Allen v. Zuckerberg

Background

Kent Allen, appearing without a lawyer, brought the action against Mark Zuckerberg and invoked the federal diversity-of-citizenship statute as the basis for jurisdiction. Allen alleged that he developed the idea for Facebook when he was six years old. According to the complaint, he and Zuckerberg discussed technology and children using chat rooms, and Allen came up with the name “Facebook” and the idea of using a profile picture showing each user’s face. Allen sought $59 million in damages.

The court had previously allowed Allen to proceed without paying the filing fee. The opinion also referred to Allen’s other similar lawsuits and noted that the court had directed him to explain why it should not restrict his ability to file additional actions without first obtaining permission.

Failure to State a Claim

Because Allen alleged that he had the idea for the social-media site, the court construed the complaint as seeking relief for copyright infringement. The court explained that copyright protects original works of authorship and the expression of an idea, but not the idea itself. Allen did not allege that he created software or another tangible expression of his ideas, and he did not allege that he held a copyright. The court therefore dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

Frivolousness

The court separately applied the statute governing cases filed without prepaying fees. That statute requires dismissal of a claim that is frivolous, meaning it has no reasonable legal or factual basis, or is based on clearly baseless factual allegations or an indisputably meritless legal theory. The court found Allen’s allegation that he created the idea for Facebook when he was six years old to be wholly implausible, particularly in light of allegations he had made in other complaints. It therefore also dismissed the complaint as frivolous.

Leave to Amend and Appeal

Courts generally give a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a complaint when a valid claim might be stated. Here, however, the court concluded that amendment would be futile because the substance of Allen’s claim was frivolous on its face. The court declined to allow amendment.

The court dismissed the complaint under the provisions governing failure to state a claim and frivolous actions filed without prepaying fees. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Allen permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.