Legal Opinion

Modena v. Neff

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided January 7, 2010No. 09-851CPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HORN, Judge.

The plaintiffs complaint is unclear, confusing and fails to raise issues over which the United States Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction. Furthermore, although plaintiff claims in forma pauperis status in his complaint, no application in support thereof was filed. Mr. Modena claims, among other allegations, that “[pjlaintiff took title to his birth certificate in 200[0]2 and filed in the International Military Registry3 to have highest claim to his Identity, etc_” As such, Mr. Modena argues that the he is a “copyrighted and bonded man” and filed this action pursuant…

2Cases cited68 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hall v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API