UNITED sTATEs DISTRICT CoURT F I L E D FoR THE DISTRICT oF CoLuMB1A

NOV 23 2013

Antonio Colbert, § C|grakrikl:i.l%t|g),lség§::_t:fld

Plaintiff, § v. § Civil Action No. lndiana Gaming Commission/ l Athletic Division, ) Defendant. l ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff s pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the case will be dismissed pursuant to

5(e)(2)(B)(ii). Under that statute, the Court is required to dismiss a case "at any time" it determines that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Plaintiff lists his address as a Post Office Box in the District of Colurnbia. He sues the lndiana Gaming Commission in lndianapolis, lndiana, for $20 million "in restitution." In his one-paragraph complaint, plaintiff states that he is bringing this action "[p]ursuant to

" and he seeks to hold defendant "liable for illegal infractions that took place on the night of 3/3/09!" Plaintiff alleges only that "a professional boxing contest . . . could’ve left me severely injured or dead."

The criminal statute plaintiff invokes proscribes bribery in sporting contests; it does not provide a private cause of action. Furtherrnore, plaintiffs cryptic allegation fails to state a

cognizable claim over which this Court may exercise jurisdiction under either

(federal question) or

(diversity actions). See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,

(2007) (A plaintiffs "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . .") (citations omitted); Aktiaselskabet AF 21 . N0v. 2001 v.

Fame Jeans, Inc.,

, 16 n.4 (D.C. Cir. 20()8) ("[A] complaint needs some information

about the circumstances giving rise to the claims."). Therefore, the complaint will be dismissed.

A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

»4~ V/)¢M

Unit’t»d scales District Judg'e

Date: November , 201 l