# Eaton v. United States

> District Court, N.D. Texas · March 11, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10822484

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, N.D. Texas
- **Decided:** March 11, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10822484

## Opinion text

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-

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10822484. Public record. Not legal advice.