Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05978/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05978-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 G:\PRO-SE\MJJ\CR.07\riches36.dsm.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN LEE RICHES,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WRITERS GUILD OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants. ____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-5978 MJJ (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this pro se complaint against the

Writers Guild of America, the Screen Actors Guild, and the Director’s Guild of America. 

A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner seeks

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. §

1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that

are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary

relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings

must, however, be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699

(9th Cir. 1988).

Sections 1915A and 1915(e)(2) accord judges the unusual power to pierce the veil of

the complaint's factual allegations and dismiss as frivolous those claims whose factual

contentions are clearly baseless. See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). 

Examples are claims describing fantastic or delusional scenarios with which federal district

judges are all too familiar. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). To pierce the

Case 3:07-cv-05978-MJJ Document 3 Filed 12/19/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\PRO-SE\MJJ\CR.07\riches36.dsm.wpd 2

veil of the complaint's factual allegations means that a court is not bound, as it usually is

when making a determination based solely on the pleadings, to accept without question the

truth of the plaintiff's allegations. See Denton, 504 U.S. at 32. A finding of factual

frivolousness 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. See id. at 32-33. 

Plaintiff alleges that defendants have stolen copyrighted material off of the internet,

which they have then used to “blackmail Hollywood studios and production companies.” 

Plaintiff further alleges that defendants “plotted with the man in Idaho to kidnap Letterman’s

son,” that they “are involved in time clock management and pork barrel spending,” that they

buy office supplies at low prices “but then charge Hollywood inflated prices,” that they “hire

illegal immigrants as writers,” and that they “dumped large amounts of oil in San Francisco

Bay” on November 9, 2007. Plaintiff seeks 100 million dollars in damages and an order

compelling defendants to return to work. As plaintiff’s allegations are clearly baseless,

irrational or wholly incredible, the complaint will be dismissed as frivolous under sections

1915A and 1915(e)(2).

For the foregoing reasons, this action is DISMISSED. 

The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 12/17/07 _____________________________

MARTIN J. JENKINS

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05978-MJJ Document 3 Filed 12/19/07 Page 2 of 2