- 1 -

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

SUSAN SCOTT, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

V. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 3: 05-CV-1953-B

§ ECF

CSC CREDIT SERVICES, INC., §

§

Defendant. §

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This case comes to the Court for review following the Court’s Order of November 17, 2005.

After review of the pleadings and for the reasons discussed herein, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s

claims against Defendant with prejudice. 

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Susan Scott filed this action in Texas state court on August 31, 2005, seeking $40

million in damages for an alleged violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2071(a). Defendant CSC Credit Services,

Inc. removed the case to this Court on October 3, 2005 on the basis of federal question jurisdiction.

After review of the pleadings, the Court had serious concerns regarding the legal basis for Plaintiff’s

claims and the possibility that they were frivolous. Further, Plaintiff had refused to cooperate in the

filing of a court ordered joint status report. Therefore, the Court set a hearing for November 16,

2005 and required Plaintiff to present legal authority and argument regarding whether her state court

Petition stated a non-frivolous cause of action against Defendant and to explain why she failed to

cooperate in filing a joint status report. (doc. 9) The Order setting the hearing warned Plaintiff that

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01953-B Document 12 Filed 12/19/05 Page 1 of 3 PageID 55
- 2 -

failure to comply could result in dismissal of her case. (Id.) 

On November 16, 2005, counsel for Defendant was present at the hearing; however, Plaintiff

did not appear. The Court then issued an Order dismissing Plaintiff’s case without prejudice, but

giving her thirty days to show cause why her case should not be dismissed. (doc. 11) The Court

warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal of Plaintiff’s case with prejudice. (Id.) To date,

Plaintiff has not attempted to demonstrate why her claims are not frivolous.

II. ANALYSIS

The Court has received only one document from Plaintiff since this suit was removed. On

October 7, 2005, Plaintiff filed a document entitled “Disqualification of Judges” that appears to be

an excerpt of a treatise discussing judicial disqualification. (doc. 5) It does not, however, make any

particularized showing that this Court is biased or prejudiced in this case, and to the extent Plaintiff

seeks disqualification of the Honorable Jane J. Boyle, her request is DENIED.

As noted in this Court’s November 17, 2005 Order, Plaintiff’s allegations in her state court

Petition do not state a claim for relief, because 18 U.S.C. § 2071(a) is a criminal statute that does

not create a civil cause of action. See Dugar v. Coughlin, 613 F. Supp. 849, 852 n.1 (S.D.N.Y. 1985).

Further, the statute criminalizes destroying government documents, while Plaintiff’s allegations

against Defendant, although unclear, appear to involve a dispute over a credit account. Thus, the

Court finds that Plaintiff’s state court Petition does not state a claim against Defendant, and Plaintiff

has not attempted to show that it does, despite being given multiple opportunities. Further, Plaintiff

has offered no explanation for her failure to comply with the Court’s order to file a joint status report.

Therefore, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant with prejudice. 

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01953-B Document 12 Filed 12/19/05 Page 2 of 3 PageID 56
- 3 -

III. CONCLUSION

Because the Court finds that Plaintiff has not stated a non-frivolous cause of action against

Defendant and because Plaintiff has refused to explain her failure to cooperate in filing a joint status

report and has refused to respond to any Court order, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s claims

against Defendant with prejudice.

SO ORDERED.

SIGNED December 19th , 2005

_________________________________

JANE J. BOYLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01953-B Document 12 Filed 12/19/05 Page 3 of 3 PageID 57