Grimes v. Johnson et al
Filing
2
ORDER RETURNING COMPLAINT TO PLAINTIFF, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 7/29/15. (jebS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/29/2015)
1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
JEROME L. GRIMES,
6
Plaintiff,
No. C 15-80199M CW
7
v.
ORDER RETURNING
COMPLAINT TO
8
9
10
DUSTIN JOHNSON, et al.,
PLAINTIFF
Defendants.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
________________________________/
On December 9, 2005, this Court entered a pre-filing order
14
regarding the cases filed by Plaintiff Jerome Grimes.
15
filing order states that if Mr. Grimes files a complaint that is
16
“related to any of the following matters:
17
18
19
20
21
The pre-
(1) a diversified group of individuals who commit acts
of terror against Mr. Grimes, his family and other
citizens;
(2) an injunction against the defendants to prevent
them from kidnaping, framing, falsely imprisoning or
otherwise terrorizing Mr. Grimes, his family, and other
citizens;
22
(3) a court order for the defendants to be subjected to
a lie detector test;
23
(4) covert terrorism
24
it will not be filed unless it presents cognizable claims that
25
are not based on merely conclusory allegations.
26
complaints filed by Mr. Grimes while he is not incarcerated or
27
detained will be filed unless they contain intelligible factual
28
allegations and claims for relief.”
Second, no other
The Court has reviewed the above-captioned complaint filed
1
2
by Mr. Grimes and finds that it shall not be filed because it
3
alleges that Defendants are engaged in terrorism.
4
alleges no cognizable causes of action in this complaint.
5
Moreover, the complaint appears to be based on events that took
6
place in Louisiana.
7
is the appropriate venue for any claims arising out of these
8
events.
Mr. Grimes
Accordingly, it is not clear that this Court
Because the above-captioned complaint concerns matters
9
mentioned in the pre-filing order and presents no cognizable
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
cause of action, the Clerk of the Court is ordered not to file
12
it.
13
Instead, the complaint shall be returned to Mr. Grimes.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15
Dated:7/29/15
CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
JEROME L. GRIMES,
Case No. 15-mc-80199-CW
Plaintiff,
8
v.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
9
10
DUSTIN JOHNSON, et al.,
Defendants.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.
That on July 29, 2015, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing
said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
18
19
20
Jerome L. Grimes
P.O. Box 305
Monroe, LA 71210
(Original Complaint Returned)
21
22
Dated: July 29, 2015
23
24
Richard W. Wieking
Clerk, United States District Court
25
26
27
28
By:________________________
Jean Ballard, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable CLAUDIA WILKEN
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?