Yi v. Progress place et al, No. 8:2016cv02143 - 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. Progress place et al CHONG SU VI, Doc. 3 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAR-11414M1 31 A 11: 21 Southern Division CLERK'S OFFICE AT GREENBELT __TW PI ;TY Plaintiff, V. Case No.: GM-16-2143 PROGRESS PLACE, et al., Defendants MEMORANDUM OPINION Self-represented Plaintiff Chong Su Yi filed the above-captioned Complaint on June 16, 2016, together with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, against Defendants Progress Place and Montgomery County. ECF Nos. 1 and 2. Because Yi appears indigent, the Motion to Proceed In Forma Paupetts shall be granted. Although the Complaint is difficult to understand, Plaintiff appears to allege that he received a no trespass order from Progress Place, a "none [sic] profit organization," banning him from their premises for one week. ECF No. 1 1f4, 6. Plaintiff contends that he is entitled to relief since he is a citizen of Montgomery County and is therefore entitled to access shelters operated by the County. Id. ¶ 6. He alleges that the notice he received from Progress Place is a violation of the First Amendment since "religion could not establish unto Plaintiff through Progress Place," an example of "unilateral action" and "selective prosecution." Id. As relief Plaintiff seeks "164 days 250,000 dollars allowed by law; 41 million dollars; and punitive damages of 100 times; 4.1 billion dollars; total of 4.141 billion dollars." Id. ¶ 7. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2), a court may dismiss a case filed in farina pamper/.s if Dockets.Justia.com . • it determines that the action is frivolous or fails to state a claim on v‘thich relief may be granted. 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. Neitzke 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 ELHL15-2730, 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 In particular, he has not alleged why receiving a no trespass order of limited duration would create a cause of action under federal law. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint will be dismissed. A separate Order follows. tr August > ' . 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.
