Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Grant v. U.S. Department of Defense

United States District Court, D. Nebraska

July 11, 2018

WILLIAM LEE GRANT II, Plaintiff,
v.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Richard G. Kopf, Senior United States District Judge

         William Grant II filed his pro se Complaint on June 4, 2018 (Filing No. 1), and has been given leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Filing No. 5). The court now conducts an initial review of the Complaint to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

         I. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT

         Plaintiff's Complaint consists of:

1. A “Command Complaint” that appears to be a copy of a complaint originally filed in the United States Court of Federal Claims that contains frivolous allegations such as: “Operation: Hometown Glory is a DoD domestic Black Ops Program run under the banner of the DOJ. The DoD disavows BEYONCE”; “Grandmas kick ass!”; and “The DoD remembers ‘Nam.”
2. Four exhibits, which are photocopies of orders entered by other federal courts in cases filed by Grant, with various handwritten notations:
A. Text order entered by the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois on March 22, 2018, in Grant v. Illinois Department of Employment Security, No. 3:18-cv-03054, dismissing Grant's complaint on initial review as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.[1]
B. An order entered by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on April 17, 2018, in Grant v. United States Department of Defense, No. 1:18-CV-1469, dismissing Grant's pro se civil action asserting “various conspiracy theories against mostly former government officials” as frivolous.
C. Order entered by the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia on April 27, 2018, in Grant v. U.S. Department of Defense, No. 1:18-cv-449, dismissing Grant's complaint with prejudice as frivolous.
D. Memorandum Opinion and Order entered by the United States District Court of the District of Maryland on May 16, 2018, in Grant v. U.S. Department of Transportation, et al., Civil Action No. GLR-18-1327, dismissing Grant's complaint on initial review as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
E. Order entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on February 21, 2018, in Grant v. United States, No. 2018-1413, summarily affirming dismissal of Grant's complaint filed in the United States Court of Federal Claims, No. 1:17-cv-01785, for lack of jurisdiction.

         II. APPLICABLE STANDARDS ON INITIAL REVIEW

         The court is required to review in forma pauperis complaints to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court must dismiss a complaint or any portion of it that states a frivolous or malicious claim, that fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, [2] or that seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

         III. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.