Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): on his alleged disability. Upon a thorough review of the record, and after consideration of the parties’ briefs, we affirm. I. We review de novo the district court’s grant of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, accepting the allegations in the complaint as true and construing them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 872 (11th Cir.2008). A court “shall dismiss” a case filed in forma pau-peris if the court determines that the action is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). We review a frivolity dismissal for abuse of discretion. Bilal v. Driver, 251 F.3d 1346, 1349 (11th Cir.2001). A claim is frivolous if it is without arguable merit either in law or fact. Id.; Carroll v. Gross, 984 F.2d 392, 393 (11th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). Pro se pleadings will be liberally construed. 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that regardless of other factors as to harms a movants likelihood of success must carry at least a fair chance of success on the merits in order to warrant interim relief internal quotation omitted (B) holding that reversal is required when a significant step in a case is taken in an accuseds absence if it appears that he has lost an advantage or has been prejudiced (C) holding that the taxpayer filed a frivolous return because it had no basis in law or fact (D) holding that a case is frivolous for  1915d now  1915e2bi when it appears the plaintiff has little or no chance of success (E) holding that union has discretion not to file a grievance that it believes has no chance of success due to mootness
Output (English): holding that the taxpayer filed a frivolous return because it had no basis in law or fact