ACKERMAN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LESTER P. ACKERMAN, IV, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 26-00277 (UNA)
)
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Defendant. )
Memorandum Opinion
This matter is before the court on its initial review of the plaintiff’s application for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis and pro se complaint. ECF Nos. 1–2. The court grants the application
and dismisses the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)–(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)). In addition, 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, see 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 unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit.’” (quoting Newburyport Water Co. v.
Newburyport, 193 U.S. 561, 579 (1904))); see also Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010
(D.C. Cir. 2009) (collecting cases dismissed “for patent insubstantiality,” including where the
plaintiff allegedly “was subjected to a campaign of surveillance and harassment deriving from
uncertain origins”). Consequently, the court must dismiss a complaint as frivolous when, as here,
Case 1:26-cv-00277-UNA Document 5 Filed 04/07/26 Page 1 of 2

2
“the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible,” Denton v. Hernandez,
504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992), or “postulat[e] events and circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind,” Crisafi
v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305, 1308 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
The plaintiff appears to allege that use of the term “molester” in the criminal context and
in the American vocabulary more broadly has caused “negative energy towards Lester” and “hate
and discrimination, defamation, and sexual harassment towards Lester.” ECF No. 1 at 1. In
addition to failing to state a claim for relief, the plaintiff’s complaint is frivolous on its face.
The court accordingly dismisses the complaint without prejudice. A separate order
accompanies this memorandum opinion.
DATE: April 2, 2026 /s/
AMIR H. ALI
United States District Judge
Case 1:26-cv-00277-UNA Document 5 Filed 04/07/26 Page 2 of 2