Source: http://www.readbag.com/pacer-mad-uscourts-dc-cgi-bin-recentops-pl-107
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 07:57:26+00:00

Document:
on April 25, 2007 by Judge Zobel for failure to state cognizable See Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (establishing a cause of action enabling plaintiffs to seek judicial relief against federal officers for violations of constitutional rights).
claims in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). and Order (Docket No. 4).
applicable, and that Rule 4(i)(3) does not require service on the United States Attorney or agency. Rule 4(i)(3) provides that where an officer or employee of the United States (such as defendant Bateman) is sued in an individual capacity in connection with duties performed on behalf of the United States, &quot;a party must serve the United States and also serve the officer or employee under Rule 4(e)[serving within a judicial district], (f)[serving in a foreign country], or (g)[serving a minor or incompetent person].&quot; 4(i)(3)(brackets added). Fed. R. Civ. P.
by delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to the United States Attorney for the district where the action is brought ..., or sending a copy by registered or certified mail to the civil process clerk at the United States attorney's office, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(A)(I) and (ii), and sending a copy of each by registered or certified mail to the United States Attorney General at Washington, D.C., see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(B), and if the action challenges an order of a non-party agency or officer of the United States, by sending a copy of each by registered or certified mail to the agency or officer. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(C). Here, I find Baldi has not sufficiently demonstrated that he has complied with the requirements of Rule 4(i)(3). Therefore, I See Fed.
v. United States, 257 F.3d 31, 37 (1st Cir. 2001) if it is &quot;crystal clear that the plaintiff cannot prevail and that amending the complaint would be futile,&quot; a dismissal sua sponte is appropriate) (citations omitted); cf., Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S.
(D.S.C. 2009)(noting that the court has inherent authority &quot;to ensure a plaintiff has standing, that subject matter jurisdiction exists, and that a case is not frivolous&quot;) citing, inter alia, Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 307-308 (1989); Pillay v. INS, 45 F.3d 14, 16-17 (2d Cir. 1995)(where a § 1915 screening was not applicable because a pro se party paid the filing fee, the Court still had inherent authority &quot;wholly aside from any statutory warrant&quot; to act sua sponte); and Rolle v. Berkowitz, 2004 WL 287678, *1 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)(sua sponte dismissal in fee-paying pro se case is warranted where the claims presented no arguably meritorious issue to consider). See also Gaffney v. State Farm Fire and Cas.
prohibited from reasserting any claims that were raised in this action, either indirectly or directly, and failure to comply with this directive may result in the imposition of sanctions, including monetary sanctions and an order enjoining him from further litigation in this Court absent prior permission of a judicial officer. III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER Based on the foregoing, it is hereby Ordered that: 1. Plaintiff's Motion for Recusal and Motion for Change of Venue (Docket No. 9) is DENIED both as to recusal and as to change of venue; Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default (Docket No. 5) is DENIED; Plaintiff's Motion for an Order to Compel the United States Marshal to Serve Defendants (Docket No. 6) is DENIED; This action is DISMISSED sua sponte with prejudice; Plaintiff is prohibited from reasserting any claims that were raised in this action, either indirectly or directly, and failure to comply with this directive may result in the imposition of sanctions, including monetary sanctions and an order enjoining him from further litigation in this Court absent prior permission of a judicial officer; and The Court CERTIFIES that any appeal by Plaintiff of the dismissal of this action would not be taken in good faith.

References: v. 

v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1915
 v. 
 v.