United States District Court, D. Maryland
William M. Nickerson Senior United States District Judge.
13, 2016, the Court received for filing a fee-paid Complaint
filed by self-represented Plaintiff Roeh Isra El, ("Isra
El") a resident of Highland, Maryland. Isra El raises
claims of defamation, involuntary servitude, and property
deprivation under Admiralty Law. The cause of action raises
barely understandable claims regarding Defendants'
"tax actions" in the Circuit Court for Howard
County. ECF No. 1. Isra El seemingly claims that
his arrest damaged his good name and caused him to be placed
in a position of involuntary servitude. Id.
Isra El is proceeding as a self-represented litigant, the
Court must liberally construe his Complaint allegations.
See e.g., Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89,
94 (2007). This Court, however, is not required to conjure up
questions never squarely presented to it. See Beaudett
v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1277 (4th
Cir. 1985). Further, a pleading which sets forth a claim for
relief shall contain a short and plain statement of the
grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends; a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief; and a demand for judgment for
the relief the pleader seeks. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
8(a). Although self-represented pleadings must be
"liberally construed" and "held to less
stringent standards than those by lawyers, "
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007),
a Complaint need not contain detailed allegations. The facts
alleged must be enough to raise a right to relief above the
speculative level and require "more than labels and
conclusions, " as "courts are not bound to accept
as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual
allegation." See Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007), citing
Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286
Isra El is not proceeding in forma pauperis, no statutory
screening is authorized under the in forma pauperis statute.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Nevertheless, a
district court has inherent authority to dismiss a frivolous
complaint suasponte. See Mallard v. United States Dist.
Ct. for S.D. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 307-08, (1989)
(courts have authority to dismiss a frivolous or malicious
lawsuit even in absence of a specific statutory provision);
Ross v. Baron, 493 Fed.App'x 405, 406 (4th Cir.
2012) (unpublished) (noting that "frivolous complaints
are subject to dismissal pursuant to the inherent authority
of the court, even when the filing fee has been paid");
Fitzgerald v. First East Seventh St. Tenants Corp.,
221 F.3d 362, 364 (2d Cir. 2000) (holding that district
courts may dismiss frivolous complaints sua sponte,
even when plaintiff has paid the filing fee, noting that
"district courts are in particular likely to be exposed
to frivolous actions, and thus have an even greater need for
inherent authority to dismiss such actions quickly in order
to preserve scarce judicial resources").
court has attempted to determine the nature of the cause of
action from a generous construction of the papers, but
colorable claims cannot be fashioned from the pleadings. It
appears that Isra El is challenging the filing of traffic
charges against him and the imposition of sentence and fines
in Howard County. The Court is faced with Isra El's
general admiralty and libel allegations and it is impossible
to discern what claims are being brought by Isra El, how the
named Defendants are culpable, why the Complaint was filed in
this federal district court, and where this Court's
subject matter jurisdiction originates.
Court has the discretion to dismiss a case at any time,
notwithstanding the payment of any filing fee or any portion
thereof; if it determines that the action is factually or
legally fanciful. Given the materials presented before this
Court, the Complaint shall be summarily dismissed without
requiring amendment/supplementation or the issuance of
summonses. A separate Order follows.
 Isra El cites to State v.
Israel, Case Number 13K15056212. The state court
docket reveals that Isra El was charged with several traffic
violations in the District Court for Howard County, prayed a
jury trial and on May 18, 2016, entered an Alford
Plea in the Circuit Court for Howard County to one count of
driving a motor vehicle while his license was suspended.
See State v. Israel, Case Number
13K15056212 (Circuit Court for Howard County). He was
sentenced to 30 days in jail, all suspended, and one month of
supervised probation, to be terminated upon payment of his
ticket(s) and his obtaining a valid license. All other counts
were nolle prossed. (docket copy attached).
A federal court does not act as an
advocate for a self-represented claimant. See Brock v.
Carroll, 107 F.3d 241, 242-43 (4th Cir. 1996);
Wellerv. Department of Social Servs., 901 F.2d 387,
391 (4th Cir. 1990); Gordon v. ...