|
Main
Date: 06 Dec 2007 10:06:04
From: samsloan
Subject: Letter-Answer from US Attorney in Sloan vs. Truong
|
U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of New York 86 Chambers Street New York, New York 10007 December 3, 2007 By Hand The Honorable Denny Chin United States District Judge United States District Court 500 Pearl Street, Room 1020 New York, NY 10007 Sloan v. Truong, et al. 07 Civ. 8537 (DC) Dear Judge Chin: I am the Special Assistant United States Attorney with principal responsibility for defending the U.S. Government in the above- referenced action. I write to the Court respectfully to request a pre- motion conference, in accordance with your individual practices (2) (A). In lieu of an Answer, the Government intends to file a motion to dismiss the complaint as against the United States for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil procedure. Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, is suing the United States under an unspecified legal theory in an attempt to compel the Department of Justice ("DOJ") to "supervise a new election for the Executive Board of the United States Chess Federation." Complaint =B6 42. A member of the United States Chess Federation ("USCF") and former member of the USCF Executive Board, Plaintiff filed this action "to redress identify theft, impersonation, election fraud, accounting fraud, insider self- dealing and other insider wrong-doing in connection with the United States Chess Federation." Id. =B6 1. With respect to the United States, Plaintiff makes no allegations, but instead explains that he seeks a new election of the USCF Executive Board to "be held at the earliest practicable date, to be supervised by the Department of Justice," and then explains parenthetically, "(and for this reason the United States of America is named as a defendant)." Id. =B6 9. The basis for the Government's motion to dismiss is two-fold. First, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the United States has not waived sovereign immunity in connection with this suit. Second, to the extent that Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief compelling the DOJ to supervise an election of the United States Chess Federation, his claim is in the nature of mandamus. Plaintiff is not entitled to mandamus relief, both because the mandamus statute does not extend to suits against the United States and because Plaintiff does not meet the criteria for the extraordinary remedy of a writ of mandamus, as DOJ has no duty to conduct elections for private entities. The deadline for the Government to answer or otherwise respond is today, December 3, 2007. The Government was prepared to file its motion to dismiss today, but realized belatedly that Your Honor requires a pre-motion conference before filing such a motion. Pursuant to your individual practices (2)(A), I understand that the deadline to answer or otherwise respond "is stayed during the pendancy of a request for a conference to discuss the proposed motion." Once a pre- motion conference with the Court has taken place, the Government will be prepared to file its motion immediately. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, MICHAEL J. GARCIA United States Attorney By ____________________ EMILY E. DAUGHTRY Special Assistant United States Attorney Tel. (212) 637-1579 Fax: (212) 637-2717 cc (by mail): Sam Sloan 1664 Davidson Ave. Apt. 1B Bronx, New York PRO SE Arthur M. Handler Handler & Goodman, L.L.P. 805 Third Ave., 8th floor New York, New York 10022 Attorney for Defendant William Brock Scot M. Graydon P.O. Box 12548 Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711-2548 Attorney for Defendant Texas Tech University http://www.samsloan.com/usatty-letter.pdf
|
|
|
Date: 08 Dec 2007 11:01:16
From: RufusZ
Subject: Re: Who Gives a Shit?
|
On Dec 7, 5:31 pm, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote: > > Stop hijacking threads!! Quit posting your personal business to this group. I'm happy that eno is clearly king these thread per their value.
|
|
Date: 08 Dec 2007 10:35:55
From:
Subject: Who Gives a Shit?
|
JHC
|
|
Date: 07 Dec 2007 14:31:50
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Letter-Answer from US Attorney in Sloan vs. Truong
|
On Dec 6, 1:06 pm, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote: > U.S. Department of Justice > United States Attorney > Southern District of New York > 86 Chambers Street > New York, New York 10007 > > December 3, 2007 > > By Hand > The Honorable Denny Chin > United States District Judge > United States District Court > 500 Pearl Street, Room 1020 > New York, NY 10007 > > Sloan v. Truong, et al. 07 Civ. 8537 (DC) > > Dear Judge Chin: > > I am the Special Assistant United States Attorney with principal > responsibility for defending the U.S. Government in the above- > referenced action. I write to the Court respectfully to request a pre- > motion conference, in accordance with your individual practices (2) > (A). In lieu of an Answer, the Government intends to file a motion to > dismiss the complaint as against the United States for lack of subject > matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of > Civil procedure. > > Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, is suing the United States und= er > an unspecified legal theory in an attempt to compel the Department of > Justice ("DOJ") to "supervise a new election for the Executive Board > of the United States Chess Federation." Complaint =B6 42. A member of > the United States Chess Federation ("USCF") and former member of the > USCF Executive Board, Plaintiff filed this action "to redress identify > theft, impersonation, election fraud, accounting fraud, insider self- > dealing and other insider wrong-doing in connection with the United > States Chess Federation." Id. =B6 1. With respect to the United States, > Plaintiff makes no allegations, but instead explains that he seeks a > new election of the USCF Executive Board to "be held at the earliest > practicable date, to be supervised by the Department of Justice," and > then explains parenthetically, "(and for this reason the United States > of America is named as a defendant)." Id. =B6 9. > > The basis for the Government's motion to dismiss is two-fold. Firs= t, > the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the United States > has not waived sovereign immunity in connection with this suit. > Second, to the extent that Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief > compelling the DOJ to supervise an election of the United States Chess > Federation, his claim is in the nature of mandamus. Plaintiff is not > entitled to mandamus relief, both because the mandamus statute does > not extend to suits against the United States and because Plaintiff > does not meet the criteria for the extraordinary remedy of a writ of > mandamus, as DOJ has no duty to conduct elections for private > entities. > > The deadline for the Government to answer or otherwise respond is > today, December 3, 2007. The Government was prepared to file its > motion to dismiss today, but realized belatedly that Your Honor > requires a pre-motion conference before filing such a motion. Pursuant > to your individual practices (2)(A), I understand that the deadline to > answer or otherwise respond "is stayed during the pendancy of a > request for a conference to discuss the proposed motion." Once a pre- > motion conference with the Court has taken place, the Government will > be prepared to file its motion immediately. > > Thank you for your consideration. > > Respectfully, > > MICHAEL J. GARCIA > United States Attorney > > By > ____________________ > EMILY E. DAUGHTRY > Special Assistant United States Attorney > > Tel. (212) 637-1579 > Fax: (212) 637-2717 > > cc (by mail): > > Sam Sloan > 1664 Davidson Ave. Apt. 1B > Bronx, New York > PRO SE > > Arthur M. Handler > Handler & Goodman, L.L.P. > 805 Third Ave., 8th floor > New York, New York 10022 > Attorney for Defendant William Brock > > Scot M. Graydon > P.O. Box 12548 > Capitol Station > Austin, TX 78711-2548 > Attorney for Defendant Texas Tech University > > http://www.samsloan.com/usatty-letter.pdf Stop hijacking threads!!
|
|
Date: 07 Dec 2007 13:20:29
From:
Subject: Who Gives a Shit?
|
JHC
|
|