SWINT v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION et al, No. 1:2021cv01145 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 5/3/2021. (adh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
SWINT v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION et al Doc. 3 FILED 5/3/2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ROBERT JAMES SWINT, Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 21-1145 (UNA) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on its initial review of the plaintiff’s pro se complaint and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Under the statute governing in forma pauperis proceedings, the Court is required to dismiss a case “at any time” it determines that the action is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Upon careful review of the complaint, the Court concludes that its factual allegations are irrational or wholly incredible, rendering this case subject to dismissal as frivolous. See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992) (“[A] finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible[.]”); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (“[A] complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”); Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305, 1307–08 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (“A court may dismiss as frivolous complaints . . . postulating events and circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind.”). 1 Dockets.Justia.com The Court will grant plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. /s/ TIMOTHY J. KELLY United States District Judge DATE: May 3, 2021 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.
