United States District Court for the District of Arizona, 2024

Glasco v. Biden

Glasco v. Biden
United States District Court for the District of Arizona · Decided September 11, 2024
Glasco v. Biden

Trial Court Opinion

1 WO 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Tyrone C Glasco, Sr., No. CV-24-02123-PHX-KML 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Joseph R Biden, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 Plaintiff Tyrone C. Glasco, Sr., filed a complaint against President Joseph Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. (Doc. 1.) Glasco also filed an application for leave to proceed without prepaying fees or costs. (Doc. 2.) That application is granted. Having granted that application, the court can assess whether Glasco’s complaint states any claims on which he might be able to obtain relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). It does not.

20 A complaint must be dismissed when the plaintiffs does not plead “factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Glasco’s complaint contains very few facts, and the court cannot determine why he is attempting to sue the named defendants. The complaint alleges Glasco was placed in a “work performance/Rehabilitation awards program” that would report “communicative research data” and “medical research data to the Biden/Harris Administration.” (Doc. 1 at 7.) That placement resulted in Glasco experiencing “minimal to moderate heart palpitation” and “extremely painful infection which cause[d] small bowel obstruction.” (Doc. 1 at 4.) There are no allegations explaining any specific actions taken by either of the named defendants.

2|| And it is not enough for a complaint to contain “an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully- || harmed-me accusation.” Id. 4 Glasco has not stated any plausible claim for relief. There is no indication that || Glasco would be able to amend his complaint to state viable claims against these || defendants. Therefore, the complaint is dismissed without leave to amend.

7 Accordingly, 8 IT IS ORDERED the application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) 9|| is GRANTED.

10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT || LEAVE TO AMEND. The Clerk of Court shall enter a judgment of dismissal without prejudice and close this case.

13 Dated this 11th day of September, 2024.

16 LAA ALALLA me Honorable Krissa M. Lanham 17 United States District Judge _2-

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.