cleaned up; quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 327-28 (1989)
How later courts described this case
- cleaned up; quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 327-28 (1989)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, §
§
v. § Criminal No. 3:01-cr-176-M-2
§
RALPHCEL DONIQUE EATON, §
Defendant. §
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Ralphcel Donique Eaton filed a pro se motion that this Court liberally construes
as a civil complaint against the United States of America related to Eaton’s alleged employment
at the “Federal Government Bank” (apparently the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas), in January or
February 2000 [ECF No. 254].
“It is well-established that a district court may dismiss a complaint on its own motion under
[Rule] 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted.” Starrett v. U.S. Dep’t
of Defense, No. 3:18-cv-2851-M-BH, 2018 WL 6069969, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 30, 2018) (citing
Carroll v. Fort James Corp., 470 F.3d 1171 (5th Cir. 2006)), rec. accepted, 2018 WL 6068991
(N.D. Tex. Nov. 20, 2018), aff’d, 763 F. App’x 383 (5th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 140 S.
Ct. 142 (2019). A district court has authority to dismiss an action as “factually frivolous” related
to claims where “the facts alleged are clearly baseless, a category encompassing allegations that
are fanciful, fantastic, and delusional.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992) (cleaned
up; quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 327-28 (1989)); see also id. at 33 (Dismissal
“is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible,
whether or not there are judicially noticeable facts available to contradict them.”)). A review of
Eaton’s filing reflects that the construed complaint presents claims and allegations that qualify as
clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal.
The Court therefore SEVERS Eaton’s civil complaint [ECF No. 254] from this action and
DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to (1) OPEN a new civil action against the United States of America
(Nature of Suit 442), (2) directly assign the action to the same district judge as this case, (3) docket
a copy of this order and the construed petition [ECF No. 254] in the new action, and (4) CLOSE
the new civil action per this order as it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Eaton’s
construed civil complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as frivolous.
SO ORDERED this 11th day of March, 2025.
; y
([“fourg J Ly
SE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
_2-