FILED
APR 2 4 2012
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Clerk ..
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Court~ ~;th~'grs'ctr~ &t anckruptcy 8
1
Jc o olumbia
DOUGLAS-WILLIAM HYSELL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12 (1643
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA )
d/b/a UNITED STATES, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on review of the plaintiff's application to proceed in
forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The court will grant the application, and dismiss the
complaint.
The plaintiff alleges that "his flesh-and-blood mother was induced through fraud to
register her biological property[, the plaintiff,] with the State of California and to file an
application for a social security number." Compl. at 2. In this way, the plaintiff asserts, a "legal
fiction, artificial person was created as an agent (U.S. Citizen) of the corporate United States
government to engage in commerce and collect revenue for the governments, federal, state and
local." !d. The plaintiff declares himself a sovereign entity, and "adjure[ s], renounce[ s],
forsake[s], and disavow[s] utterly and absolutely now and forever all presumptions of power,
authority or right of the ... United States [and the] State of California ... over the Rights ... of
this Sovereign from whatever source presumed or derived." Id. He demands the "release of all
property being held by the defendants," and a declaration of his "Diplomatic Immunity." Jd. at
10.
/ 1
(l
/
The Court must dismiss a complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(l )(B), 1915A(b)(1). In Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989), the Supreme Court states that the trial court has the authority to
dismiss not only claims based on an indisputably meritless legal theory, but also claims whose
factual contentions are clearly baseless. Claims describing fantastic or delusional scenarios fall
into the category of cases whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. ld. at 328. The trial
court has the discretion to decide whether a complaint is frivolous, and such finding is
appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational or wholly incredible. Denton v. Hernandez, 504
U.S. 25, 33 (1992).
The Court is mindful that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent
standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404
U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Having reviewed the plaintiffs complaint, the Court concludes that what
factual contentions are identifiable are baseless and wholly incredible. For this reason, the
complaint is frivolous and must be dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1).
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
DATE:~ I'll ;;zo/;L
2