Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Adams v. Drug Enforcement Administration

United States District Court, District of Columbia

May 12, 2014

DALE BRENT ADAMS, Plaintiff,
v.
DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, et al., Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge.

Plaintiff claims that he is the victim of unlawful government surveillance pursuant to its Terrorist Surveillance Program, Compl. ¶¶ 11, 26, and through the efforts of the Drug Enforcement Administration, see id. ¶¶ 40-45, and the National Security Administration, see id. ¶ 59. By means of this surveillance, plaintiff alleges, the government has interfered with virtually all aspects of his life, from "financial[] oppress[ion], " id. ¶ 60.E., to violation of "the husband-wife, attorney-client and work product privilege[s], " id. ¶ 60.G., to "breach of confidentiality of trade secrets, customer contacts and other business records, " id. ¶ 60.K., to interference with his "fundamental right to have a child, " id. ¶ 60.L. He demands a declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and unspecified monetary damages. Id. ¶ 75; see id. at 10-11 (page numbers designated by the Court).

To survive dismissal, the plaintiff not only must plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face, " Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007), but also must plead those facts with enough specifically "to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, " id. at 555. "[W]here the well-pleaded facts do not permit the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct, the complaint has alleged - but in has not shown - that the pleader is entitled to relief." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009) (quoting Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 8(a)(2)) (brackets and internal quotation marks removed). The Court "[d]etermine[s] whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief" by "draw[ing] on its judicial experience and common sense." Id. (citation omitted). With these considerations in mind, the Court concludes that the complaint must be dismissed. The few factual allegations set forth in the complaint are, at best, highly speculative and conclusory, such that the complaint "stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief." Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557 (brackets, internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

The Court will grant the plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss the complaint without prejudice.[1] An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.