Smith v. United States ( 2021 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FILED
MAR 22 2021
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Court for the District of Columbia
ANGELIA DENISE SMITH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 21-0700 (UNA)
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of the Plaintiff’s pro se complaint and
application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Under the statute governing in forma
pauperis proceedings, the Court is required to dismiss a case “at any time” it determines that the
action is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Here, having reviewed the complaint carefully, the Court concludes that it
cannot discern what claim or claims Plaintiff intends to bring. Because Plaintiff’s complaint
lacks coherence and fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, the Court is required
to dismiss it under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Gwinnell-Kennedy v. U.S. Gov’t Judiciary,
No. 09-cv-737, 2009 WL 1089543, at *1 (D.D.C. Apr. 22, 2009) (summarily dismissing
complaint under § 1915(e)(2) because it was “incoherent”); McGuire v. U.S. Dist. Court, No. 10-
cv-696, 2010 WL 1855858, at *1 (D.D.C. May 4, 2010) (summarily dismissing complaint under
§ 1915(e)(2) because it was “largely incoherent and nonsensical”); cf. Neitzke v. Williams, 490
U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (“[A] complaint, containing . . . . factual allegations and legal conclusions .
. . lack[ing] an arguable basis either in law or in fact” shall be dismissed).
1
Accordingly, the Court will grant Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and
will dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). An Order
consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
/s/
AMIT P. MEHTA
United States District Judge
DATE: March 22, 2021
2