Carter v. Obama ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • FILED
    UNITED srArEs DISTRICT CoURT MAR 2 9 2012
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA C|erk. U.S. District & Bankruptcy
    C0urts for the District of Columbia
    Audrey Carter, )
    )
    Plaintiff, )
    )
    v. ) Civil Action No.
    )
    Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama, et al. )
    )
    )
    Defendants. )
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint and
    application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § l9l5(e), the Court is
    required to dismiss a complaint upon a determination that it, among other grounds, is frivolous.
    28 U.S.C. § l9l5(e)(2)(B)(i).
    Plaintiff, a resident of Burlington, New Jersey, purports to sue the wife and daughters of
    President Barack Obama and former President George Bush. See Compl. Caption. In her one-
    page complaint, plaintiff alleges, inter alia, that Michelle Obama "was never married to Barrack
    [sic] Obama before he became President[,] [that] he met [Michelle] while she was working in a
    ‘Go Go’ bar [,] [that] Michelle knew President [] Obama was dating me and later married me in
    August 2012[,] [and that] Michelle began to blackmail and threaten my husband President
    Obama . . . ." Compl.
    Plaintiff’ s outlandish and scandalous accusations are the type of fantastic or delusional
    scenarios warranting dismissal under § l9l5(e)(2) as frivolous. See Neitzke v. Williams, 
    490 U.S. 319
    , 325 (1989); Best v. Kelly, 
    39 F.3d 328
    , 330-31 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Furthermore, the
    allegations "constitute the sort of patently insubstantial claims" that deprive the Court of subject
    matter jurisdiction. Tooley v. Napolz'tano, 
    586 F.3d 1006
    , 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009); see Caldwell
    v. Kagan, 
    777 F. Supp.2d 177
    , 178 (D.D.C. 201 l) ("A district court lacks subject matter
    jurisdiction when the complaint ‘is patently insubstantial, presenting no federal question suitable
    for decision.' ") (quoting Tooley, 586 F.3d at l009). Henc o ~ complaint will be dismissed with
    l 0 inion.
    ; United Stl¢tes District Judge
    Date: Marc , 2012
    prejudice A separate Order accompanies this
    

Document Info

Docket Number: Civil Action No. 2012-0482

Judges: Judge Emmet G. Sullivan

Filed Date: 3/29/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014