Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04980/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04980-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 430
Nature of Suit: Banks and Banking
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MRS. LOUIS T. RECHT,

Plaintiff,

 v.

HEARTLAND FINANCIAL INC, et al.

Defendants.

 /

No. C 06-04980 CRB

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

Now before the Court is plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”),

along with her complaint and several other documents. A court may authorize a plaintiff to

prosecute an action in federal court without prepayment of fees or security if the plaintiff

submits an affidavit showing that he or she is unable to pay such fees. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(a).

A court is under a continuing duty, however, to dismiss a case seeking to proceed

without the prepayment of fees whenever it determines that the action “(i) is frivolous or

malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary

relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)--

(iii).

Plaintiff’s action is frivolous. First, it is apparent that this action is the same action

which was previously dismissed for being frivolous. See Recht v. United States, 06-4919

Case 3:06-cv-04980-CRB Document 11 Filed 11/29/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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:\CRBALL\2006\4980\orderdismissingcase.wpd 2

MMC. Indeed, plaintiff has put the number of the earlier-dismissed case, 06-4919, in the

caption of some her pleadings in this case.

Second, plaintiff’s allegations are nonsensical and do not state a claim. For example,

the first paragraph of her complaint begins: “Demanding motions to strike for malpractice

and mayhem by United States Judges that are under possion [sic] and are childmolesters and

animal molesters and are using the court clerks and Judges under possiuon [sic] of another

and any Federal and States and City and Town that are trying to eat and molest children

animals or hold women or men hostage using Arizona Bank In De Nova . . . .” The

complaint goes on for 46 pages in a similar vein. As her allegations are frivolous and do not

state a claim, and as it is apparent that she cannot state a claim, this action is DISMISSED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: Nov. 29, 2006

 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-04980-CRB Document 11 Filed 11/29/06 Page 2 of 2