JAMES MORAN, Senior District Judge
Plaintiff Lisa Calimese brought this action against the American Psychiatric Association (APA) for violating her right to the pursuit of happiness. Along with her complaint, plaintiff filed a petition to proceed in forma pauperis. For the following reasons, plaintiff's petition is denied.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) we may authorize plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis if she demonstrates an inability to pay the required costs and fees. In her affidavit, plaintiff states that she is unemployed, has no savings, and her only source of income is social security. She has shown her inability to pay court costs.
Our inquiry does not end there, however. As part of the initial review of a petition to proceed in forma pauperis, we analyze the claims and dismiss the complaint if we determine that the action is frivolous or malicious, it falls to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks damages from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii); Alston v Debruyn, 13 F.3d 1036, 1039 (7th Cir. 1994). We review the claim using the same standard as a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Zimmerman v. Tribble, 226 F.3d 568, 571 (7th Cir. 2000). Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), we dismiss a claim only if it appears beyond a doubt that there exist no facts to support the allegations. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). Complaints by pro se parties should "be liberally construed and not held to the stringent standards expected of pleadings drafted by lawyers." McCormick v. City of Chicago. 230 F.3d 319, 325 (7th Cir. 2000).
In her civil cover sheet, plaintiff identifies the nature of her suit as personal injury and her cause of action as the violation of her right to the pursuit of happiness. Her one-page complaint is unclear and provides no factual context for her allegations; it appears to state that the APA infringed on her pursuit of happiness by not informing her of her rights and improperly questioning and advising her on certain issues. These allegations fail to state a claim. Neither the Constitution nor its amendments provide a guarantee for the pursuit of happiness. See U.S. Const; Coffey v. U.S., 939 F. Supp. 185, 191 (E.D.N.Y. 1996). Nor do plaintiff's vague allegations regarding APA's failure to properly question and advise her give rise to any other causes of action.
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's petition to proceed in forma pauperis is denied.