McBrien v. Federal Bureau of Investigation ( 2009 )

FILED
FEB" 3 2009
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NANCY MAYER WHITIINGTON. Cl.EHK
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA u.s. DISTRICT COlIIr
KAREN McBRIEN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
Civil Action No.
09 0197
FEDERAL BUREAU OF )
INVESTIGATION, et at., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff s application to proceed in
forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. 1 The court will grant the application, and dismiss the
complaint.
The court must dismiss a complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(E)(I)(B). In Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S.
319 (1989), the Supreme Court states that the trial court has the authority to dismiss not only
claims based on an indisputably meritless legal theory, but also claims whose factual contentions
are clearly baseless. Claims describing fantastic or delusional scenarios fall into the category of
cases whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. !d. at 328. The trial court has the discretion
to decide whether a complaint is frivolous, and such finding is appropriate when the facts alleged
are irrational or wholly incredible. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992).
Plaintiff has submitted two pleadings which appear to be duplicates. For purposes
ofthis Memorandum Opinion and Order, the court consolidates the two pleadings.
1
Plaintiff alleges that various federal government agencies and contractors are conducting
surveillance on her in her home and as she travels, that other entities have conducted biomedical
and genetic experiments on her, and that other unidentified individuals are conspiring to harass
her and to deprive her of any assistance with her troubles. Plaintiff demands monetary damages
and injunctive relief. The court is mindful that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to
less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,520 (1972). Having reviewed plaintiffs complaint, it appears that its
factual contentions are baseless and wholly incredible. For this reason, the complaint is frivolous
and must be dismissed.
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
2