United States District Court, D. Maryland
BRIDGET M. BIRMINGHAM Plaintiff,
U.S. GOVT. Defendant.
Xinis United States District Judge.
above-captioned complaint was filed on December 29, 2016,
together with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, which
shall be granted. Plaintiff complains that her residence
“is focused on” 24 hours, seven days a week,
causing her to lose her privacy. She also claims that
telephone calls to her house are stolen and “received
vacant;” her internet, cable, electricity, heating and
air conditioning unit, washer, and dryer are
“controlled by below activities;” and calls
placed to 911 are directed “below.” ECF No. 1, p. 6.
Plaintiff claims that men and women of the federal government
are hounding her for a “safety zone” to land
“corrupt” in. Id., p. 7. No particular
relief request is made.
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, courts are required to screen a
plaintiff's complaint when in forma pauperis status has
been granted. Therefore, pursuant to this statute, numerous
courts have performed a preliminary screening of non-prisoner
complaints. See Michau v. Charleston Cnty., S.C.,
434 F.3d 725, 727 (4th Cir. 2006) (applying 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B) to preliminary screen a non-prisoner
complaint); Troville v. Venz, 303 F.3d 1256, 1260
(11th Cir. 2002) (applying § 1915(e) to non-prisoner
actions); Evans v. Albaugh, 2013 WL 5375781 (N. D.
W.Va. 2013) (28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) authorizes dismissal of
complaints filed in forma pauperis).
plaintiff is proceeding as a self-represented litigant, the
court must liberally construe her 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), 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
construing complaint allegations, the court finds that
plaintiff has, at best, set out inchoate claims, that do not
state a federal cause of action under this Court's §
1331 jurisdiction. A district court has inherent authority to
dismiss a frivolous complaint sua sponte. 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”). The court finds that the instant
matter is subject to dismissal due to plaintiff's failure
to allege a cognizable federal claim. A separate order
 Plaintiff noted that the United States
Government lives below her residence in a bomb shelter. ECF
No. 1 at p. 2.
 Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2)(B)
(2) Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion
thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the
case at any time if the court determines that-
(B) the action or appeal-
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is
immune from such ...