Ahmed-Al-Khalifa v. Bromwich et al

Filing 7

WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable John W. Darrah on 5/1/2013: Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Accordingly, the Complaint is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (2)(B)(ii), and Pl aintiff's In Forma Pauperis Application 4 and Plaintiff's Motion in Further Submission in Support of Original Motion 6 are denied. Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel 5 is denied as moot. See statement below. [For further detail see text below.] Mailed notice (ao,)

Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Name of Assigned Judge
or Magistrate Judge

John W. Darrah

CASE NUMBER

13-cv-1386

CASE
TITLE

Sitting Judge if Other
than Assigned Judge

DATE
Ahmed-Al-Khalifa v. Bromwich et al

5/1/13

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Accordingly, the Complaint is
dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), and Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis Application [4] and
Plaintiff’s Motion in Further Submission in Support of Original Motion [6] are denied. Plaintiff’s Motion for
Appointment of Counsel [5] is denied as moot. See statement below.
[ For further details see text below.]

Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT
On February 20, 2013, Plaintiff Oluwashina Kazeem Ahmed-Al-Khalifa filed a Complaint with an
application to proceed without paying the customary $350 filing fee. Plaintiff alleges his constitutional
rights were violated when he was deported without proper due process and seeks to sue the following
Defendants: Michael Bromwich, the Inspector General of the United States Department of Justice; Wiliam F.
Riley, Deputy Assistant Director with the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service; and J. Rielly, an
officer with the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”). Plaintiff has recently filed at least five
other similar actions in the Northern District of Illinois, all without paying the requisite filing fees. These
other actions allege similar claims against F. Ramos, a “deportation officer”; Brian Perryman, an INS officer;
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder; former U.S. Attorney John Ashcroft, and the Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit. See Case Nos. 12-cv-10339, 13-cv-582, 13-cv-583, 13-cv-586, and 13-cv-01377. In 2002,
Plaintiff, proceeding under the name “Oluwashina Ahmed,” filed petitions for writs of habeas corpus, which
were dismissed upon the Court’s notification that Plaintiff had been deported, in 2002, to Nigeria. See Case
Nos. 02-cv-2022, 02-cv-2518, 02-cv-2713, 02-cv-2768.
If a court is presented with a case submitted with a request to proceed in forma pauperis, the court
will dismiss the case if it determines the action fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The court applies the same standard it would use to rule on a Rule 12(b)(6)
motion to dismiss. See DeWalt v. Carter, 224 F.3d 607, 611 (7th Cir. 2000). Plaintiff asserts a violation of
his constitutional rights, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for his deportation in 2002. The facts of Plaintiff’s
case are set out more fully in this Court’s January 31, 2013 Order dismissing Plaintiff’s action against
Perryman, see Ahmed-Al-Khalifa v. Perryman, 13-cv-0583 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 31, 2013). As in that case, the
allegations in the Complaint filed with this Court “plainly reveal[] that [the] action is untimely under the
governing statute of limitations.” United States v. Lewis, 411 F.3d 838, 842 (7th Cir. 2002). The statute of
limitations governing § 1983 claims is two years. Henderson v. Bolanda, 253 F.3d 928, 931 (7th Cir. 2001).
Even assuming Plaintiff could assert a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, it is clear that Plaintiff was deported in
Page 1 of 2

2002 and therefore, his claim is over ten years old and barred by the statute of limitations. Hence, Plaintiff’s
claim is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S.
199, 215 (2007) (“If the allegations . . . show that relief is barred by the applicable statute of limitations, the
complaint is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim. . . .”); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Page 2 of 2