Opinion
Case: 1:17-cv-00721
04-11-2017
JAMES GENCARELLI, Plaintiff, v. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, et al., Defendants.
(F-Deck)
Assigned To : Unassigned
Assign. Date : 4/19/2017
Description: Pro Se Gen. Civil Jury Demand MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se civil complaint. The application will be granted, and the complaint will be dismissed.
It appears that the plaintiff brings this action under 18 U.S.C. § 371 and charges defendants with conspiracy to usurp the government of the United States, see Am. Compl. at 1 (caption), among other criminal offenses, see id. at 3-6. However, none of the code provisions cited by plaintiff allows for a private right of action. See Ray v. First Nat. Bank of Omaha, 413 F. App'x 427, 430 (3d Cir. 2011) (finding that "the Patriot Act does not provide for a private right of action for its enforcement"); Beeson v. South Carolina, No. CV 2:16-1164, 2016 WL 4394506, at *3 (D.S.C. July 13, 2016) (finding that 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 371, 2384, and 2385 are "criminal statu[t]es that do not give rise to civil liability or authorize a private right of action"), report and recommendation adopted sub nom. Beeson v. State of South Carolina, No. 2:16-CV-1164, 2016 WL 4370032 (D.S.C. Aug. 12, 2016); Corrado v. N.Y. Office of Temp., No. 15-CV-7316, 2016 WL 3181128, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. June 2, 2016) (dismissing claims under 18 U.S.C. § 2382); Payn v. Gerald E. Kelley, No. CIV-15-1089-D, 2015 WL 7779701, at *3 (W.D. Okla. Dec. 2, 2015) (dismissing claims under 26 U.S.C. §§ 7201, 7203, 7206(1)); DuBose v. Kasich, No. 2:11-CV-00071, 2013 WL 164506, at *2 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 15, 2013) (dismissing claims under 18 U.S.C. § 1361); Kissi v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 793 F. Supp. 2d 233, 235 (D.D.C.) (dismissing claims under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 1957), aff'd, 444 F. App'x 457 (D.C. Cir. 2011); Rockefeller v. U.S. Court of Appeals Office, for Tenth Circuit Judges, 248 F. Supp. 2d 17, 23 (D.D.C. 2003) ("[T]he plaintiff is precluded from asserting any claims pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 242 and 371 because, as criminal statutes, they do not convey a private right of action.").
The complaint will be dismissed because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. DATE: 4-11-17
/s/_________
United States District Judge