MICHELE FOTINOS-v-BETH LABSON-FREEMAN, ET AL.

Filing 32

Order by Hon. Thelton E. Henderson denying 31 Ex Parte Application to set aside the judgment. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2014)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

MICHELE FOTINOS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

5
6
7
8

v.
BETH LABSON-FREEMAN, et al.,
Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-04463-TEH
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE THE
COURT’S JANUARY 23, 2014
JUDGMENT

9
10

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application to Vacate and Set Aside

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Judgment, filed on February 24, 2014. In their application, Plaintiffs assert that in its

12

January 22, 2014 order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss, the Court failed to

13

consider Plaintiffs’ First Cause of Action against President Barack Obama for his alleged

14

breach of his “fiduciary duty to the American people in nominating [Defendant Beth

15

Labson-]Freeman, pursuant to Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.”

16

First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) at 63.

17

The Court agrees that its January 22, 2014 order of dismissal did not address this

18

cause of action, which seeks declaratory relief that President Obama breached a fiduciary

19

duty to the American people “to conduct a due diligence of the qualifications, ethics, and

20

conduct of the proposed nominee” when he nominated Defendant Labson-Freeman to the

21

federal bench. FAC ¶ 280. This claim must be dismissed, however, because Plaintiffs

22

lack standing for the reasons discussed below.

23

Federal courts are limited to only adjudicating controversies brought by those with

24

standing to sue. Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83, 94-95 (1968); Schlesinger v. Reservists

25

Comm. to Stop the War, 418 U.S. 208, 220 (1974). Standing to sue comes from having a

26

concrete injury, and therefore a sufficient stake in the controversy being presented.

27

Schlesinger, 418 U.S. at 220-21. Here Plaintiffs do not allege that they have been

28

personally injured in any way by President Obama’s conduct; their only allegation is that

1

his nomination of Defendant Labson-Freeman is “not in the best interest of the American

2

people.” FAC ¶¶ 7, 299. It is long been held that “standing to sue may not be predicated

3

upon an interest . . . held in common by all members of the public.” Schlesinger, 418 U.S.

4

at 220. Thus, Plaintiffs’ alleged interest, shared by the “American people” at-large, does

5

not confer standing on Plaintiffs. As a result, the Court cannot adjudicate Plaintiffs’ cause

6

of action against President Obama. This deficiency cannot be cured by amendment and

7

the claim must be dismissed with prejudice.

8
9

Accordingly, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs’ request to vacate and set aside
the judgment entered on January 23, 2014.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13
14

Dated: 02/24/14

_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2