UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. One Machine Gun/Short Barreled Rifle and Miscellaneous Firearms and Ammunication

Filing 59

ORDER DENYING 53 DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 11/20/2017. (ejdlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/20/2017: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (amkS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Case No. 5:10-cv-04766-EJD

Plaintiff,
13

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM
JUDGMENT

v.
14

16

ONE MACHINE GUN/SHORT
BARRELED RIFLE AND
MISCELLANEOUS FIREARMS AND
AMMUNICATION,

17

Defendant.

15

Re: Dkt. No. 53

18
19
20

On September 11, 2017, this Court granted the government’s motion for summary
judgment (Dkt. No. 51) and entered judgment accordingly (Dkt. No. 52).

21

Steven Lee Vargem now moves for relief from that judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60.

22

Mot. for Relief from J. (“Mot.”), Dkt. No. 53. Vargem’s position is difficult to discern, but he

23

appears raise arguments that are similar to the arguments he raised in opposition to the

24

government’s motion for summary judgment. Dkt. No. 48. He seems to argue that he is not subject

25

to personal jurisdiction in this Court because admiralty laws apply and because he is not a U.S.

26

citizen. Mot. 11–12. He also appears to argue that the “United States of America” is a separate

27

entity from the United States Government. Id. at 3.

28

Case No.: 5:10-cv-04766-EJD
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
1

1

The Court finds that, as before, Vargem’s arguments are frivolous and do not warrant

2

further discussion. See Order Granting Def.’s Mot. for Summ. J., Dkt. No. 51; United States v.

3

Dawes, 161 F. App’x 742, 746 (10th Cir. 2005) (finding that the same arguments are “legally

4

frivolous and do not merit further comment”); U.S. v. Rice, Nos. 2:09-cr-00078-JCM, 2:10-cr-

5

00520-JCM, 2012 WL 2995686, at *1 (D. Nev. July 3, 2012) (finding that the same arguments are

6

“entirely frivolous and without legal basis”).

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 20, 2017
______________________________________
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case No.: 5:10-cv-04766-EJD
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
2