United States District Court, D. Maryland
DEBORAH K. CHASANOW UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Ferebee, a self-represented litigant and resident of Temple
Hills, Maryland, brings suit against Defendants “7-11
Conv[en]ience Store #11693 (entity)” (the
“store”) and Ms. Emebet, a store cashier, for
claims of “defamation of character, falsely accused,
age, conspiracy, tort, ” and that her “civil
rights [were] violated.” (ECF No. 1, at 1). She seeks
$500 million in damages and invokes this court's federal
question jurisdiction. (Id.; ECF No. 1-5).
Accompanying the complaint is Plaintiff's motion for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2),
which will be granted. Plaintiff is a frequent litigator in
this court as well as in the Maryland state
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) courts are required to
screen a plaintiff's complaint when in forma
pauperis status has been granted. A case may be
dismissed if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to
state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks
monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such
relief. Although pleadings filed by a self-represented
plaintiff are to be liberally construed, the plaintiff's
complaint must contain factual allegations sufficient
“to raise a right to relief above the speculative
level” and that “state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007).
complaint must be dismissed because she fails to state a
federal claim upon which relief may be granted, and there is
no basis for this court to exercise diversity jurisdiction.
In her complaint, Plaintiff indicates that the
“enclosed discrimination claim where her civil rights
w[ere] violated” was filed in the Circuit Court for
Prince George's County and the Maryland Court of Appeals
where she claims unfair rulings were made. (ECF No. 1). She
indicates that no trial or depositions were held which could
have allowed her to prove her case. She states that society
has labeled her crazy and on drugs and that “Plaintiff,
along with other cases, in this court, all falls under the
civil rights violations rule, which everyone has participated
in this inhumane act against the plaintiff.”
to the complaint filed in this case is the complaint
Plaintiff filed against the store in the Circuit Court for
Prince George's County on August 27, 2014. (ECF No. 1-3).
In the complaint before the state court, Plaintiff alleged
that she entered a 7-11 store on August 26, 2014, and was
accused by Ms. Emebet of stealing a $0.99 soda. (Id.
at 1). Plaintiff alleged that she previously had problems
with Ms. Emebet and that Ms. Emebet said embarrassing things
in front of other customers in an attempt to tear down her
“integrity, character and dignity.”
(Id.). Plaintiff responded by showing Ms. Emebet her
“law suits folder” which changed Ms. Emebet's
attitude. (Id.). Plaintiff left the store but then
decided to return “because [her] feelings [were]
distraught, [she was] humiliated, [and she] felt as though
[her] rights were violated.” (Id.). Plaintiff
alleged that “because of the embarrassment,
humiliation, defamation of character, prejudice, because Ms.
Emebet is of another nationality, (discrimination), ”
she was entitled to $500 million dollars in damages.
(Id. at 2).
Plaintiff does not inform the court of what federal law she
brings this action under, it appears that Plaintiff intends
to bring a claim for a violation of Title II of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in a place
of public accommodation on the ground of race, color,
religion, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. § 2000a.
“The gravamen of a [Title II] claim is the denial to
plaintiff of full and equal enjoyment of the services offered
by the establishment” for reasons based on race, color,
religion, or national origin. Sherman v. Marriott Hotel
Servs., Inc., 317 F.Supp.2d 609, 616 (D.Md. 2004)
(citing 42 U.S.C. § 2000a; Wooten v. Moore, 400
F.2d 239, 241 (4th Cir. 1968), cert.
denied, 393 U.S. 1083 (1969); United States v.
DeRosier, 473 F.2d 749 (5th Cir. 1973)).
Plaintiff's allegations that she suffered
“embarrassment, humiliation, defamation of character,
[and] prejudice” when Defendant Emebet accused her of
stealing a soda from the store and that “[Defendant]
Emebet is of another nationality” do not state a
plausible Title II claim as to which relief can be granted.
Additionally, “[w]hen a plaintiff brings an action
under [Title II], he cannot recover damages.”
Newman v. Piggie Park Enters., 390 U.S. 400, 402
(1968). “Only injunctive and declaratory relief (and
attorneys' fees) may be awarded to a prevailing
plaintiff.” Sherman, 317 F.Supp.2d at 616.
there is no assertion for jurisdiction in this court over
state law claims based on diversity of citizenship. The
events and all participants may well be citizens of Maryland,
making diversity jurisdiction unavailable. Once the purported
federal claim is dismissed, the court has discretion to
dismiss any supplemental state law claims as well. United
Mine Workers of Am. v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715, 726
(1966). Particularly where it appears Plaintiff has
attempted, unsuccessfully, to bring these claims in state
court, and where the three year statute of limitations likely
elapsed before this suit was filed, the court declines to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state law claims.
Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed. A separate
 Cases filed in this court: Ferebee
v. Chick-Fil-A, Civil Action No. PX-18-335 (D. Md.);
Ferebee v. Apple Communications, Civil Action No.
GJH-18-180 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. United States of
America, Civil Action No. PWG-17-3253 (D. Md.);
Ferebee v. Petty, Civil Action No. PWG-17-1503 (D.
Md.); Ferebee v. Jeanett P. Henry, LLC, Civil Action
No. PWG-17-1397 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. Scott Mgmt
Prop., Civil Action No. PJM-17-1072 (D. Md.);
Ferebee v. Lexy Dept. Store, Civil Action No.
PWG-17-1071 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. Dollar Tree Store
Franchise, Civil Action No. PX-17-0643 (D. Md.);
Ferebee v. E. Motors Dealership, Civil Action No.
PWG-17-165 (D. Md); Ferebee v. Dep't. of Human
Relations Comm'n, Civil Action No.
TDC-16-3803 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. Shoppers Food,
Civil Action No. PX-16-3645 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. United
States Post Office, Civil Action No. GJH-16-3482 (D.
Md.); Ferebee v. Sheehy Ford Dealership, Civil
Action No. PX-16-3142 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. Sally
Beauty Supply Store, Civil Action No.
PX-16-2911 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. Nat'l Conf. of State
Legislatures, Civil Action No. GJH-16-2055 (D. Md.);
Ferebee v. United Medical Center, Civil Action
No. PX-16-2879 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. Int'1
House of Pancakes, Civil Action No. DKC 15-3840 (D.
Md.); Ferebee v. Temple Hills Post Office, Civil
Action No. GJH-14-2451 (D. Md.); Ferebee v. Lexy
Corp., Civil Action No. PWG-13-3931 (D. Md.);
Ferebee v. Int'l House of Pancakes, Civil Action
No. DKC-13-3817 (D. Md.).
For a limited discussion of cases filed by Ferebee
both here and in state court see Ferebee v. E. Motors
Dealership, Civil Action No. PWG-17-165, ...