Free Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

PAUL K. CHARLTON United States Attorney District of Arizona RICHARD G. PATRICK Assistant U.S. Attorney Arizona State Bar No. 5148 Two Renaissance Square 40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 Telephone: (602) 514-7500 [email protected]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Charles August Schlund, III, an individual CIV-03-01590-PHX-VAM Plaintiff, v. George W. Bush, President of the United States, a Sovereign Nation, George W. Bush, an individual; Does 1-10, individuals; Does 11-20, entities, Defendants. FEDERAL DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Defendant George W. Bush, by the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney for the

16 District of Arizona, hereby responds in opposition to plaintiff's September 23, 2005 motion for 17 injunctive relief in the above captioned action.1 Plaintiff's request for injunctive relief is 18 premised upon the allegations set forth in his complaint. See plaintiff's motion at p. 2, 3, 5, 9, 19 11, 12, 19, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 and 38. Plaintiff's complaint was 20 dismissed by the Court's Order dated July 20, 2005 and Judgment dated July 21, 2005. Plaintiff 21 thereafter filed a first amended complaint on September 15, 2005. All claims alleged in 22 plaintiff`s dismissed complaint not realleged in his first amended complaint are waived; 23 furthermore, his first amended complaint supercedes his original complaint with the latter treated 24 as "non-existent". Forsyth v. Humana, Inc, 144 F. 3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997). Because 25 26 27 Plaintiff's amended complaint also seeks relief against unidentified individuals and entities. To the extent those unidentified defendants are federal governmental employees or 28 entities, this response is on their behalf also.
1

Case 2:03-cv-01590-VAM

Document 42

Filed 09/30/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 plaintiff seeks injunctive relief based upon the allegations of a non-existent pleading, his motion 2 should be summarily denied.2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 10 I hereby certify that on September 30, 2005, I electronically transmitted the attached 11 document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing. 12 S/ LaRee Zickefoose U.S. Attorney's Office 13 14 I hereby certify that on September 30, 2005, I served the attached document by mail on 15 the following, who are not registered participants of the CM/ECF System: 16 Charles August Schlund, III 8520 North 54th Drive 17 Glendale, Arizona 85302 Plaintiff 18 19 S/ LaRee Zickefoose 20 U.S. Attorney's Office 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Any enjoin the President of the United States 28 powers issues. attempt to v. Bush, 2005 WL 2234110 *7 (D.D.C. raises serious separation-ofNewdow 2005). However, given the deficiencies in plaintiff's motion, those thorny legal issues need not be addressed now.
Case 2:03-cv-01590-VAM Document 42 Filed 09/30/2005 Page 2 of 2
2

Respectfully submitted this 30th day of September, 2005. PAUL K. CHARLTON United States Attorney District of Arizona S/Richard G. Patrick RICHARD G. PATRICK Assistant U.S. Attorney