Hickman v. Pacer Federal Court Services

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: February 14, 2011
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2011-0375
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FoR THE DISTRICT oF CoLUMB1A F I L E D ) FEB 1 1 2011 ‘ ' C| k, U.S. D' t° t&B nkruptcy Derlan Douglas Hlcklnan’ § Coiiits for thelllislrict of Columbia Plaintiff, ) ) v. § Civil Action No. PACER Federal Court Services, ) ) Defendant. ) )

l\/IEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintifF s pro se complaint and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § l9l5(e), the Court is required to dismiss a complaint upon a determination that it, among other grounds, is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § l9l5(e)(2)(B)(i).

Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident, purportedly is suing the United States Courts’ Public Access to Court Electronic Records ("PACER"). He seeks "any payments due for PACER court service network of 94 federal courts document scaning [sic] ability’s [sic] and patent fees [] or payments for the equipment used . . . ." that he claims are due him, Compl. at l. Plaintiff seeks $94 million in damages. Complaints that describe fantastic or delusional scenarios or contain "fanciful factual allegation[s]" are subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(€)(2). Neitzke v. Wz'llz`ams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); accord Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C. Cir. l994). This complaint qualifies for such treatment and, thus, will be dismissed A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

¢ United States Districi Judge `i

Date: February [O , 2011