Scott v. Unknown Party

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

9 Gene Edward Scott, II, No. CV-24-02539-PHX-DJH 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Unknown Party, 13 Defendant.

15 Plaintiff has filed a Complaint that is patently frivolous. Therein, he alleges that “only 1% of airlines for passengers are Negros owned in the United States and less than 2% of airlines are legally owned by Negros in the Universe.” (Doc. 1 at 4). For relief he seeks “to never be @ fault” and “to be legal Gigolo during forever.” (Id. at 5). He does not identify any defendants.

20 “[A] complaint, containing both factual allegations and legal conclusions is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Nietzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). “[A] finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or wholly incredible, whether or not there are judicially recognized facts available to contradict them.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 25 U.S. 25, 33 (1992).

26 Moreover, in light of Plaintiff’s pattern of filing frivolous actions, see, e.g., Scott v. Veterans Administration et al, 2:23-cv-01151-DWL at Doc. 12 (discussing Plaintiff’s pattern of filing frivolous cases, usually accompanied by IFP applications, each a 1|| different account of Plaintiffs finances, even when filed in the same month, and then || voluntarily dismissing them), it is clear that leave to amend would be futile.

3 Accordingly, 4 IT IS ORDERED that this action is dismissed without leave to amend. The || Clerk shall terminate the action.

6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Application for Leave to Proceed In 7\| Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2), the Ex Parte Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to || Dismiss Case (Doc. 8), and Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 9) are denied as moot.

9 Dated this 8th day of January, 2025.

11 ( . ip Gu □□ 12 norable’Dian¢g4. Hurfetewa 3 United States District Judge _2-