IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION CHARLES E. BANKS, III, ) CASE NO. 1:24 CV 172 ) Plaintiff, ) JUDGE DONALD C. NUGENT ) Vv. ) ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION SCOTT JOHN DOE, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

Pro se Plaintiff Charles E. Banks, III filed this action against One Stop Richland County Department of Job and Family Services Employees Scott John Doe, Jane Doe Williams and Jane Doe Johnson. His handwritten Complaint is illegible. From the few words that the Court can decipher, it appears that Banks was denied government benefits for transportation. He claims “freedom of speech, threats, intimidation, or retaliation” and seeks monetary damages. Plaintiff filed an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. No. 2). That Application is granted. Standard of Review Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Boag v. MacDougall,

(1982) (per curiam); Haines v. Kerner,

(1972), the Court is required to dismiss an in forma pauperis action under

(e) if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams,

(1989); Lawler v. Marshall,

(6th Cir. 1990); Sistrunk v. City of

Strongsville,

(6th Cir. 1996). A claim lacks an arguable basis in Jaw or fact when it is premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or when the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke,

. A cause of action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it lacks “plausibility in the Complaint.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,

(2007). A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal ,

(2009). The factual allegations in the pleading must be sufficient to raise the right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all the allegations in the Complaint are true. Twombly,

. The Plaintiff is not required to include detailed factual allegations, but must provide more than “an unadorned, the Defendant unlawfully harmed me accusation.” Jqbal,

. A pleading that offers legal conclusions or a simple recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not meet this pleading standard. Jd. In reviewing a Complaint, the Court must construe the pleading in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff. Bibbo v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.,

(6th Cir. 1998) Discussion Federal Civil Procedure Rule 8 requires a Plaintiff to submit a short, plain and □□□□□□□ statement of his claims and relief. To meet the minimum notice pleading requirements of Rule 8, the Complaint must give the Defendants fair notice of what the Plaintiff's legal claims are and the factual grounds upon which they rest. Bassett v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n,

(6th Cir. 2008). The factual allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint are largely illegible. The Court can find no mention of any of the Defendants in these allegations and no explanation

-2-

of his claims for relief. His legal claims are stated solely as legal conclusions. Legal conclusions alone are not sufficient to state a claim and do not meet the minimum pleading requirements of Rule 8. Iqbal,

. Conclusion Accordingly, Plaintiff's Application to Proceed Jn Forma Pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is granted. This action is dismissed pursuant to

(e). The Court certifies, pursuant to

(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.' IT IS SO ORDERED. i ul DONALD C. NUGENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: i LU 2004

'

(a)(3) provides: An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies that it is not taken in good faith. -3-