United States District Court, District of Columbia
Donnie Mack Sellers. Plaintiff,
United States el al., Defendants.
matter is before the Court on initial review of plaintiffs
pro se complaint and application for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. For the reasons explained
below, the in forma pauperis application will be
granted and this case will be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 19J5A, which requires immediate dismissal of a
prisoner's complaint that fails to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted or is frivolous.
complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as
true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on
its face.' " Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Ail. Corp, v. Twombly,
550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). Plaintiff is a Montana state
prisoner. He sues the United States, several federal
agencies, and Montana Governor Steve Bullock, for injunctive
relief. See Compl. at 1-2.
states that he "is a 100% disabled veteran with brain
injury." Compl. ¶ 14. He alleges the following
occurrences with regard to the United States, While
incarcerated in Montana, plaintiff learned "of
homegrown/alien-foreign terror activities being
planned/conducted on U.S. soil in several states, "
including Montana. Compl. at 1. In addition, plaintiff
"has knowledge of several Muslims in the United States
[who] are not homegrown who share the beliefs and brotherhood
of Al Queda. ISIS, and other Muslim cult branches," one
of whom is alleged to be "the uncle of the Nigerian kid
[who] tried to blow up the Delta airliner over Detroit a
while back, who resides in Texas, but also has homes in New
York, London, and Nigeria. Id. ¶¶ 16-17.
Plaintiff claims to have "certified mail receipts,
" showing that "he tried to report what he
knew to the FBI and Homeland Security before he ran afoul of
the law of Montana, " but "[n]either defendant
responded in any manner." Id. ¶¶
20-21 (emphasis added). Despite his ''communication
problems due to [his] brain injury." plaintiff
"believes he was explicit to these defendants."
Governor Bullock, plaintiff alleges that Bullock is a member
of "a deeply entrenched generations old 'Montana
Organized Consanguinity/ Kindred Administrations (MOCKA),
" who has "abdicate[d] all his powers and
responsibilities to [MOCKA] without any type of supervision
or accountability, " Compl. ¶¶ 29, 31.
Plaintiff contends that "a lot of Montana state
entities, " including the Department of Corrections,
"are operated by [MOCKA]. Id. ¶ 29.
"The gist of this complaint, " then, "is the
fact that because of this organized crime families [sic]
operating the states [sic] prison system for profit, "
plaintiff "is unable to communicate and report to the
named defendants hereof the danger as explained above."
Id. ¶ 33. The conspiratorial allegations
continue for an additional twenty or more paragraphs, As
relief, plaintiff seeks (1) a "protective order .. .
until a proper investigation and/or trial can be
conducted"; (2) an order "to all defendants to work
together and conduct a system that allows inmates with
knowledge about illegal aliens and activities on U.S. soil to
report to them at least by U.S. mail in a manner that
organized crime families like the MOCKA system in Montana
cannot block or interfere; and (3) an order compelling the
United States Department of Justice to investigate "the
corruption, lies, deceit, racketeering, and murders being
conducted in Montana by the MOCKA families as state employees
under state law and federal employees under federal law in
partnership." Compl. at 13-14.
lacking "an arguable basis either in law or in
fact' are subject to dismissal as
frivolous. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325
(1989). "In determining whether a particular . . .
complaint is frivolous . .., the threshold issue for the
trial court is an assessment of the substance of the claim
presented, i.e., is there a factual and legal basis
... for the asserted wrong, however inartfully pleaded."
Crisafi v. Holland, 655 Â¶ 2d 1305, 1307 (D.C. Cir.
1981), quoting Watson v. Auk, 525 F.2d 886, 892 (5th
Cir. 1976)). Plaintiffs allegations are the type of
"fantastic or delusional scenarios'' warranting
dismissal on frivolous grounds. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at
328; cf. Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C.
Cir. 1994) (a court may dismiss claims that are
"essentially fictitious"- for example, where they
suggest "bizarre conspiracy theories . . . [or]
fantastic government manipulations of their will or
mind") (citations and internal quotation marks omitted);
Crisafi, 655 F.2d at 1307-08 ("A court may
dismiss as frivolous complaints ... postulating events and
circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind.").
plaintiff s allegations were plausible, this Court would have
no authority to grant the requested relief. The United States
Attorney General has absolute discretion in deciding whether
to investigate claims for possible criminal or civil
prosecution. As a general rule applicable here, such
decisions are not subject to judicial review.
Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v, Reno, 56 F.3d
1476, 1480-81 (D.C. Cir. 1995). And the Eleventh Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution immunizes Governor Bullock, who is sued
at best in his official capacity, from this lawsuit.'
Therefore, this case will be dismissed. A separate order
accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
 The amendment provides in pertinent
part: “[t]he judicial power of the United States shall
not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity,
commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by
Citizens of another State." U.S. Const, amend. XI. It is
long established that this amendment applies equally to suits
brought by citizens against their own states. See Edelman