Campbell v. Webb

• Court: District Court, E.D. Kentucky
• Decided: December 2, 2022
• Docket: 2:22-cv-00148
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY NORTHERN DIVISION (at Covington)

VINCENT CAMPBELL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 2: 22-148-DCR ) v. ) ) CHARLES WEBB, ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) AND ORDER Defendant. ) )

*** *** *** ***

Vincent Campbell is a resident of Covington, Kentucky. Proceeding without a lawyer, Campbell recently filed a civil Complaint with this Court. [Record No. 1] Campbell also has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. [Record No. 3] The financial information provided indicates that he lacks enough assets or income to pay the filing and administrative fees in this case. Therefore, the Court will grant Campbell’s fee motion and allow him to proceed as a pauper. The Court has also conducted an initial screening of Campbell’s Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The case will be dismissed without prejudice following this screeing. As currently drafted, the Complaint does not state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). In fact, Campbell does not appear to be seeking any relief from this Court. [See Record No. 1 at 4] Instead, he appears to be asking the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to investigate the named defendant, who he alleges is on parole, is living in his apartment building, and shot a bullet into his apartment. [See id.; Record No. 1-1 at 2.] This Court exists independent of the FBI and it does not generally have the authority to order federal law enforcement officials to initiate criminal investigations into specific individuals. See Saro v. Brown, 11 F. App’x 387, 388 (6th Cir. 2001) (making it clear that this “power is vested exclusively in the executive branch”). Therefore, Campbell’s submission with this Court is simply unavailing.1

Dismissal is also appropriate because Campbell has failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction. Although Campbell checked a box on his form Complaint indicating that this matter involves a federal question under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 [see Record No. 1 at 3], he has not identified the basis for such jurisdiction, and this Court cannot fairly perceive any plausible federal claim in this case. There is also no diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, as Campbell alleges that the parties are both Kentucky citizens. [See Record No. 1 at 1-2.] Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Campbell’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Record No. 3] is GRANTED, and payment of the filing and administrative fees in this case is WAIVED.

2. Campbell’s Complaint [Record No. 1] is DISMISSED without prejudice. 3. This action is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the docket. 4. Since Campbell’s filing includes an attached letter that is specifically directed to the FBI, the Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to forward a copy of Campbell’s seven-page filing at Record Nos. 1 and 1-1 to the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Kentucky.

1 Since Campbell’s filing includes an attached letter that is specifically directed to the FBI, the Court will direct the Clerk’s Office to forward a copy of Campbell’s filing to the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Dated: December 2, 2022.

a Les Danny C. Reeves, Chief Judge ie IJ * United States District Court “Ge Eastern District of Kentucky

-3-