Raymond v. Mnuchin

Filing 3

ORDER that the Plaintiff's 1 Registration of Foreign Judgment is hereby STRICKEN AS FRIVOLOUS. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 7/21/2017. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (khm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:17-mc-00038-MR-DLH

DOUGLAS RAYMOND,1

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
STEVEN TERNER MNUCHIN,
)
)
Defendant.
)
___________________________ )

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte.
I.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On July 5, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a document entitled “Registration of

Foreign Judgment.” [Doc. 1]. In this document, the Plaintiff makes a demand
for “lawful money in all transactions” and asks the Clerk to issue a summons
and to commence garnishment proceedings against the Defendant. [Id. at
1-2].

The Plaintiff also appears to challenge the legitimacy of the

While the caption of the “Registration of Foreign Judgment” identifies the Plaintiff as
“Douglas Raymond” [Doc. 1 at 1], it appears that the Plaintiff’s name is actually Douglas
Raymond Stehling. The body of the pleading refers to the Plaintiff as “Douglas Raymond
of the STEHLING family.” [Id.]. In addition, the IRS correspondence attached to the
Plaintiff’s “Registration of Foreign Judgment” is addressed to “Douglas R. Stehling.” [Doc.
1-2 at 4].
1

confirmation affidavits and oaths of office executed by Roger L. Gregory,
Chief Circuit Judge for the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and
Timothy M. Burgess, Chief United States District Judge for the United States
District Court for the District of Alaska. [Id. at 2; Doc. 1-2 at 1-3]. Finally, the
Plaintiff attaches a letter dated June 9, 2017 from the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) advising the Plaintiff that he has made frivolous arguments
concerning his tax liability. [Doc. 1-2 at 4-7]. The words “Refusal for Cause”
have been written across each page of this correspondence. [Id.]. Regarding
this correspondence, the Plaintiff states in his “Registration of Foreign
Judgment” as follows:
Therefore the paper of June 9, 2017, a frivolous
penalty 3175C Letter is hereby Refused for Cause
timely and returned to Steven Terner MNUCHIN as
principal. Summons and Process of Garnishment are
contemplated stipulating that the frivolous penalty
process generated by agent Christine L. DAVIS at MS
4450 Ogden, Utah and any other IRS agents and/or
attorneys stops. The rule of law is that the clerk must
issue summons and garnishment on Mr. MNUCHIN
should it be ordered upon this finding of fact and true
judgment.
[Doc. 1 at 3].

2

II.

DISCUSSION
The registration of a foreign judgment is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1963,

which provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
A judgment in an action for the recovery of money or
property entered in any court of appeals, district
court, bankruptcy court, or in the Court of
International Trade may be registered by filing a
certified copy of the judgment in any other district or,
with respect to the Court of International Trade, in
any judicial district, when the judgment has become
final by appeal or expiration of the time for appeal or
when ordered by the court that entered the judgment
for good cause shown. Such a judgment entered in
favor of the United States may be so registered any
time after judgment is entered. A judgment so
registered shall have the same effect as a judgment
of the district court of the district where registered
and may be enforced in like manner.
28 U.S.C. § 1963. By its terms, § 1963 applies only to a judgment for the
recovery of money or property entered by a federal court. Here, the Plaintiff
does not seek to register the judgment of any court; rather, he is attempting
to register various documents, including copies of judges’ oaths and
correspondence that he received from the IRS, in an effort to commence
some sort of action against the United States Secretary of the Treasury. The
Plaintiff’s efforts, however, have no legal effect and constitute a wholly
improper use of the registration procedure. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s filing

3

is hereby stricken as frivolous. See, e.g., Ohio Hoist Mfg. Co. v. LiRocchi,
490 F.2d 105, 107-08 (6th Cir. 1974) (holding that registering court has
inherent authority to annul or vacate a registered judgment filed in knowing
violation of § 1963).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s “Registration of
Foreign Judgment” [Doc. 1] is hereby STRICKEN AS FRIVOLOUS.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: July 21, 2017

4