United States District Court, E.D. New York
ROBERT H. AJAMIAN, Plaintiff,
KINAN NIMEH, Defendant.
Robert H. Ajamian, pro se, Latham, NY, for Plaintiff.
No appearances, for Defendants.
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
JOANNA SEYBERT, District Judge.
On June 10, 2014, pro se plaintiff Robert H. Ajamian ("Plaintiff") filed an in forma pauperis Complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Section 1983") against Kinan Nimeh ("Defendant"), accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis. By Transfer Order also filed on June 10, 2014, Plaintiff's action was transferred to the Eastern District of New York on July 1, 2014 and assigned to the undersigned.
Upon review of the declaration in support of the application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Therefore, Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. However, for the reasons that follow, the Complaint is sua sponte DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) (B)(ii), 1915A(b)(1). However, Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file an Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order.
Plaintiff's sparse handwritten Complaint, submitted on a Section 1983 complaint form, complains that the Defendant, who is alleged to be Plaintiff's stockbroker during the period of March 2005 through September 2011, made "criminal misrepresentations" and breached his fiduciary duty to the Plaintiff in relation to investments to Plaintiff's retirement account. (Compl. ¶¶ 4-5.) In its entirety, Plaintiff claims that
Broker Kinan Nimeh from Gann Allen Financial violated my constitutional rights to conservative safe Keough retirement account from March 2005-Sept 2011 and my property was destroyed in the amount of $30, 000 plus treble which is $90, 000 today total. The criminal misrepresentation and fraudulent concealment doctrine many dangerous activities against a retirement account took place excessive margins, penny stocks all in violation of the 1934 SEC Act.
(Compl. ¶ 4.) Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff next alleges as his cause of action:
In my first cause of action my Constitutional rights were violated for safe conservative investments. Kinan Nimeh was taking dangerous approach with excess margins and penny stocks he had conflict of interest. Kinan would criminally misrepresent what he was doing and fraudulently concealing his activities all against SEC 1934 act.
I identify that $30, 000 plus treble $90, 000 are my total damages.
Due to my Constitutional rights being violated and being mislead and misinformed I am demanding compensation of $90, 000 for damage to my retirement account.
(Compl. ¶ 5.) For relief, Plaintiff seeks to recover a damages award of $90, 000 "for damages to my Keough retirement fund violating my constitutional rights and endangering my ...