REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CHARLES F. EICK, Magistrate Judge.

This Report and Recommendation is submitted to the Honorable Gary A. Feess, United States District Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636 and General Order 05-07 of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

PROCEEDINGS

Plaintiff, pro se, paid the filing fee and filed a 58-page Complaint on February 14, 2014. The Complaint names as Defendants the "Sheriff's Department of the City of Monterey Park," the County of Los Angeles, and former Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca.

The Complaint consists of a rambling, largely incomprehensible narrative describing the alleged electronic monitoring and torture of Plaintiff by Sheriff Baca and others. Plaintiff alleges that Baca caused to be implanted in Plaintiff's shoulder a "protoplasmic microchip" which purportedly reads Plaintiff's mind and permits Baca to speak to Plaintiff and to control Plaintiff's actions (see Complaint, pp. 5, 9, 19). Baca allegedly caused Plaintiff to be harassed and tortured by "electromagnetic radio-active micro-waves . . . via satellites and Governments' electronic computer equipment. . . ." (id., p. 9). Baca allegedly caused Plaintiff to be implanted with an "impulse neuron implant" which assertedly permits Baca and others to see through Plaintiff's eyes (id., p. 39). Baca allegedly blocks Plaintiff's phone calls, manipulates Plaintiff's emails, interferes with Plaintiff's ability to perform his job as a truck driver, attempts to compel Plaintiff to crash his truck, and also attempts to compel Plaintiff to commit crimes (id., pp. 11, 20, 22, 24). Baca allegedly caused a device to be placed in Plaintiff's nose during nasal surgery which allegedly permits Baca to follow Plaintiff's "visual sense" (id., p. 56).1 Baca also allegedly caused Plaintiff to be cloned and assertedly has kidnapped Plaintiff's children and is killing them or selling them into slavery (id., pp. 11, 13, 38-39, 44-45, 55-56).

Plaintiff further appears to allege that Baca caused Plaintiff's unlawful arrest for embezzlement, that Plaintiff received ineffective assistance of counsel in his criminal proceedings, and that the criminal court violated Plaintiff's speedy trial right (id., pp. 14, 17-18).2

On March 17, 2014, Defendant County of Los Angeles filed "Defendant County of Los Angeles' Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted; or in the Alternative, Motion for More Definite Statement" ("Motion"), seeking dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or alternatively a more definite statement pursuant to Rule 12(e). On April 17, 2014, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to the Motion.

DISCUSSION

Typically, claims such as those alleged by Plaintiff have been asserted by indigent plaintiffs, and have suffered swift dismissal as "frivolous" under the federal in forma pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. section 1915(e)(2)(B)(1) or its predecessor, 28 U.S.C. section 1915(d).3 See e.g., Banks v. An Unknown Named Number of Federal Judges and U.S. Covert Government Agents, ___ Fed. App'x ___, 2014 WL 1285117, at *1-2 (3d Cir. Apr. 1, 2014) (upholding dismissal of complaint alleging that federal judges and others subjected Plaintiff to a "Voice to Skull" technology); McGinnis v. Freudenthal, 2011 WL 2312094 (10th Cir. June 10, 2011) (upholding dismissal of frivolous complaint alleging plaintiff was subjected to electromagnetic torture); Ezike v. Na. R.R. Passenger Corp., 2009 WL 247838 (7th Cir. Feb. 3, 2009) (remanding for dismissal of complaint alleging that plaintiff was the victim of a conspiracy involving various employers, the teamsters, people of Indian descent, AMTRAK police and armed secret agents); Mendes v. United States, 88 Fed. Cl. 759 (Fed. Cl.), appeal dismissed, 375 Fed. App'x 4 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (upholding dismissal of frivolous complaint alleging that "zealot, fanatical women" employed by the FBI and CIA used "laser beam technology" against plaintiff); Athans v. Starbucks Coffee Co., 2007 WL 1673883 (D. Ariz. June 11, 2007) (dismissing as frivolous complaint which alleged, inter alia, that Starbucks joined law enforcement agencies and other commercial establishments to administer a chemical to plaintiff to prevent him from stalking); Foggy v. United States Gov't, 2007 WL 1667394 (D. Idaho June 5, 2007) (plaintiff alleged the government used satellite to put "Hollywood voices" in her head to instruct her to molest and kill her son); Hairston v. Cheney, 2004 WL 1368795 (N.D. Ill. June 16, 2004) (dismissing as frivolous a complaint alleging that defendants inserted a camera into the plaintiff and conducted cosmic and weight gain experiments on her); Jones v. North Atlantic Treaty Org., 1998 WL 136511 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 23, 1998) (two NATO member states allegedly "picked" plaintiff's head, publicly aired his thoughts and mumblings, and caused him to be besieged by older women); McCorkle v. Ameritech, 1993 WL 524703 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 13, 1993) (United States Navy and plaintiff's employer allegedly harassed plaintiff by means of hypnosis, placement of electronic receivers into plaintiff's sinuses, head, pelvis and rectum, placement of equipment in plaintiff's home to induce sleep deprivation, and use of shock discipline); Carrasco v. U.S. Gov't Justice Dep't Strike Force, 792 F.Supp. 603 (N.D. Ill. 1992) (government allegedly surgically placed monitoring device in plaintiff's brain to record his dreams for law enforcement agencies and made him an experiment for sex therapy); Chambers v. Webster, 1990 WL 81339 (E.D. Pa. June 5, 1990) (officials of CIA, Secret Service, Justice Department, Nuclear Regulatory Commission and state prison system allegedly conspired to harass plaintiff by means of electroshock therapy, telekineses, voice synthesizers, hypnotism, mental telepathy, and cybernetics); Shibuya v. George Washington Univ., 1987 WL 14638 (D.D.C. Aug. 25, 1987) (university employees allegedly monitored plaintiff and exposed her thoughts to the public by use of microwaves and lasers, used drugs, microwaves, lasers or hypnosis to induce artificial noises and smells in plaintiff, and retarded plaintiff's ability to take New York and District of Columbia bar examinations).

Plaintiff presently is not in forma pauperis and apparently is not in custody. Accordingly, Plaintiff is not subject to the restrictions on frivolous complaints contained in 42 U.S.C. section 1915. However, a federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider claims that are "so insubstantial, implausible, foreclosed by prior decisions of this Court, or otherwise completely devoid of merit as not to involve a federal controversy." Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1998) (citations and internal quotations omitted); Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 537 (1974) (court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over claims that are "essentially fictitious," "obviously frivolous" or "obviously without merit"); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227 n.6 (9th Cir. 1984) (court may dismiss frivolous paid complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction).4

Plaintiff's frivolous, delusional and fanciful allegations do not confer subject matter jurisdiction on this Court. See Bivolarevic v. U.S. CIA, 2010 WL 890147 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2010) (court lacked jurisdiction over claims that CIA subjected plaintiff to "voice to skull technology" as a "mind control weapon"); Strode v. Dep't of Defense, 2004 WL 1572655 (W.D.N.Y. June 2, 2004) (dismissing paid complaint which alleged that government agents transmitted from their bodies "electomagnetic extremely low frequency radio energy from master satellites"); O'Brien v. United States Dep't of Justice, 927 F.Supp. 382 (D. Ariz. 1995), aff'd, 76 F.3d 387 (9th Cir. 1996) (unpublished disposition) (plaintiff alleged that various defendants including the United States Department of Justice, Ted Kennedy, Andy Williams, Johnny Mathis, Janet Reno, Neil Diamond, Nancy Reagan, the Phoenix Suns, Charles Barkley, the Arizona governor, the Arizona attorney general, and National Basketball Association Commissioner David Stern had assaulted the plaintiff using electronic and satellite equipment, contaminated the plaintiff with germs, and conspired to dictate whom she should marry; court dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the allegations were "so bizarre and delusional that they [were] wholly insubstantial"); Doran v. McGinnis, 158 F.R.D. 383 (E.D. Mich. 1994) (dismissing paid complaint as frivolous, where plaintiff alleged prison officials implanted "telepathic mind control device" in his brain to control his mind and bodily functions).

RECOMMENDATION

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Court issue an Order: (1) accepting and adopting this Report and Recommendation; (2) dismissing the Complaint without leave to amend and dismissing the action without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and (3) denying Defendant's Motion as moot.