Frost v. United States Congress

Background

The court stated that, in prior related proceedings, Yvonne Frost had been barred from filing new actions without paying the filing fee or first obtaining the court’s permission. The court later imposed additional filing requirements, including a motion for permission to file, a copy of the restriction order, the filing fee or an application to proceed without paying it, and a sworn statement that the claims were not frivolous or brought for an improper purpose.

Frost filed this new complaint several days after the additional restrictions were imposed. Because she submitted the required documents, the case was opened and assigned a civil case number. The court then reviewed her permission request, accompanying declaration, and proposed complaint.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that the proposed action continued Frost’s pattern of vexatious and nonmeritorious filings. It found that Frost had not asserted facts suggesting a plausible claim for relief and had not shown good cause for permission to file the action.

Ruling

The court denied Frost’s request for permission to file the new action and denied her request to proceed without paying filing fees. It directed the clerk to close the action. The court stated that the existing bar on filing new actions without first seeking permission remained in effect and warned that further frivolous complaints could lead to additional filing restrictions and monetary penalties. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court resolved the case through filing-permission and fee-status restrictions without deciding the underlying claims against the defendants.