Emrit v. Musk, et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Ronald Satish Emrit, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	) 	ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
) 	AND RECOMMENDATION
vs. 	)
) 	Case No. 1:25-cv-008
Elon Musk, et al., 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
The Plaintiff, Ronald Satish Emrit (“Emrit”), initiated the above-captioned civil rights action
against Elon Musk (“Musk”), Vivek Ramaswamy (“Ramaswamy”), Speaker of the House Mike
Johnson (“Speaker Johnson”), and the Department of Government Efficiency with the submission
of a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and a proposed complaint on January 16, 2025.
See Doc. No. 1. After screening the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), Magistrate Judge
Clare R. Hochhalter issued a Report and Recommendation on January 31, 2025, in which he
recommended that the case be dismissed for failure to state a claim and as frivolous. See Doc. No.
4. Judge Hochhalter also recommended finding the request to proceed in forma pauperis as moot
The Plaintiff was given until February 18, 2025, to file an objection to the Report and
Recommendation. No objection was filed.
The Court has carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, relevant case law, and
the entire record, and finds the Report and Recommendation to be persuasive. Accordingly, the
Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 4) in its entirety and ORDERS as
follows:
1) 	The case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
2) 	The Court finds the request to proceed in forma pauperis moot.
Case 1:25-cv-00008-DLH-CRH Document 5 Filed 02/19/25 Page 1 of 2

3) 	The Court certifies that an appeal from the dismissal of this action may not
be taken in forma pauperis because such an appeal would be frivolous and
cannot be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 19th day of February, 2025.
/s/ Daniel L. Hovland
Daniel L. Hovland, District Judge
United States District Court
2
Case 1:25-cv-00008-DLH-CRH Document 5 Filed 02/19/25 Page 2 of 2