Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06107/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06107-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Amazon.com, Inc.
Defendant
Jeffrey Bezos
Defendant
Jonathan Lee Riches
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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\riches46.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.

AMAZON.COM, INC., et al.,

Defendants. ____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-6107 MJJ (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

Amazon.com, Inc., and its Chief Executive Officer, Jeffrey Bezos. 

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-06107-MJJ Document 3 Filed 12/21/07 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\riches46.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 his “life is in danger from Defendants’ burning the Amazon rain

forest since 1990, using the wood and timber to build Amazon.com book warehouses.” He

further alleges they are infringing a copyright by selling two books about him “without my

consent.” Plaintiff claims defendants are committing “pollution fraud,” “are washing books

and washing laundering money in the Amazon River,” “avoiding taxes in international

shelters,” and “working with the Colombians putting kilos of cocaine in books and shipping

them to U.S. cities.” Plaintiff seeks 50 million dollars in damages, and an order “to stop the

operations of Amazon.” 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: December 21, 2007 _____________________________

MARTIN J. JENKINS

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-06107-MJJ Document 3 Filed 12/21/07 Page 2 of 2