Ainsley v. United States Air Force, et al, No. 1:2021cv01795 - Document 11 (N.D. Ohio 2021)

Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2 ) is granted. This action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e). Further, Plaintiff's motion for financial relief (Doc . No. 3 ), "motion forced no contact from all Defendants" (Doc. No. 4 ), motion to request criminal prosecution (Doc. No. 5 ), motion requesting an attorney (Doc. No. 7 ), and "renewed motion for no contact from Defendants and Imme diate Criminal Prosecution" (Doc. No. 8 ) are denied. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this decision may not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 12/14/2021. (M,S)

Download PDF

Ainsley v. United States Air Force, et al Doc. 11 Case: 1:21-cv-01795-DCN Doc #: 11 Filed: 12/14/21 1 of 4. PageID #: 165 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ABSYNTH AINSLEY, CASE NO. 1:21 CV 1795 Plaintiff, JUDGE DONALD C. NUGENT V. UNITED STATES AIR FORCE,et. al.. MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendants. AND ORDER I. Introduction On September 20,202\,pro se plaintiff Absynth Ainsley filed this action against the United States Air Force, NASA,Targeted Individual Program, Schriever's Air Force Base,the CIA,the FBI, and "U.S. Military"(Doc. No. 1). The complaint consists of disjointed and illogical statements and includes equally incomprehensible exhibits. The complaint alleges that the defendants "have been holding me hostage, hurting my body, mu[tilating] my breasts and vagina as well as other body parts, with court subliminals, extreme illegal experiments, microwave ... attacks, forced torture..."(Id). The complaint states that the defendants have conducted a torture program and "have my neck locked in metal encasing ... They have forced me out of my [apartment] to live in my car... They need to respect my rights."(Id.). The exhibits include letters to the defendants describing alleged "torture and abuse" by the defendants. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 1:21-cv-01795-DCN Doc #: 11 Filed: 12/14/21 2 of 4. PageID #: 166 including "physical loss of my own bio-matter" and "various DNA exttaction methods."(Doc. Nos. 1-2,1-3, and 1-4). The complaint also includes a copy of a Facebook post and a copy of an order denying Plaintiff a civil stalking protection order.(See Doc. Nos. 1-7,1-9, and 1-10). On October 20,2021, Plaintiff filed a supplement to the complaint(Doc. No.6). As best the Court can discern, the supplement contains statements alleging that the Targeted Individual Program staff"originated an attack" on Plaintiff and her property and illegally impounded her vehicle.(Id). II. Standard of Review Pro se pleadings are liberally construed. Boag v. MacDougall,454 U.S. 364, 365,102 S. Ct. 700,70 L. Ed. 2d 551 (1982)(per curiam); Haines v. Kerner,404 U.S. 519,520,92 S. Ct. 594,30 L. Ed. 2d 652(1972). The district court, however, is required to dismiss an informa pauperis action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams,490 U.S. 319, 328,109 S. Ct. 1827,104 L. Ed. 2d 338(1989); Lawler v. Marshall, 898 F.2d 1196(6th Cir. 1990); Sistrunkv. City ofStrongsville, 99 F.3d 194,197(6th Cir. 1996). A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact when it is premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or when the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. An action has no arguable factual basis when the allegations are delusional or rise to the level ofthe irrational or "wholly incredible." Denton v. Hernandez,504 U.S. 25, 32, 112 S. Ct. 1728,118 L. Ed. 2d 340(1992). A cause of action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it lacks "plausibility in the complaint." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,550 U.S. 544,564,127 S. Ct. 1955,167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007). -2- Case: 1:21-cv-01795-DCN Doc #: 11 Filed: 12/14/21 3 of 4. PageID #: 167 A pleading must contain a "short and plain statement ofthe claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,611-1^, 129 S. Ct. 1937,173 L. Ed. 2d 868(2009). The factual allegations in the pleading must be sufficient to raise the right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true. Twombly,550 U.S. at 555. The plaintiff is not required to include detailed factual allegations, but he or she must provide more than "an unadomed,the defendant unlawfully harmed me accusation." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. A pleading that offers legal conclusions or a simple recitation ofthe elements of a cause of action will not meet this pleading standard. Id. The Court is "not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation." Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S. Ct. 2932,92 L. Ed. 2d 209(1986). In reviewing a complaint, the Court must construe the pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Bibbo v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 151 F.3d 559, 561 (6th Cir. 1998). III. Discussion Although this Court recognizes that pro se pleadings are to be held to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, Haines,404 U.S. at 520-2V,Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108,110(6th Cir.1991), the Court is not required to conjure unpleaded facts or construct claims against defendants on behalf of a pro se plaintiff. See Bassett v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 528 F.3d 426,437(6th Cir. 2008). The complaint must give the defendants fair notice of what the plaintiffs claim is and the grounds upon which it rests. Lillard V. Shelby Cty. Bd. ofEdn., 76 F.3d 716,724(6th Cir.1996)(citation omitted). Additionally, the Court has discretion to refuse to accept without question the truth ofPlaintiffs allegations when they are "clearly baseless," a term encompassing claims that may be fairly described as fanciful. -3- Case: 1:21-cv-01795-DCN Doc #: 11 Filed: 12/14/21 4 of 4. PageID #: 168 fantastic, delusional, wholly incredible, or irrational. Denton, 504 at 32-33. Here, Plaintiffs complaint fails to meet even the most liberal reading ofthe Twombly and Iqbal standard as her pleading fails to connect any alleged occurrence to any specific, cognizable injury, and she fails to coherently identify how the defendants harmed her. Additionally, Plaintiffs pleadings do not contain a decipherable legal claim within the jurisdiction of this Court or a proper request for relief. And her factual allegations are at times wholly incredible and irrational. Plaintiffs complaint and supplement therefore lack an arguable basis in fact and fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. IV. Conclusion Plaintiffs application to proceed informa pauperis(Doc. No. 2)is granted. For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e). Further, Plaintiffs motion for financial relief(Doc. No. 3),"motion forced no contact from all Defendants"(Doc. No. 4), motion to request criminal prosecution(Doc. No. 5), motion requesting an attorney(Doc. No. 7), and "renewed motion for no contact from Defendants and Immediate Criminal Prosecution"(Doc. No. 8)are denied. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this decision may not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED. DONALD C. NUGEf United States District Jhdge DATED: I WWtt,\^,lOPl -4-

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.