Novy v. Apple Inc.
4:25-cv-01929
S.D. Tex.May 28, 2025Background
- Angie Novy, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a lawsuit against Apple Inc. in the Southern District of Texas.
- Novy's handwritten complaint alleged that Apple sought to control her via her iPhone, describing acts of espionage and mind control.
- She simultaneously moved to have all court proceedings conducted offline due to fears for her safety from law enforcement.
- The court reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), which requires dismissal of in forma pauperis suits that are frivolous or fail to state a claim.
- The court considered whether the allegations met the federal pleading standards for plausibility and clarity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the Complaint | Apple uses her iPhone to control and spy | Not recorded (Apple not required) | Allegations found frivolous and too delusional to proceed |
| Plausibility Under § 1915 | Alleged fear and threats to her safety | Not recorded | The claims lack an arguable basis in law or fact |
| Federal Pleading Standard | Pro se filings should be liberally construed | Not recorded | Factual content insufficient; claim not plausible on its face |
| Request for Offline Proceedings | Online access endangers her security | Not recorded | Motions denied as moot because underlying suit dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Newsome v. EEOC, 301 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2002) (clarifies dismissal standards for in forma pauperis cases)
- Samford v. Dretke, 562 F.3d 674 (5th Cir. 2009) (defining "frivolous" under § 1915)
- Sullivan v. Leor Energy, LLC, 600 F.3d 542 (5th Cir. 2010) (limitation on review to complaint and certain attachments)
- Allen v. Vertafore, Inc., 28 F.4th 613 (5th Cir. 2022) (defining permissible documents considered at dismissal stage)
- George v. SI Group, Inc., 36 F.4th 611 (5th Cir. 2022) (standards for review of pleadings at motion to dismiss)