Robinson v. Obama

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: April 4, 2014
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2014-0568
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED

APR ' 4 2014 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT clerk u_s msmct&aankru t FoR THE DISTRICT oF CoLUMB1A coun§ farina instructor c»¢u§i»ia

David Robinson Jr., ) ) Plaintiff, ) )

v. ) Civil Action No. /#" ) Barack Obama et al ., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM C)PINION

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has submitted an action captioned "Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Interlocutory Damages Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1985," and an application to proceed in forma pauperis The Court will grant plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction since plaintiff has not established his standing to sue. See Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action "at any time" it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting); Haase v. Sessz`ons, 835 F.Zd 902, 906 (D.C. Cir. l987) ("[T]he defect of standing is a defect in subject matter jurisdiction.").

Plaintiff, a resident of Rosedale, New York, sues, inter alia, President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, several leaders of Congress, and the National Security Agency ("NSA") for equitable relief and monetary damages exceeding $12 million. See Compl. at 13-1 5. Plaintiff is "challenging the constitutionality of a secret govemment program that unlawfully intercepts vast quantities of telephone and intemet communication of innocent

Americans without court approval . . . ." Ia’. at l. He alleges that he "is an innocent American

who frequently communicates by telephone and intemet," who now "has a well-founded belief that his communications are being intercepted." ]d. at 2. Plaintiff` s belief stems from nothing more than "public revelations [in 20l3] that the federal govemment, through . . . NSA, and with the participation of certain telecommunications and intemet companies, has conducted surveillance and intelligence-gathering programs that collect certain data about the telephone and intemet activity of American citizens within the United States." Klayman v. Obama, 957 F. Supp. 2d l, 1 (D.D.C. 2013).

"To establish Article lII standing, an injury must be ‘concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent; fairly traceable to the challenged action; and redressable by a favorable ruling."’ Clapper v. Amnesty Intern. USA, 133 S.Ct. 1l38, 1147 (20l3) (quoting Monsanto C0. v. Geertson Seed Farms, 561 U.S. l39, -, 130 S.Ct. 2743, 2752 (2()10)). Unlike the plaintiffs in Klayman, plaintiff does not allege that he is a "subscriber[] or user[] of certain telecommunications and intemet firms." Klayman, 957 F. Supp. 2d at l. His generalized fear that his communications are being intercepted "is insufficient to create standing." Clapper, 133

S.Ct. at 1154. A separate order of dismissal accompanies this emorandum Opinion.

Date: Marchi g , 2014 United St§.@_s_)istrict Judge