Winston v. United States

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: April 10, 2025
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2025-0752
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MICHAEL WINSTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-0752 (UNA) ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on review of Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma

pauperis (ECF No. 2), his pro se civil complaint, and motion for preliminary injunction (ECF

No. 3. The application is GRANTED, the complaint and this civil action are DISMISSED

without prejudice for the reasons stated below, and the motion for preliminary injunction is

DENIED as moot.

The complaint describes injuries Plaintiff allegedly sustained in a motor vehicle accident,

assaults Plaintiff allegedly has sustained, criminal convictions and incarcerations, and the alleged

theft of property belonging to Plaintiff and his late mother. Plaintiff demands an order directing

the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute the criminal acts described in the

complaint. This the Court cannot do. The decision to conduct an investigation, or not, is

discretionary, see Gage v. U.S. Attorney General, No. 22-cv-0283, 2022 WL 602451, at *1 (D.D.C.

Feb. 28, 2022) (“The decision whether and when to investigate a particular matter is

quintessentially discretionary[.]”), and “courts cannot compel the executive branch to initiate an

investigation because such decisions are ‘generally committed to an agency’s absolute

discretion,’” Sherven v. U.S. Office of Special Counsel, No. 23-cv-0754, 2023 WL 2954440, at *1

1 (D.D.C. Apr. 12, 2023) (quoting Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 831 (1985)). A separate order

accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

DATE: April 10, 2025 /s/ TANYA S. CHUTKAN United States District Judge