United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division
OPINION AND ORDER 
POLSTER CHAPPELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court on review of the
Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. #1) filed on August
28, 2017. Plaintiff Miguel Oyola is an inmate at the Desoto
Correctional Institution (DeSoto CI) in Arcadia, Florida.
Proceeding pro se, Plaintiff initiated this action
against two inmates at DeSoto CI, Chauncey V. Thomas and
Mitchell M. Blanks. (Doc. #1). Plaintiff also filed
a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (Doc.
#2). Because Plaintiff seeks leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, the Court must review his Complaint to
determine whether it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See
28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii).
Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants Blanks and
Thomas are involved in starting a drug business trafficking
K-2, Molley, Meth, Heroin, and Marijuana in Desoto CI.
Plaintiff states that Blanks' entire family is heavily
involved in the drug business in Fort Myers. Plaintiff offers
to read out to officers the names and times of future drug
transactions by the Defendants. Plaintiff also alleges that
Mtichell and Blanks have spoken about setting fire to the
homes of the judges in the Fort Myers Federal Court.
federal district court is required to review a civil
complaint filed in forma pauperis and to dismiss any
such complaint that is frivolous, malicious, or fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915. In essence, § 1915(e)(2) is a screening
process to be applied sua sponte and at any time
during the proceedings. The mandatory language of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915 applies to all proceedings in forma
pauperis. The section provides:
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;
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). In making the above
determinations, all factual allegations in the complaint must
be viewed as true. Brown v. Johnson, 387 F.3d 1344,
1347 (11th Cir. 2004). Moreover, the Court must read the
plaintiff's pro se allegations in a liberal
fashion. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972).
complaint may be dismissed as frivolous under §
1915(e)(2)(B)(i) where it lacks an arguable basis in law or
fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).
A claim is frivolous as a matter of law where, inter
alia, the defendants are immune from suit or ...