United States of America et al v. Kelley et al

Filing 40

ORDER denying 36 Motion to Vacate; denying 38 Motion to Transfer Case; denying 39 Motion to Vacate, signed by Judge Benjamin H. Settle. This matter remains closed, and the clerk is directed not to accept any further filings in it, other than a notice of appeal. (KMC)

Download PDF
Case 3:18-cv-06051-BHS Document 40 Filed 09/08/21 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 6 7 8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel DAVID GOLDEN CASE NO. C18-6051BHS ORDER 9 Plaintiff, v. 10 TROY X. KELLEY, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff David Golden’s “Motion to 14 Vacate Judgment as per CR 60,” Dkt. 36, “Motion to Transfer Case Jurisdiction and 15 Venue,” Dkt. 38, and “Motion to Vacate,” Dkt. 39, which is in fact a Reply to his own 16 17 18 motion. This matter was filed a as proposed qui tam case in December 2018. Dkt. 1. The United States Declined to Intervene, Dkt. 10, and asked this Court1 to Dismiss the case, 19 20 21 1 22 This case was reassigned to the undersigned following the Honorable Ronald B. Leighton’s retirement from the federal bench. Dkt. 37. 23 24 ORDER - 1 Case 3:18-cv-06051-BHS Document 40 Filed 09/08/21 Page 2 of 3 1 Dkt. 13. The Court granted the motion and dismissed the case without prejudice, Dkt. 16, 2 and entered a judgment, Dkt. 18. 3 Undeterred, Golden filed subsequent motions to amend the judgment, Dkt. 21, to 4 vacate the judgment, Dkt. 22, for sanctions, Dkt. 23, and a supplemental motion to 5 vacate, Dkt. 24. The Court denied the motions, Dkt. 25, and Golden appealed in July 6 2019, Dkt. 26. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal, finding that the “questions raised 7 in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.” Dkt. 31. On May 8 22, 2020, it denied Golden’s Motion for Reconsideration. Dkt. 33. Golden’s Petition for a 9 writ of mandamus or prohibition before the Supreme Court was rejected. In re Golden, 10 11 ___ U.S. ___, 141 S. Ct. 464 (Mem) (2020). Golden acknowledges that this case has long since been dismissed and closed and 12 that his appeals have been rejected, but explains that the Supreme Court erred, apparently 13 as part of a conspiracy against him: 14 15 16 17 The dismissal was appealed, but the U.S. Supreme Ct. refused to apply its own binding case law, and dismissed the appeal on 10/5/20, thereby denying Plaintiff restitution or even a hearing for contract fraud, so the Defendants could corruptly launder more tax money. While on appeal, Democrats and Republicans (ie., the Defendants) used the CIA and media to launch a Counterintelligence operation against Plaintiff (the CIA quidpro-quo whistleblower impeachment hearings), which yielded no tangible results. 18 Dkt. 36 at 5. He asks this Court to vacate its own orders and award him the relief he 19 sought in his initial complaint, which, according to his civil cover sheet, is 20 $1,000,000,000.00. Dkt. 1-1. 21 22 23 24 ORDER - 2 Case 3:18-cv-06051-BHS Document 40 Filed 09/08/21 Page 3 of 3 1 Golden’s claims were and are facially frivolous, and his motions to resurrect this 2 closed case are both untimely and unavailing. All are DENIED. This matter remains 3 closed, and the Clerk is directed not to accept any further filings in it, other than a notice 4 of appeal. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 Dated this 8th day of September, 2021. A 7 8 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER - 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?