The opinion of the court was delivered by: Chief Judge Kane
Before the Court is Plaintiff Curtis W. Jackson's pro se complaint (Doc. No. 1), application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2), and motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 7). For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted, his complaint will be dismissed, and his motion for appointment of counsel will be denied as moot.
In his complaint, Plaintiff avers that the Honorable William W. Caldwell, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, violated Plaintiff's civil rights when Judge Caldwell presided over three civil actions Plaintiff filed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. (Doc. No. 1, at 2-3) (citing civil action numbers 1:02-CV-0631, 1:04-CV-1696, and 1:07-CV-0376). Specifically, Plaintiff complaints:
Judge William W. Caldwell intentionally handled my 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil complaints me as a state prisoner. [sic] Each time, he was "deliberately indifference" and also with a conflict of interest with a tort committed in the process. Especially with my 2007 civil complaint. Each time I filed a [civil complaint] it cost me time, money and mental anguish. Also Judge William W. Caldwell was intentionally deliberately indifference and had a "conflict of interest["] when he didn't let the Attorney General of Pennsylvania address the issues.
(Doc. No. 1, at 3.) For these alleged violations of his civil rights, Plaintiff seeks twenty-five million dollars in compensatory damages and ten million dollars in punitive damages. (Id. at 4.) He further requests that a different judge preside over his 2007 civil complaint "on appeal" or that it be "put back in front of another judge in U.S. District Court based off this civil complaint." (Id.)
When a plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, a court is required to review the complaint prior to service of process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). This section states, in relevant part:
(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 ...