United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
a prisoner, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this
civil action under 18 U.S.C. § 2520 and Bivens v.
Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Having reviewed
plaintiffs financial information, the Court assesses a
partial initial filing fee of $10. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b). Additionally, this action is dismissed under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a
complaint filed in forma pauperis if it is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. To state a claim for relief under Bivens, a
complaint must plead more than "legal conclusions"
and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of
action [that are] supported by mere conclusory
statements." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009). A plaintiff must demonstrate a plausible claim
for relief, which is more than a "mere possibility of
misconduct." Id. at 679. "A claim has
facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."
Id. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a
plausible claim for relief [is] a context-specific task that
requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial
experience and common sense. Id. at 679.
is currently under prosecution by the United States on a
charge of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in
excess of one kilogram of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 846 & 841(a)(1). United States v.
Robinson, No. 4:15-CR-100 HEA (E.D. Mo.). Although
represented by counsel, plaintiff has filed several pro se
motions in that action. E.g., Motion for Order the
[sic] U.S. Attorney and Homeland Security ICE Agents to drive
at least 120 to 140 mile [sic] to discuss case on Shawn D.
Robinson (Doc. No. 220). His motions to suppress have been
denied by the Court.
case, plaintiff sues defendants in their official capacities.
His allegations pertain to the investigation leading to the
above-cited criminal action. He alleges that the ICE
defendants violated the Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C.
§§ 2510-22. His allegations are entirely conclusory
in that he repeatedly claims that defendants "violated
the law" and "illegally" wiretapped his
communications and took his personal property. Many of his
allegations are nonsensical. Mostly, he alleges that each of
the agents conducting the investigation lied about his
involvement in the alleged conspiracy.
allegations are legally frivolous because they are conclusory
and fail to allege facts, which if proved, would entitle
plaintiff to relief.
plaintiffs Bivens claims are frivolous.
Official-capacity against federal agents are equivalent to a
suit against the United States. The United States, however,
is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment.
Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2520, permits civil suits for
damages by private actors for unlawful wiretaps or their
disclosure. However, suits against the United States are
prohibited. 18 U.S.C. § 2520(a). As a result, plaintiffs
claims under the Act are frivolous.
these reasons, this action is dismissed.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed in
forma pauperis [ECF No. 2] is GRANTED.
FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff must pay an initial filing
fee of $10 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order.
Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to
"Clerk, United States District Court, " and to
include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration