Hirpassa v. Federal Aviation Administration

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: April 20, 2010
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2010-0607
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED

APR 2 2010 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT C\erk, U.S. District_& Bankruptc\|¢ FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COU\’TS TO|' the DiSUlCf 01 C¢lll|mb 3 Kedist Hirpassa, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) .. v. ) Civil Action No.: 7 ) Federal Aviation Administration, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

The plaintiff has filed an application to proceed without prepayment of fees and a pro se complaint. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed.

In his complaint, the plaintiff states that since his employment as a summer clerk in 2004 at the U.S. Department of State, he has been "consistently stalked by various helicopters, mainly Arrny (Grey) and Police helicopter." Compl. at l. When he contacted the Federal Aviation Administration, he was "told to take pictures of it." Ia’. Immediately thereafter the plaintiffs’ camera was "found missing from [his] Bank of America safety box[.]" The plaintiff states that "whoever has been stalking me using helicopters have [sic] made it difficult for me to live my life the way I desire[.]" Id

The complaint appears to be based on the sort of "fantastic or delusional scenarios" that warrant summary dismissal. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-28 (1989) (determining that courts have the "unusual power to pierce the veil of the complaint’s factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless"). Thus, the complaint will

be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § l9l S(e)(Z)(B)(i) (requiring dismissal of frivolous complaints).

fin

A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

ed States District Judge

Date: /`L// ;L;,D