Free Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Charles August Schlund, III, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

8 Plaintiff, 9 v. 10 George W. Bush, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 (Doc. 43). 14 repetitive. 15 16

CIV 03-1590 PHX VAM O R D E R

Defendant Bush has filed a Motion to Dismiss this case. Plaintiff's complaint is rambling, irrational and The Court believes that plaintiff is attempting to

allege (1) President Bush and his predecessor have implanted a mind control device in his head which is used to torture him; (2) 17 President Bush and his alleged co-conspirators have committed 18 various illegal acts, and (3) defendants have used the courts to 19 prevent plaintiff from pursuing his claims. 20 to arise from prior dismissals of plaintiff's complaints. 21 Plaintiff's initial complaint was dismissed as it was 22 defective. 23 amend and cure those defects. 24 Amended Complaint that is equally defective. 25 plaintiff has had two opportunities to allege a coherent cause of 26 action, the dismissal will be with prejudice. 27 Also pending before the Court are a Motion for Preliminary 28 Case 2:03-cv-01590-VAM Document 51 Filed 11/22/2005 Page 1 of 2 (Doc. 39). Because (Doc. 38). Plaintiff filed an (Doc. 33). Plaintiff was given an opportunity to The third issue seems

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Injunction (Doc. 41); an Ex Parte Application and Motion for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 45) and a Motion for Hair Analysis Test to Test for Illegal Drugs in Plaintiff Schlund's Hair (Doc. 49). Since the case will be dismissed with

prejudice, all of the above Motions are moot and will be denied. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED granting defendant's Motion to Dismiss the case. prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 41) as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 45) as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying plaintiff's Motion for Hair Analysis Test (Doc. 49) as moot. DATED this 21st day of November, 2005. (Doc. 43). The dismissal will be with

2 Case 2:03-cv-01590-VAM Document 51 Filed 11/22/2005 Page 2 of 2