Shallow v. United States of America

Background

Sean Shallow, who was appearing without a lawyer, sued the United States of America and the Department of Justice. He asserted claims involving identity theft, impersonation, and unauthorized use of his “special agent” credentials. He also alleged that his salary and other payments had been taken for more than 36 years through the Department of Justice.

The court had previously allowed Shallow to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The opinion quotes allegations from his complaint concerning alleged perjury, fraudulent documents, impersonation, and several people allegedly using his credentials. The complaint cited various federal criminal statutes and referred to an alleged conspiracy involving his employment and payments.

Court’s analysis

Under the statute governing complaints filed without prepaid fees, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court must dismiss a complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a legally recognized claim for relief, or seeks money from a defendant protected from that type of lawsuit. The court must also dismiss claims over which it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court lacks legal authority to hear them. Although courts read self-represented complaints generously, those complaints still must provide a short and plain statement showing an entitlement to relief.

The court held that Shallow’s allegations were factually frivolous. It explained that a claim is factually frivolous when its allegations are clearly baseless, fanciful, fantastic, or delusional. The court found that the complaint was based on Shallow’s beliefs about alleged impersonation, fraudulent documents, and a decades-long conspiracy to deprive him of salary and other payments, but that he provided no factual basis supporting those assertions. The court concluded that the allegations did not have plausible factual support and were irrational.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). It declined to grant Shallow leave to amend because it found that the defects could not be cured by adding allegations. The court directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and enter judgment dismissing the action. The opinion does not state any separate ruling on the individual theories beyond the dismissal of the action as frivolous.