Yi v. Department of Motor Vehicle of Maryland et al, No. 8:2016cv01712 - Document 3 (D. Md. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge George Jarrod Hazel on 8/31/2016. (c/m 08/31/2016 jf3s, Deputy Clerk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Yi v. Department of Motor Vehicle of Maryland et al Doc. 3 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT T OF MARYLAND IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRINNURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARY4dra Southern Division " I A 11: 21 CLERK'S OFFICJE AT GP,EEIIPELi CHONG SU YI, Plaintiff, v. Case No. G.IH-16-1712 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLE OF MARYLAND, et al., Defendants MEMORANDUM OPINION Self-represented Plaintiff Chong Su Yi filed the above-captioned Complaint on May 27, 2016, together with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauper/s. against Defendants. Department of Motor Vehicle of Maryland and the Secretary of the State of Illinois. ECF Nos. 1 and 2. Because Yi appears indigent, the Motion to Proceed In Forma Pcmperis shall be granted. Although the Complaint is difficult to understand, Plaintiff appears to allege that the State of Illinois "would not reinstate [his] driver[s] license" because of moving violations that he obtained. ECF No. 1 If 4. In addition, he appears to claim that the State of Illinois' actions were unlawful since he was a temporary resident of Illinois but permanently resided in Maryland. Icl. II 6. He concludes by alleging that citations for moving violations are violations of both the First Amendment and of State's rights. Id. ¶ 7. As relief Plaintiff sates he "want[s] the court to order: enforceable white post speed sign and its speed violation citation ipso facto in the prior ordo cogniscendi unconstitutional." Id. ¶ 8. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2), a court may dismiss a case filed in,fbrma pauperis if it determines that the action is frivolous or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Dockets.Justia.com An action is frivolous if it raises an indisputably meritless legal theory or is founded upon clearly baseless factual contentions, such as fantastic or delusional scenarios. Nei/the v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-28 (1989). "Although pleadings filed by a self-represented plaintiff are to be liberally construed, the plaintiff's complaint must contain factual allegations sufficient `to raise a right to relief above the speculative level' and that 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Harris V. Janssen Healthcare Products, No. CV ELH-15-2730, 2015 WL 5897710, at *2 (D. Md. Oct. 6,2015) (citing Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff has not provided any information that might lead to a reasonable conclusion that some plausible cause of action has accrued on his behalf, or that any such cause of action would fall within this Court's jurisdiction. Although Plaintiff appears to seek federal question jurisdiction, there are no facts alleged in the Complaint supporting any such causes of action. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint will be dismissed. A separate Order follows. August 3/ 2016 Date George J. Hazel United States District Judge
]]>
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.
