Buxbaum v. Bondi

Background

Michael Buxbaum, who was representing himself, sued Pamela Jo Bondi. He alleged that he was unlawfully injected with a virus by a federal agent at Bondi’s direction on approximately March 20, 2025. He also alleged that Adam Daniel Sommer and Cari Joy Sommer were funding payments to Bondi, law enforcement, social workers, and media broadcasters to follow him and activate the virus. Buxbaum claimed that the alleged injection prevented him from working in cryptocurrency markets.

Buxbaum paid the filing fee and did not ask to proceed without prepaying fees. The court nevertheless explained that it could dismiss a complaint as frivolous even when the filing fee had been paid. It also noted that complaints filed by people without lawyers are read liberally, but still must provide a short and plain statement showing a right to relief under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Court’s analysis

The court described a factually frivolous complaint as one based on allegations that are clearly baseless, fanciful, fantastic, or delusional. It concluded that Buxbaum offered no factual basis for his assertions that he had been injected with a virus, was being followed at Bondi’s direction, or had been excluded from cryptocurrency markets as a result. The court stated that strongly held beliefs are not facts and characterized the allegations as conclusory claims and implausible suspicions.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action as frivolous. It denied leave to amend because the complaint did not suggest that Buxbaum had additional facts that could cure its defects. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all pending motions, adjourn remaining dates, and close the case.