Banks v. Food and Drug Administration

District of Columbia

Banks v. Food and Drug Administration

District Court, District of Columbia·Decided January 31, 2012·No. Civil Action No. 2012-0161·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _]AN 3 1 2012

Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy

RAYNOLDO BANKS’ ) Courts for the District of Co|umbia

Plaintiff, § v. § Civil Action N0. 2

FOOD AND DRUG ADl\/IINISTRATION, §

Defendant. § MEMORANDUM OPINION

The plaintiff identifies the defendant as "FEDERAL DRUGE AMINSTRIONS," which presumably is a reference to the Food and Drug Administration. The court notes that plaintiff filed an identical complaint against this same defendant, and the complaint was dismissed without prejudice for its failure to comply with the basic notice pleading requirements of Rule S(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Banks v. Food & DrugAdmin., N0. 12-0065 (D.D.C. Jan. l7, 2012). The instant complaint is a repetitive lawsuit, and the court will dismiss it

under 29 U.S.C. § l9l5(e)(2) as frivolous and malicious. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

Aél/

Un` d S t?istrict Judge DATE; /» /?9//

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _]AN 3 1 2012

Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy

RAYNOLDO BANKS’ ) Courts for the District of Co|umbia

Plaintiff, § v. § Civil Action N0. 2

FOOD AND DRUG ADl\/IINISTRATION, §

Defendant. § MEMORANDUM OPINION

The plaintiff identifies the defendant as "FEDERAL DRUGE AMINSTRIONS," which presumably is a reference to the Food and Drug Administration. The court notes that plaintiff filed an identical complaint against this same defendant, and the complaint was dismissed without prejudice for its failure to comply with the basic notice pleading requirements of Rule S(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Banks v. Food & DrugAdmin., N0. 12-0065 (D.D.C. Jan. l7, 2012). The instant complaint is a repetitive lawsuit, and the court will dismiss it

under 29 U.S.C. § l9l5(e)(2) as frivolous and malicious. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

Aél/

Un` d S t?istrict Judge DATE; /» /?9//

Banks v. Food and Drug Administration, (D.D.C. 2012).

Pincite

Banks v. Food and Drug Administration (Banks v. Food and Drug Administration) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.