United States District Court, District of Columbia
MARY AKU QUARTEY, Plaintiff, Pro se, Gaitherburg, MD.
KETANJI BROWN JACKSON, United States District Judge.
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, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 118 L.Ed.2d 340 (1992); see Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" [A] complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact."). Having reviewed the plaintiff's complaint, the Court concludes that what factual contentions are identifiable are baseless and wholly incredible. Furthermore, the allegations of the complaint " constitute the sort of patently insubstantial claims" that deprive the Court of subject matter jurisdiction. Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010, 388 U.S.App.D.C. 327 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
The Court will grant plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
For the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby
ORDERED that the plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED; it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint and this civil action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
This is a final appealable Order. See Fed. ...