United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
HONORABLE SARA LIOI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
se plaintiff Paul Cunningham filed this action against
the Portage County Sheriff's Department, the Portage
County Prosecutor's Office, the Brimfield Police
Department, Portage County Sheriff David W. Doak, and Portage
County Prosecutor Victor V. Viglucci. Plaintiff's
complaint is very brief. In its entirety, it states:
All violated the duty and the Constitutional right to
protection. All abuse [sic] their power by the lack of
protection in a very bias [sic] and discriminatory manor
[sic]. All showed a lack of respect and intimidation.
(Doc. No. 1, Complaint at 5.) Cunningham indicates he is
asserting claims for violation of his constitutional rights,
violation of duty, abuse of power, discrimination, bias
treatment, case neglect, neglect of duty, violation of code
of conduct and ethics, false identity of police and sheriff
and prosecutors, intimidation, and threats. He seeks monetary
Standard of Review
pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Boag v.
MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365, 102 S.Ct. 700, 70 L.Ed.2d
551 (1982) (per curiam); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S.
519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972), the Court is
required to dismiss an in forma pauperis action
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) if it fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable
basis in law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S.
319, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989); Lawler v.
Marshall, 898 F.2d 1196 (6th Cir. 1990); Sistrunk v.
City of Strongsville, 99 F.3d 194, 197 (6th Cir. 1996).
A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact when it is
premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or when
the factual contentions are clearly baseless.
Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. A cause of action fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it lacks
plausibility in the complaint. Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 564, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d
pleading must contain a short and plain statement of the
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78, 129 S.Ct.
1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). The factual allegations in the
pleading must be sufficient to raise the right to relief
above the speculative level on the assumption that all the
allegations in the Complaint are true. Bell Atl.
Corp., 550 U.S. at 555. The plaintiff is not required to
include detailed factual allegations, but must provide more
than an unadorned, the defendant unlawfully harmed me
accusation. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. A pleading that
offers legal conclusions or a simple recitation of the
elements of a cause of action will not meet this pleading
standard. Id. In reviewing a complaint, the Court
must construe the pleading in the light most favorable to the
plaintiff. Bibbo v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 151
F.3d 559, 561 (6th Cir. 1998).
complaint contains no factual allegations. Although the
standard of review is liberal for pro se pleadings,
it requires more than bare assertions of legal conclusions.
Lillard v. Shelby County Bd. of Educ, 76 F.3d 716,
726-27 (6th Cir.1996). The complaint must give the defendants
fair notice of what the plaintiffs claims are and the factual
grounds upon which they rest. Id. at 726;
Bassett v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n,
528 F.3d 426, 437 (6th Cir. 2008). Cunningham gives no
indication of what actions the defendants took that plaintiff
believes violated his constitutional rights. He has not
stated a claim upon which relief may be granted
the foregoing reasons, Cunningham's application to
proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is granted.
His motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 4) and his
motion for extension of time (Doc. No. 5) are denied. This
action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), an appeal from this
decision could not be taken in good faith.
IS SO ORDERED.