Davis v. Arvest Bank

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION ANTHONY DAVIS PLAINTIFF Vv. No. 4:25-cv-34-DPM ARVEST BANK DEFENDANT ORDER 1. Davis's application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted for good cause.

2. The Court must screen Davis’s complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The Court has also reviewed his recent notice, Doc. 3, which contains correspondence between him and Arvest Bank about a $100,000 loan application and two of Davis’s Arvest accounts. Davis says his complaint raises a federal question. Doc. 2 at 3. But nothing in the complaint, or in Davis’s notice, makes clear what that question is.

The Court has reviewed the federal statutes Davis invokes in his complaint. None provide him—a private citizen—with a cause of action, regardless of the circumstances here. Without more information, the Court cannot determine whether Davis has a plausible claim. Mick v. Raines, 883 F.3d 1075, 1079 (8th Cir. 2018). The Court will therefore dismiss Davis’s case without prejudice unless he files an amended complaint by 7 March 2025 that clarifies the legal basis and factual basis of his lawsuit.

So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge tehnvany 2025 _2-