07-2397 KAMAL KARNA ROY, a/k/a Jungle Democracy v. United States of America

ALD-355 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
NOS. 07-2293 & 07-2397
________________
KAMAL KARNA ROY,
a/k/a Jungle Democracy,
Appellant
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; NEW YORK, NEW YORK;
PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH; DICK CHENEY; LISA NISBORN ROY;
HARRIETSTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY; CITIZENS BANK; KELLI
PETERSON; NANCY WOOD; RICHMOND COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY;
RICHARD OSINDACH; HON. JEFFEREY ROMES; JAMES BAROWSKI;
THE NEW YORK TIMES; ESTELLE KRAUSHANI; WORKERS COMPENSATION
BOARD, NEW YORK; HON. JOHN ROBERTS; KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN;
TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO.; NYS JUDICIAL COMMISSION; ATTORNEY
TRAVELERS INS; US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; EXECUTIVE HEAD
STATE INSURANCE FUND; NBT BANK; CHAIRPERSON TRAVELERS
INSURANCE CO.;
NY STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT; PRIME MINISTER INDIA; HSBC BANK;
SOMMATH CHATTURJEE; THE STATE INSURANCE FUND; GOD;
DOUGLAS J. HAYDES; DEBBIE EORIYAHO
____________________________________
On Appeal From the United States District Court
For the District of Delaware
(D.C. Civ. No. 06-cv-00685)
District Judge: Honorable Sue L. Robinson
_______________________________________
Submitted For Possible Dismissal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) or Summary Action
Under Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6
August 23, 2007
Before: SLOVITER, CHAGARES AND COWEN, CIRCUIT JUDGES.

-- 1 of 3 --

The District Court’s order contains a list of Roy’s numerous lawsuit filed throughout1
the United States and its territories.
2
(Filed: September 6, 2007 )
_______________________
OPINION
_______________________
PER CURIAM
Appellant Kamal Karna Roy a/k/a Jungle Democracy and other aliases, filed a pro
se complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. He was
granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Roy filed his lawsuit
against numerous defendants, including God, the United States of America, United States
President George Bush, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court John G.
Roberts, the Prime Minister of India, agencies and officials of the State of New York,
Kentucky Fried Chicken, and The New York Times. Roy’s complaint consists of what
appear to be excerpts of his previous lawsuits. Among other things, the complaint1
contains references to discrimination, deprivation of government benefits, corruption, the
loss of the power of God to the rulers of society, actions taken by President Bush, Roy’s
exception to Chief Justice Roberts being named to the United States Supreme Court, and
the government of India’s violation of civil rights concerning pension benefits. Roy
sought “up to one-half billion dollars” in United States currency in damages. The District
Court dismissed the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Roy

-- 2 of 3 --

The District Court dismissed the complaint by memorandum order entered April 13,2
2007, as later amended by its revised memorandum order entered April 24, 2007. Roy
filed a notice of appeal and an amended notice of appeal concerning these orders. The
two appeals have been consolidated for all purposes.
3
appeals and has been granted leave to appeal in forma pauperis.2
The federal in forma pauperis statute permits an indigent litigant to appeal without
paying the administrative costs of proceeding with the appeal. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The
statute protects against abuses of this privilege by allowing the appeals court to dismiss
the appeal if it is frivolous. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 27 (1992). An action is
frivolous if it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams,
490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). We may dismiss the appeal where the factual allegations are
delusional, irrational, or wholly incredible. Hernandez, 504 U.S. at 33. Upon review of
the record, we agree with the District Court’s assessment of the complaint and conclude
that the appeal is “clearly baseless” under the Neitzke standard.
We will dismiss the appeal as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

-- 3 of 3 --