Odemns v. Comcast Holdings

Opinion

4,4"1,“\${M.Aiwt.>., ~4.… . c . ,csz<,,~V,~<~W!Ww~»~m.m.»~m~.. h

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GEORGE LEE ODEMNS lll, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case: 1116-cv-01946 V. ) Assigned To : Unassigned ) Assign. Date : 9/30/2016 ' _ COMCAST HOLDINGS, €I al., ) Descr`\ption: Pro Se Gen. C\v\| ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

The trial court has the discretion to decide whether a complaint is frivolous, and such a finding is appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational or wholly incredible Denlon v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); see Neitzke v. Willz`ams, 490 U.S. 3l9, 325 (1989) (“[A] complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”). Having reviewed the plaintiffs complaint, the Court concludes that what factual contentions are identifiable are baseless, irrational and wholly incredible Furthermore, the allegations of the complaint “constitute the sort of patently insubstantial claims” that deprive the Court of subject matter jurisdiction Tooley v. Napolitano,

586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009).

The Court will grant plaintiffs application to proceed informal pauperis and will dismiss the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § l9l5(e)(2)(B)(i). An Order consistent with this

Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

DATE;7/23//”/F W/%M&

United Stzites District Judge