Pantchev

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedApril 13, 2026
DocketCivil Action No. 2025-2786
StatusPublished

This text of Pantchev (Pantchev) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pantchev, (D.D.C. 2026).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GUEORGUI HRISTOV PANTCHEV, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-2786 (UNA) ) MOLLY C. DWYER, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

Memorandum Opinion

This matter is before the court on initial review of Plaintiff’s application for leave to

proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, and pro se complaint, ECF No. 1. The court will grant the

application, and for the reasons discussed below, dismiss the complaint without prejudice.

“A complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to

relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl.

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A complaint that lacks “an arguable basis either in

law or in fact” is frivolous. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). And the court cannot

exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a frivolous complaint. Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528,

536–37 (1974) (“Over the years, this Court has repeatedly held that the federal courts are without

power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction if they are ‘so attenuated and

unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit.’”) (quoting Newburyport Water Co. v.

Newburyport, 193 U.S. 561, 579 (1904)); Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir.

2009) (explaining that courts may dismiss cases “for patent insubstantiality,” including where

plaintiff allegedly “was subjected to a campaign of surveillance and harassment deriving from

uncertain origins”). Consequently, a court is obligated to dismiss a complaint as frivolous “when

1 the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible.” Denton v. Hernandez,

504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992).

The complaint consists of scattered insults and inflammatory language. Its allegations are

conclusory and lack any factual basis. The complaint is frivolous, and therefore must be dismissed.

A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

DATE: April 13, 2026 AMIR H. ALI United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport
193 U.S. 561 (Supreme Court, 1904)
Hagans v. Lavine
415 U.S. 528 (Supreme Court, 1974)
Neitzke v. Williams
490 U.S. 319 (Supreme Court, 1989)
Denton v. Hernandez
504 U.S. 25 (Supreme Court, 1992)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Tooley v. Napolitano
556 F.3d 836 (D.C. Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Pantchev, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pantchev-dcd-2026.