# Mohammed Bey v. Bush

> District Court, District of Columbia · October 4, 2012

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2661694

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, District of Columbia
- **Decided:** October 4, 2012
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Judge Beryl A. Howell
- **Nature of suit:** Civil
- **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/2661694

## Opinion text

•
FILED
OCT - 4 2012
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Abdul Ayat Mohammed Bey a.k.a. )
Ronald B. Britt-Bey, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12 1649
)
George Herbert Walker Bush et al. )
)
Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiffs pro se complaint and

application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is

required to dismiss a complaint upon a determination that it, among other grounds, is frivolous.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident, purports to sue former Presidents George

Herbert Walker Bush and George Walker Bush. The complaint's allegations are mostly

incomprehensible and fail to implicate the named defendants in any wrongdoing. Nevertheless,

plaintiff seeks, inter alia, to enjoin the named defendants "from torturous inhumane and

unconstitutional water boarding" and "from 25 year embezzlement of plaintiff-Bey .... "

Compl. at 10 (page number supplied). Plaintiff also seeks $5 billion in monetary damages. !d. at

11.

The complaint presents the type of fantastic or delusional scenarios warranting dismissal

under§ 1915(e)(2) as frivolous. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Best v.

Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Furthermore, the allegations "constitute the sort of

~I
/
patently insubstantial claims" that deprive the Court of subject matter jurisdiction. Tooley v.

Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009); see Caldwell v. Kagan, 777 F. Supp.2d 177,

178 (D.D.C. 2011) ("A district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction when the complaint 'is

patently insubstantial, presenting no federal question suitable for decision.'") (quoting Tooley,

586 F.3d at 1009). Hence, the complaint will be dismissed with prejudice. A separate Order

accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

M.~
)~012
United States District Judge
Date: September

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2661694. Public record. Not legal advice.