HOBBES LAVEY v. MICHELLE KING (2025)

ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Hobbes LaVey sued the Commissioner of the United States Social Security Administration, Dkt. 1, and moved to proceed in forma pauperis, Dkt. 2. The court granted that motion but ordered that service be withheld pending screening of the complaint in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Dkt. 4.

LaVey filed a complaint on a standard form for plaintiffs seeking judicial review of a decision by the Commissioner to deny disability benefits. See https://txed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/ forms/social_security_complaint.pdf. But LaVey does not identify any decision denying disability benefits. Instead, he claims violations of 18 U.S.C. § 242, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb et seq. And the complaint, which is handwritten on a form with no space for a narrative description of the claims, includes no factual allegations of the conduct that LaVey alleges violated those statutes. The only additional information provided is “change of SSN.” Dkt. 1-1.

The court “shall dismiss” a complaint filed by a plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis “at any

time” if the court determines that the complaint “is frivolous or malicious; ․ fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or ․ seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1951(e)(2).

General rules for pleading complaints are governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A pleading stating a claim for relief must include a statement affirming the court's jurisdiction, “a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief; and ․ a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).

After reviewing the complaint, the court is unable to discern what specific claims LaVey intends to assert against the Commissioner. Accordingly, before the court takes up its formal review of the complaint, LaVey should be given an opportunity to amend. In his amended complaint, LaVey should provide additional facts that would support a claim against the Commissioner. Service of process may occur, if at all, only after the court completes its screening of LaVey's amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

It is ORDERED that LaVey file an amended complaint within 30 days of the docketing of this order, setting out factual allegations about the Commissioner's conduct for each claim asserted. Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation of dismissal of LaVey's claims without further notice.

It is further ORDERED that service of process be withheld until further order of the court.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 17th day of February, 2025.

Bill Davis United States Magistrate Judge