Cho v. Trump

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------x MINGGUO CHO, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, 20-CV-2846 (RPK) (LB) -against- DONALD J. TRUMP; THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants. -------------------------------------------------------------------x RACHEL P. KOVNER, United States District Judge: Plaintiff Mingguo Cho believes he has discovered that the cure for COVID-19 is garlic soup. He filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , contending that the President and the federal government are engaged in an unconstitutional conspiracy to suppress his scientific findings. Compl. ¶ 3. He seeks damages and injunctive relief, including (i) an order compelling all persons globally to consume garlic soup; (ii) an order compelling “doctors, health personnel, medical school personnel, and pharmaceutical companies . . . to learn and teach the benefits of garlic soup”; and (iii) an order restructuring the “entire medical system in the United States to enjoin federal, state and local governments from preventing non-licensed persons from publicizing, offering and administering their proven cures to the public.” Id. ¶ 22 . For the reasons that follow, this lawsuit is dismissed as frivolous. DISCUSSION A pro se complaint must be “liberally construed” and, “however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Nevertheless, a [1] district court “possesse[s] the power” to dismiss a case sua sponte if it determines that the plaintiff’s claims are frivolous. Fitzgerald v. First East Seventh Street Tenants Corp., 221 F.3d 362, 363-64 (2d Cir. 2000). Claims are frivolous when they lack “an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). This standard authorizes dismissal when a plaintiff’s factual allegations are “fanciful,” “fantastic,” or “delusional.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992) (quoting Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 325, 328 ). The standard for dismissal is satisfied here. Plaintiff alleges that he has discovered a “life energy system” that has allowed him to cure diseases such as lupus and AIDS. Compl. ¶¶ 4-5. Indeed, he implies that he can cure any illness if the illness is detected early enough. Id. ¶ 10. Plaintiff further alleges that he has discovered that garlic soup is a “wonder drug” that “is 100% effective” against COVID-19. Id. ¶¶ 18-19. And he asserts that President Trump and federal agencies are “part of a vast conspiracy with drug companies, medical doctors, hospitals, and others” to suppress his discoveries. Id. ¶ 11; see id. ¶¶ 12, 15-16. This claim of a massive government conspiracy to suppress miraculous medical discoveries is appropriately labeled fanciful, fantastic, and delusional. See Fitzgerald, 221 F.3d at 363-64 ; Denton, 504 U.S. at 33 . While I have considered affording plaintiff a chance to amend the complaint, I have concluded that any such attempt would be futile because the problem with plaintiff’s complaint is a “substantive” one that cannot be cured with “better pleading.” Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000); see Ashmore v. Prus, 510 F. App’x 47, 49 (2d Cir. 2013) (leave to amend is futile where barriers to relief cannot be surmounted by reframing the complaint). Accordingly, this action is dismissed. [2] CONCLUSION This action is dismissed as frivolous. I certify under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore deny in forma pauperis status for the purpose of any appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment closing the action. The Clerk of Court shall also mail a copy of this Order and the Judgment to plaintiff and note the mailing on the docket. SO ORDERED. /s/ Rachel Kovner RACHEL P. KOVNER United States District Judge Dated: Brooklyn, New York August 11, 2020