Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

PETER TERENCE RUSS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-03-RS-GRJ

UNKNOWN FEDERAL AGENCY,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff initiated this case by filing a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983, and is proceeding pursuant to Doc. 6, an Amended Complaint. Plaintiff also

seeks leave to proceed as a pauper. Docs. 3, 7. Upon due consideration, the Court

concludes that this case should be dismissed as frivolous.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 governing proceedings in forma pauperis, 

the Court may dismiss a case at any time if the Court determines that the

allegation of poverty is untrue, or the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a

claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a

defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2). “A claim is

frivolous if it is without arguable merit either in law or fact.” Bilal v. Driver, 251

F.3d 1346, 1349 (11 Cir. 2001) (citing Battle v. Central State Hospital, 898 F.2d th

126,129 (11 Cir. 1990)). A dismissal as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C § th

1915(e)(2)(B)(i) is appropriate when a complaint presents legal theories that are

“indisputably meritless,” or when the claims rely on factual allegations which are 

“clearly baseless.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989).

Case 5:11-cv-00003-RS-GRJ Document 8 Filed 05/12/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

This is plainly such a case. Plaintiff’s amended affidavit of indigency is facially

incredible in that Plaintiff contends that his monthly student loan payment is $20,000. 

Doc. 7. The allegations of the Amended Complaint are similarly fantastic. Plaintiff

alleges that “since 1998 or 2001" he has been harassed by an unknown federal agency

that is causing Plaintiff’s co-workers, family, friends, and former Army National

Guardsmen to react “in a negative way” to Plaintiff. As a result, Plaintiff alleges that his

unspecified civil rights have been violated. Plaintiff asks the Court to stop the actions of

the unnamed agency, and to “pay [Plaintiff’s] bills off and house”. The Court can

ascertain no cognizable federal claim in Plaintiff’s complaint. The Court previously

dismissed a nearly identical case filed by Plaintiff. See Russ v. Unknown Federal

Agency, case number 5:10-cv-289-RS-EMT, Doc. 20 (1/5/11). 

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motions for leave to proceed as a pauper,

Docs. 3 and 7, are DENIED. It is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be

DISMISSED as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

IN CHAMBERS this 12 day of May 2011. th

s/Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party’s objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No: 5:11cv3-RS-GRJ

Case 5:11-cv-00003-RS-GRJ Document 8 Filed 05/12/11 Page 2 of 2