Brown v. KeyBank National Association

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
TERRANCE T. BROWN, 	§
Plaintiff, 	§
§
v. 	§ 	No. 3:26-CV-1165-K-BW
§
KEYBANK NATIONAL 	§
ASSOCIATION, 	§
Defendant. 	§
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The 	United 	States 	Magistrate 	Judge 	made 	findings, 	conclusions, 	and 	a
recommendation (“FCR”) in this case. 	(Doc. 22.) 	On September 10, 2026, Plaintiff
simultaneously filed objections to the FCR (Doc. 24) and a motion for leave to amend
his complaint (Doc. 25). The District Judge reviewed de novo those portions of the
proposed FCR to which objection was made and reviewed the remaining proposed
findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding no error, the Court
ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 4) is GRANTED,
and this action will be dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.
With respect to Plaintiff’s request to file an amended complaint, the Magistrate
Judge explained in the FCR that Brown’s claim is frivolous and lacks an arguable basis
in law because it is “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory,” and it lacks an
Case 3:26-cv-01165-K-BW Document 26 Filed 10/13/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID <pageID>

arguable basis in fact because it describes “fantastic or delusional scenarios.” (See Doc.
22 (citing Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-28 (1989).) 	As the FCR explained,
Plaintiff’s claims fail because his allegations do not create any plausible or reasonable
inference that Defendant is responsible for any of the conduct alleged and Plaintiff’s
proposed amendment offers nothing to change that analysis. 	(See Doc. 22.) 	In light
of Plaintiff’s history of filing similar frivolous lawsuits in this district and elsewhere (see
id.), granting leave to amend would be futile and cause needless delay. 	Accordingly,
Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint (Doc. 25) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Signed October 13 th , 2026.
____________________________________
ED KINKEADE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:26-cv-01165-K-BW Document 26 Filed 10/13/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID <pageID>