determination of status as a . means of terrorizing me into cooperation.... Id. at 4. 5 . According to plaintiff, this "controversy involves alleged federal income tax liabilities for calendar years 1999, 2000 and 2001 [and that an affidavit included with exhibits appended to his complaint] applies to each of those years as well as 1997 and 1998.” Compl. Ex. E. 6 . While the Court of Federal Claims is not considered a "court of the United States" within the meaning of title 28 of the United States Code, the court has jurisdiction to grant or deny an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 2503(d) (deeming the Court of Federal Claims to be “a court of the United States” for the purposes of section 1915); see also Matthews v. United States, 72 Fed.Cl. 274, 277-78 (2006) (<HOLDING>). 7 . The court notes that section 1915(a)(1)
holding that the state court may adjudicate the applicability of a bankruptcy injunction to state court litigation holding that the court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate any claims whatsoever under the federal criminal code holding that a breach of settlement claim should have been brought in the court of federal claims pursuant to the tucker act holding inter alia that common law claims were preempted recognizing that congress enacted the court of federal claims technical and procedural improvements act of 1992 authorizing inter alia the court to adjudicate applications to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to section 1915