Ferguson-El v. United States

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: March 30, 2012
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2012-0507
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MAR 3 0 2012 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA é:}';°.§l; ?,'?i».°!%‘{§‘§fi§‘i§?‘鑧.'»l'.‘.’l.§la Leon Pat Ferguson-El, ) Plaintiff, § v. § Civil Action No. United States, § Defendant. § MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 191 5A (requiring dismissal of a prisoner’s complaint upon a determination that the complaint, among other enumerated grounds, is frivolous or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted).

Plaintiff, a prisoner in Oakwood, Virginia, purports to sue under the F ederal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ l346(b), 2671-2680, for the alleged acts or omissions of Attomey General Eric Holder, Jr., and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Plaintiff alleges that on February 17 , 201 l, he "mailed fiduciaries Clinton, and Holder Agent for defendant a Notice of Protests to plaintiff s unlawful seizure . . . and plaintiff is a Public Minister of the Sovereign Moorish American National . . . being held in the Admiralty and Maritime jurisdiction of the United States . . . by its co-business partner Commonwealth of Virginia a.k.a. State of Virginia." Compl. 11 7. When plaintiff did not receive a response from either Holder or Clinton, he mailed on March 27, 2011, an "‘Affidavit of Certificate of Non-Response"’ and, on April 2, 201 l,

submitted his tort claim for damages "for the failure [of Holder and Clinton] to secure

[plaintiff’s] unalienable Rights, Property, Rights, Immunities . . . ." Id. 1[1] 9-10. Plaintiff claims that he received no response to his tort claim within six months, id. at l, and, thus, has commenced this lawsuit against the government for $20 million. Id. at 8.

The United States has consented to be held liable under the FTCA only "in the same

manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances . . . ." 28 U.S.C.

§ 2674. Plaintiff’ s allegations are barely comprehensible and, in fact, present the type of fantastic or delusional scenarios warranting dismissal of the complaint as frivol0us. See Nez`tzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C. Cir. l994). Furtherrnore, nothing in the complaint comes close to alleging behavior on the part of the

Attomey General and Secretary Clinton that is cons` ‘ 1 ~ ' t of a private individual.

v anies this Memorandum Opinion.

ZZ United §tates District Judge DATE: Marc , 2012