Eaton v. United States

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, § § v. § Criminal No. 3:01-cr-176-M-2 § RALPHCEL DONIQUE EATON, § Defendant. § MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Ralphcel Donique Eaton filed a pro se motion that this Court liberally construes as a civil complaint against the United States of America related to Eaton’s alleged employment at the “Federal Government Bank” (apparently the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas), in January or February 2000 [ECF No. 254]. “It is well-established that a district court may dismiss a complaint on its own motion under [Rule] 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted.” Starrett v. U.S. Dep’t of Defense, No. 3:18-cv-2851-M-BH, 2018 WL 6069969, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 30, 2018) (citing Carroll v. Fort James Corp., 470 F.3d 1171 (5th Cir. 2006)), rec. accepted, 2018 WL 6068991 (N.D. Tex. Nov. 20, 2018), aff’d, 763 F. App’x 383 (5th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 140 S. Ct. 142 (2019). A district court has authority to dismiss an action as “factually frivolous” related to claims where “the facts alleged are clearly baseless, a category encompassing allegations that are fanciful, fantastic, and delusional.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992) (cleaned up; quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 327-28 (1989)); see also id. at 33 (Dismissal “is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible, whether or not there are judicially noticeable facts available to contradict them.”)). A review of Eaton’s filing reflects that the construed complaint presents claims and allegations that qualify as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal. The Court therefore SEVERS Eaton’s civil complaint [ECF No. 254] from this action and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to (1) OPEN a new civil action against the United States of America (Nature of Suit 442), (2) directly assign the action to the same district judge as this case, (3) docket a copy of this order and the construed petition [ECF No. 254] in the new action, and (4) CLOSE the new civil action per this order as it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Eaton’s construed civil complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as frivolous. SO ORDERED this 11th day of March, 2025. ; y ([“fourg J Ly SE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE _2-