United States District Court, District of Columbia
June 9, 2015
GEORGE LEE ODEMNS III, Plaintiff,
WHITE HOUSE, et al., Defendants.
COLLEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, 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 (1992); see Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (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. Plaintiff's allegations that defendants "have been collecting data (sounds, words, thoughts, dreams) from [him] for financial profit without consent... with the aide of other technology (microchips, satellite, audio/visual recorder)... and then distributed to U.S. Federal employees, contractors and international government entities, " Compl. at 1-2, do not comprise viable legal claims. 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 (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.