Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 10, 2023

Nobile v. Borack Obama Administration

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-07417
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
5
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Nobile v. Borack Obama Administration, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint as frivolous and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

Who this affects

Natacha Nobile’s lawsuit was dismissed, and she was denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

What happened

Natacha Nobile sued the Borack Obama Administration, alleging that former President Obama, government officials, airlines, and celebrities participated in threats, defamation, HIV spreading, and interference with her airline business. She sought $10 billion in damages and represented herself.

The court reviewed the complaint under the law governing lawsuits filed without prepaying fees. It found that Nobile provided no factual basis for her broad-conspiracy allegations and that the allegations were irrational, implausible, and frivolous.

Judge Swain dismissed the complaint, declined to allow Nobile to amend it, directed the Clerk to enter judgment, and denied fee-free status for any appeal because the appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Nobile v. Borack Obama Administration · No. 1:23-cv-07417
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 10, 2023

Background

Natacha Nobile, representing herself, invoked federal-question jurisdiction and sued the Borack Obama Administration. She alleged that former President Obama, Joe Biden and the Joe Biden Administration, airlines, and various celebrities acted together to threaten and harm her, spread HIV, defame her, and interfere with her airline business. She also alleged that airlines owed her commissions. Nobile sought $10 billion in damages.

The court had previously allowed Nobile to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Her complaint identified “Death threats, mental health rights[,] torts, defamation” as the rights involved.

Legal standard

Under the statute governing lawsuits filed without prepaying fees, the court must dismiss a complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a legally sufficient claim, or seeks money from a defendant protected from such relief. The court must also dismiss a case when it lacks authority to decide the claims. Although courts read self-represented complaints generously, those complaints still must provide a short and plain statement showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief.

A complaint is factually frivolous when its allegations are clearly baseless, fanciful, fantastic, or delusional. A plaintiff’s belief that events occurred does not by itself supply factual support.

Court’s analysis

The court found that Nobile offered no factual basis for her assertions that former President Obama, airlines, and celebrities participated in a broad conspiracy against her. The court characterized the allegations as implausible, irrational, conclusory claims and suspicions. It therefore dismissed the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

The court also considered whether Nobile should be allowed to amend her complaint. It declined to grant leave to amend because it found that the defects could not be cured by amendment.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint as frivolous. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Nobile permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.