MASEK v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Civil Action No. 26-3218 (UNA)
KARL MASEK,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of Plaintiff’s application for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1). The Court will grant
the application and dismiss the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
“A complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl.
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A complaint that lacks “an arguable basis either in
law or in fact” is frivolous, Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989), and the Court cannot
exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a frivolous complaint, Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528,
536-37 (1974) (“Over the years, this Court has repeatedly held that the federal courts are without
power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction if they are ‘so attenuated and unsub-
stantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit.’”) (quoting Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport,
193 U.S. 561, 579 (1904)); Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Conse-
quently, the Court is obligated to dismiss a complaint as frivolous when “the facts alleged rise to
the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible,” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992),
Case 1:26-cv-03218-UNA Document 4 Filed 10/08/26 Page 1 of 2

2
or “postulat[e] events and circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind,” Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d
1305, 1307-08 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
Upon review of the complaint, the Court concludes that this pleading is frivolous. It al-
leges, vaguely, that Plaintiff’s myriad complaints to federal government agencies about unknown
individuals stalking him have gone unanswered, and that unidentified defendants—perhaps aided
in some way by government officials—continue to stalk, threaten, harass, and conspire against
him. The Court cannot exercise jurisdiction of a frivolous complaint. A separate order shall issue.
/s/ Timothy J. Kelly
TIMOTHY J. KELLY
United States District Judge
Date: October 8, 2026
Case 1:26-cv-03218-UNA Document 4 Filed 10/08/26 Page 2 of 2