Parker v. Apple (Fed. Cir. 2020) (non-precedential order)
The Federal Circuit has dismissed Parker’s pro se appeal as frivolous. Parker described the facts of the case as follows:
On October 29, 2018 Raevon Parkerwent to the Apple Store in the Saint Louis Galleria for a malfunction of his cellular device. The attendant in the Apple Store fixed the device but kept it by deceiving the Plaintiff knowing that it was the first phone to have new features [created by Parker himself].
The damages that the plaintiff is seeking is a trillion dollars.
Parker first sued in Missouri state court asking for $2 trillion and $900 USD as well as return of his priceless phone. The Missouri court dismissed on the pleadings for failure to state a claim. Later, Parker refiled in Federal Court and that case was also dismissed.
You may have heard of district court’s certifying questions for appeal under 28 U.S.C. 1292(b). In this case, the district court issued a reverse-certification — certifying that any appeal by Mr. Parker should not be taken in good faith. Still, Parker appealed.
On appeal to the Federal Circuit, Parker made a takings claim — arguing that his 5th Amendment rights were violated by Apple — “his property was taken for public use and he had not been compensated.” Despite widespread concern over Apple’s monopolistic practices, Apple is not the government and is not bound by the 5th Amendment takings clause or is incorporation under the 14th Amendment. Thus, the Federal Circuit dismissed the case and denied Parker’s fee waiver petition (Proceedings in forma pauperis). The Federal statute guiding the court’s approach to in forma pauperis proceedings indicates that the court should dismiss any case where “the action or appeal is frivolous.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Following that guidance the the court has dismissed Parker’s appeal.
= = = =
I will note that the current value of Apple’s publicly traded shares is $2