Opinion
CIV S-06-037 GEB PAN PS.
February 10, 2006
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
On January 23, 2006, this court denied plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis with leave to file an amended application, and dismissed plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction with leave to file an amended complaint.
On February 1, 2006, plaintiff filed a new in forma pauperis application; however, this application, like the previous one, fails to identify the amount of money plaintiff holds in cash and in checkings and savings accounts other than the designation "55.22.00."
On February 7, 2006, plaintiff filed a new complaint again asserting that the jurisdiction of this court rests on 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(1), (2) and (5). For the reasons set forth in the court's prior order, the facts of this case do not authorize jurisdiction under any of these statutes. Nor does the court foresee any possible basis for this court's jurisdiction of plaintiff's action. The Honorable Gregory H. Hollows reached the same conclusion October 20, 2005, in Bergeron v. King Mohamed VI, et al., CIV S-05-1102 FCD GGH PS.
Accordingly, I recommend that plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied, and plaintiff's complaint dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiff further requests the court "to personally contact the U.S. Attorneys Office and make an appointment for the plaintiff to swear out a criminal indictment on all 19 causes of action against and for the named defendants," which can be attached to a letter rogatory, forwarded to the U.S. State Department for authentication and served upon the Kingdom of Morocco. Plaintiff's request is denied.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the Honorable Garland E. Burrell, Jr., the United States District Judge assigned to this case. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Written objections may be filed within ten days after being served with these findings and recommendations. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." The failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).