Grant v. Central Intelligence Agency ( 2019 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION WILLIAM LEE GRANT II PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:19CV00839 JM CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY DEFENDANT ORDER Pending is the Plaintiff’s pro se application to proceed in forma pauperis (docket # 1), along with his pro se complaint. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. However, for the reasons stated below, Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B). 28 U.S.C.§ 1915(e)(2) provides “the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that ... the action (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” This §1915(e)(2) screening, and the authority to dismiss claims arising thereunder, includes non-prisoner pro se complaints. Key v. Does, 217 F. Supp. 3d 1006, 1007 (W.D. Ark. 2016). With regard to frivolousness under § 1915(e)(2)(i), “the Supreme Court explained that an action is frivolous if ‘it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.’ ” Aziz v. Burrows, 976 F.2d 1158, 1159 (8th Cir. 1992) (quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) ). Here, Grant’s complaint lacks any arguable basis in law or fact. It states fantastic or delusional scenarios including government conspiracy theories and celebrity conspiracy theories. Further, a recent search of district court filings conducted by Senior United States District Judge, Ralph R. Beistline, United States District Court for the District of Alaska, revealed that Plaintiff has litigated these claims in numerous courts. See, William Lee Grant II v. Office of the Secretary of the Defense, et al., Case No. 5:19CV00004, United States District Court for the District of Alaska, (November 26, 2019) (taking judicial notice that a search of district court filings returned 131 filings by Plaintiff against the same or similar defendants). Wherefore, Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. The Clerk is directed to close the case. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 27" day of December, 2019. UNITED S ATES Ct TRICT JUDGE