Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Baity v. United States Postal Service

United States District Court, D. Montana, Missoula Division

January 22, 2018

KEITH M. BAITY, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, UNITED STATES JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, and UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, Defendants.

          ORDER, AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

          Jeremiah C. Lynch United States Magistrate Judge

         I. Introduction

         Plaintiff Keith Baity, appearing pro se, filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Baity submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Because it appears he lacks sufficient funds to prosecute this action IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Baity's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is GRANTED. This action may proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, and the Clerk of Court is directed to file Baity's lodged Complaint as of the filing date of his request to proceed in forma pauperis.

         The federal statute under which leave to proceed in forma pauperis is permitted - 28 U.S.C. § 1915 - also requires the Court to conduct a preliminary screening of the allegations set forth in the litigant's pleading. The applicable provisions of section 1915(e)(2) state as follows:

(2) Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that-
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal-
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

         The Court will review Baity's pleading to consider whether this action can survive dismissal under the provisions of section 1915(e)(2), or any other provision of law. See Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1138, 1142 (9th Cir. 2005).

         II. Background

         Baity commenced this action to challenge Defendants' alleged conduct in interfering with his business advertising practices. Baity is self-employed as a grout and tile restoration specialist. He advertises his business by what he refers to as “home delivered advertising” which apparently involves placing printed advertisement publications in or on residential mailboxes. Defendant United States Postal Service (“USPS”) has engaged in various acts apparently seeking to prevent Baity from placing his ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.