff s pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application and will dismiss the complaint as it is required to do "at any time [it] determines that ... the action ... is frivolous." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Plaintiff, a homeless individual in the District of Columbia, sues three individuals he identifies as agents of the Central Intelligence Agency. Plaintiff accuses the defendants of various misdeeds, including defaming his character by "submitt[ing] video recording footage onto a website [depicting him] as a pedophile" and hiding in his food and drink "cyanide poison, a cancer infections virus known to the CIA as [illegible], the HIV virus, syphyllis [sic] and what I believe is a physiologically based toxicokinetic risk assessment drug or photosynthetic chemical [] known as poison acetone." CompI. at 1. Complaints that describe fantastic or delusional scenarios are subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319,328 (1989); Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328,330-31 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Moreover, a complaint may be dismissed as frivolous when it lacks "an arguable basis in law and fact," Brandon v. District of Columbia Bd. of Parole, 734 I~ ./"" F.2d 56, 59 (D.C. Cir.1984), or is based on "fanciful factual allegation[s]." Neitzke, 490 u.s. at 325. This complaint satisfies the foregoing conditions and, accordingly, will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. Date: May 5, 2009 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
