Olivia Johnson v. Gina Abadi, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS OLIVIA JOHNSON, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * Civil Action No. 25-13481-ADB * GINA ABADI, et al., * * Defendants. * * * ORDER BURROUGHS, D.J.

On November 20, 2025, a pro se litigant proceeding under the name “Olivia Johnson” filed a one-page civil complaint and a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The complaint names “Gina Abadi” and “Hong Yi Zeng” as defendants. The body of the complaint consists of a single factual allegation (“Defendants conspired together in violation of due process rights,” a demand for damages, a jurisdictional allegation, and a certification under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [ECF No. 1 at 1].

Article III of the Constitution limits the jurisdiction of the federal courts to “Cases” or “Controversies,” U.S. Const. art. III, § 2. For a case or controversy to exist, the plaintiff must have standing, or, in other words, the plaintiff “must present an injury that is concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent; fairly traceable to the defendant’s challenged action; and redressable by a favorable ruling.” Horne v. Flores, 557 U.S. 433, 445 (2009).

Here, Johnson does not set forth a claim for which she has standing. While Johnson alleges that the defendants violated “due process rights” and seeks damages, she does not identify any conduct by the defendants that injured her personally.

In the absence of a case or controversy over which the Court could exercise jurisdiction, the Court DISMISSES this action.1 IT IS SO ORDERED.

April 1, 2026 /s/ Allison D. Burroughs ALLISON D. BURROUGHS U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

1 The Court notes that, according to information available on the Federal Courts’ PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) platform, in November 2025, and plaintiff named Olivia Johnson filed a case titled “Johnson v. Abadi” in twenty-one different federal district courts.