Case: 3:13-cv-00476-wmc Document #: 3 Filed: 07/30/13 Page 1 of 5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
OPINION AND ORDER
13-cv-4 7 6-wmc
ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al.,
OPINION AND ORDER
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, et al.,
Plaintiff Anthony Bussie (#64105-050) is a pretrial detainee in custody at the
Federal Detention Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Pending before the court are
two proposed civil actions against random federal officials and agencies. Bussie has filed
a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in both cases. Because Bussie is
incarcerated, the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), requires
this court to screen his complaints and dismiss any portion that is legally frivolous,
malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seeks monetary relief
from a defendant who by law cannot be sued for money damages.
In addressing any pro se litigant's pleadings, the court must read the complaint
generously. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 521 ( 1972). Even under this lenient
Case: 3:13-cv-00476-wmc Document #: 3 Filed: 07/30/13 Page 2 of 5
standard, the court concludes that these complaints must be dismissed for reasons set
forth briefly below.
Bussie is presently in custody pursuant to a federal indictment, charging him with
threatening to harm a United States congressman. See United States v. Bussie, 12-cr-229
(D.N.J.). Court records reflect that this case has been continued indefinitely because
Bussie suffers from a mental disease that has rendered him incompetent to stand trial.
Giving both of his complaints the most generous interpretation possible, both proposed
civil actions are a testament to that diagnosis.
In Case No. 13-cv-476, Bussie sues the United States Attorney General, the
Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Senator Patrick Leahy, Congressman Robert
E. Andrews, former President William J. Clinton, former President George W. Bush, Jr.,
President Barack Obama, the United States Air Force, Senator Harry Reid, Senator
Mitch McConnell, House Speaker John Boehner, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the
Congressional Committee on Ethics, and several state agencies. In Case No. 13-cv-477,
Bussie sues the Federal Election Commission, the "House of Congress Employment," and
many of the same defendants listed in Case No. 13-cv-476.
Both of Bussie's proposed complaints feature rambling, incoherent prose that
appears to invoke 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal
Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 ( 1971), the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28
U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680, and the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491. Bussie seems to
acknowledge that he suffers from a mental disorder and that he is in custody as the result
Case: 3:13-cv-00476-wmc Document #: 3 Filed: 07/30/13 Page 3 of 5
of criminal charges. To the extent that one can be discerned, the common theme of both
complaints appears to be that the criminal charges against him are the product of ethical
violations and other "white collar crimes" perpetrated by one or more of the defendants.
He takes issue in particular with Congressman Andrews. Woven throughout the
accusations of wrongdoing by Andrews and other defendants, are allegations that Bussie
has been denied compensation pursuant to an employment contract with the United
States for foreign intelligence services performed in the wake of 9/11 and the war in Iraq.
In a somewhat similar complaint, Bussie sought $50 million dollars for paranormal
or "psychic work" performed on behalf of the United States. That complaint was
dismissed by the United States Court of Federal Claims and the Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit. See Bussie v. United States, 96 Fed. Cl. 89 (Jan. 12, 2011), affd, 443 F.
App'x 542, 2011 WL 468788 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2011) (per curiam). A national database
of court records reflects that Bussie has filed at least 26 other civil actions in the federal
district courts within the last two years, ten of which were submitted in the past three
months. A cursory review of these recently filed complaints reveals content that is
similar to the pending proposed actions in Case Nos. 13-476 and 13-477.
appears from this review that Bussie has filed these actions scattershot across the country
to avoid a preclusion order entered against him by the District Court for New Jersey,
barring him from filing any actions "pertaining to ( 1) his alleged entitlement to monetary
damages arising out of an intelligence and war contract with the United States
Government or (2) alleged misconduct by government officials pertaining to the
enforcement of his alleged intelligence and war contract with the United States
Case: 3:13-cv-00476-wmc Document #: 3 Filed: 07/30/13 Page 4 of 5
government." Conjured Up Entertainment v. United States, No. 11-2824 (D.N.J. July 26,
2011) (Dkt. # 9, at3-4).
Although pro se pleadings are entitled to a liberal construction, Haines, 404 U.S.
at 521, a prose complaint is subject to dismissal as frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in
fact or law. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). A complaint lacks an
arguable basis in fact when the plaintiff's allegations are so "fanciful," "fantastic," and
"delusional" as to be "wholly incredible." Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 ( 1992)
(citing Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 325). Stated another way, a complaint is factually frivolous if
its allegations are "bizarre, irrational or incredible." Edwards v. Snyder, 478 F.3d 827, 829
(7th Cir. 2007) (citations omitted). The garbled allegations featured throughout both of
Bussie's proposed complaints clearly fit this category and are therefore subject to
dismissal as factually frivolous.
Likewise, both of Bussie's proposed complaints repeat allegations that have been
rejected as frivolous by another federal district court. See Bussie v. Dep't of Commerce, No.
12-cv-792 (E.D. N.C. March 12, 2013) (Dkt. # 8). Repetitive allegations of the sort
made by Bussie are considered malicious and are grounds for dismissal under the PLRA.
See Lindell v. McCallum, 352 F.3d 1107, 1109-10 (7th Cir. 2003) (citing Pittman v. Moore,
980 F.2d 994, 995 (5th Cir. 1983) (noting that it is "malicious" for a pro se litigant to
file a lawsuit that duplicates allegations of another pending federal lawsuit by the same
plaintiff) (citations omitted). For other reasons that require no further elaboration,
litigants are not allowed to pursue claims that have been raised and rejected previously by
Case: 3:13-cv-00476-wmc Document #: 3 Filed: 07/30/13 Page 5 of 5
other federal courts. See Hagee v. City of Evanston, 729 F.2d 510, 514 (7th Cir. 1984)
(explaining that the doctrine of res judicata is designed to protect litigants from facing
multiple lawsuits and "to enhance judicial economy by prohibiting repetitive litigation").
To the extent that Bussie has made duplicative claims that have been adjudicated
elsewhere, he may not proceed with those same allegations here. Therefore, both of
Bussie's proposed complaints will be dismissed.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The motion by plaintiff Anthony Bussie for leave to proceed in fonna
pauperis is DENIED.
2. The proposed complaints filed by Bussie in Case Nos. 13-467 and 13-477
are DISMISSED as frivolous and malicious for purposes of 28 U.S.C.
3. The clerk of court shall provide a copy of this order to plaintiff and to the
official having charge of his custody at the Federal Detention Center in
Entered this 30th day ofJuly, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
WILLIAM M. CONLEY