United States District Court, D. New Mexico
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL
C. BRACK SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Civil
Rights Complaint Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1
("Compl.")), filed November 29, 2018, and
Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying
Fees or Costs (Doc. 2 ("Application")), filed
November 29, 2018
to Proceed in forma pauperis
statute for proceedings in forma pauperis, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a), provides that the Court may authorize the
commencement of any suit without prepayment of fees by a
person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of
all assets the person possesses and that the person is unable
to pay such fees.
When a district court receives an application for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, it should examine the papers and
determine if the requirements of [28 U.S.C] § 1915(a)
are satisfied. If they are, leave should be granted.
Thereafter, if the court finds that the allegations of
poverty are untrue or that the action is frivolous or
malicious, it may dismiss the case ....
Menefee v. Werholtz, 368 Fed.Appx. 879, 884 (10th
Cir. 2010) (citing Ragan v. Cox, 305 F.2d 58, 60
(10th Cir. 1962)). "[A]n application to proceed in
forma pauperis should be evaluated in light of the
applicant's present financial status." Scherer
v. Kansas, 263 Fed.Appx. 667, 669 (10th Cir.2008)
(citing Holmes v. Hardy, 852 F.2d 151, 153 (5th Cir.
1988)). "The statute [allowing a litigant to proceed
in forma pauperis ] was intended for the benefit of
those too poor to pay or give security for costs. . .
" Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.,
335 U.S. 331, 344 (1948). While a litigant need not be
"absolutely destitute," "an affidavit is
sufficient which states that one cannot because of his
poverty pay or give security for the costs and still be able
to provide himself and dependents with the necessities of
life." Id. at 339.
Court grants Plaintiffs Application to Proceed in District
Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs. Plaintiff signed an
affidavit declaring that she is unable to pay the costs of
these proceedings and that the following information is true:
(i) her average monthly income amount during the past 12
months is $3, 692.77 in child support and disability
payments; (ii) her total monthly expenses are $3, 724.00;
(iii) she has $6.43 in a bank account; and (iv) five persons
rely on her for support. The Court finds that Plaintiff is
unable to pay the filing fee because her monthly expenses
exceeds her monthly income and five persons rely on her for
of the Case
Donald J. Trump and every member of the Republican Parties
Leadership is intentionally and systematically destroying
every aspect of government. ... By use of tear gas and pepper
spray at the U.S. Border, Donald J. Trump, through the
negligent use of military and economic supremacy has executed
a savage injustice of engendering terrorism, terrorizing
tribal societies, and traumatizing communities. . . . Through
lying, contradiction, and denial, Donald J. Trump and the
Republican Leadership have aggravated the most dangerous
existential threats of Global Warming and nuclear war while
simultaneously opposing several forms of renuable [sic]
energy with the intent to destroy the prospects of Human
(Compl. at 3-4.) Although she did not list them as defendants
or identify them by name or otherwise, Plaintiff alleges that
the "Leadership" of the New Mexico National Guard
wrongfully imprisoned her, labeled her as a domestic
terrorist, wrongfully terminated her, and used public
resources to harass her via the Santa Fe Police Department.
(Id. at 2.) Plaintiffs request for relief includes:
(i) "Death of Donald J. Trump via hand to hand combat by
Plaintiff Ramie W. Chavez;" (ii) "$999, 999, 999.99
for Plaintiff Theory of Everything;" (iii)
"Anything else the Judge deems necessary;" (iv)
"Legalization of Prostitution;" and (v) "End
or WWWIII." (Id. at 5.)
Complaint fails to state a claim. Plaintiff fails to state
with any particularity what each Defendant did to Plaintiff,
when the Defendants committed these alleged unspecified
actions, or how those actions harmed Plaintiff. See
Nasious v. Two Unknown B.I.C.E. Agents, at Arapahoe Cty.
Justice Ctr., 492 F.3d 1158, 1163 (10th Cir. 2007)
("[T]o state a claim in federal court, a complaint must
explain what each defendant did to him or her; when the
defendant did it; how the defendant's action harmed him
or her; and, what specific legal right the plaintiff believes
the defendant violated.").
Court dismisses this case for failure to state a claim.
Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis under 28
U.S.C. § 1915. Section 1915(e)(2) states that "the
court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court
determines that... the action . . . fails to state a claim on
which relief may be granted."