Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01322/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01322-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jerry Brown
Defendant
John Lee Disney
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN LEE DISNEY, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1322 LKK KJM P

vs.

JERRY BROWN, et al., 

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has

submitted an affidavit requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a)(1). This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302 pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The in forma pauperis statute permits federal district courts to

authorize the commencement, prosecution or

defense of any suit, action or proceeding, civil or

criminal . . . without prepayment of fees or security

therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit that

includes a statement of all assets such prisoner

possesses that the person is unable to pay such fees

or give security therefor. Such affidavit shall state

the nature of the action . . . and affiant’s belief that

the person is entitled to redress.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). A court may deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis if it appears from

Case 2:06-cv-01322-LKK -KJM Document 4 Filed 12/04/06 Page 1 of 2
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

2

the face of the proposed complaint that the action is frivolous. Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152

F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 1998). In determining whether an action is frivolous, the court may “pierce

the veil of the complaint’s factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions

are clearly baseless.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989). Such allegations include

those “describing fantastic or delusional scenarios, claims with which federal district judges are

all too familiar.” Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 328; see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33

(1992) (finding of frivolousness appropriate when allegations are irrational or wholly

incredible).

Plaintiff alleges that he designed and patented the Great Seal of California in

1972; that Jerry Brown, the governor, was impressed with his design and offered to pardon

plaintiff if he ever went to prison, in exchange for a sum of money, which plaintiff paid. 

Plaintiff seeks damages for breach of contract. 

The court finds these allegations frivolous. 

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma

pauperis be denied and the action be dismissed. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: December 1, 2006. 

2/disn1324.friv

Case 2:06-cv-01322-LKK -KJM Document 4 Filed 12/04/06 Page 2 of 2