Kristen Mendez v. Jack Stoller and Dawn Hill-Kearse

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI OXFORD DIVISION KRISTEN MENDEZ PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NUMBER: 3:26-cv-00117-JDM-JMV JACK STOLLER and DAWN HILL-KEARSE DEFENDANTS

JUDGMENT This action is DISMISSED with prejudice. And Plaintiff Kristen Mendez is warned that any future frivolous filing may result in sanctions, including a prefiling injunction that limits access to this Court.

On May 12, 2026, Kristen Mendez filed this pro se action against Jack Stollar and Dawn Hill-Kearse. [1] The next day, the Magistrate Judge granted Mendez’s request to proceed in forma pauperis. [4] But, because Mendez’s complaint failed to state a claim and appeared frivolous, the Magistrate Judge also recommended this action be dismissed. [4] Mendez did not timely object to the recommendation to dismiss.

The undersigned Judge adopts the recommendation to dismiss. Because Mendez is proceeding in forma pauperis, her complaint is subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Newsome v. E.E.O.C., 301 F.3d 227, 231 (5th Cir. 2002). Section 1915(e)(2) provides for the sua sponte dismissal of the complaint if the Court finds it is “frivolous or malicious” or if it “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B))(i), (ii). And here, Mendez’s complaint meets both dismissal criteria. The three-sentence complaint is so devoid of any cognizable claim that it cannot be construed as anything but frivolous.

Moreover, as the Magistrate Judge’s order points out, Mendez’s complaint was one of more than a dozen complaints Mendez scatter-shot across various federal district courts at the same time.

The undersigned Judge agrees with the Magistrate that this action is part of a larger “pattern of vexatious litigation that wastes judicial resources and can result in sanctions to the filer.” [4] See Emrit v. Bd. of Immigr. Appeals, No. 2:22-CV-00110, 2022 WL 4287659, at *1 (S.D.W. Va. Mar.

31, 2022), report and recommendation adopted, No. 2:22-CV-00110, 2022 WL 3594518 (S.D.W.

Va. Aug. 23, 2022). Mendez is warned that future frivolous filings may subject her to sanctions, including a prefiling injunction limiting access to this Court.

Conclusion The Recommendation to Dismiss [4] is adopted and incorporated into this Judgment. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice.

This case is CLOSED.

SO ORDERED this the 1st day of June, 2026. /s/ James D. Maxwell II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI