Medenbach et al v. Brown et al, No. 3:2016cv01617 - Document 4 (D. Or. 2016)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Mr. Medenbach's Application for Leave to Proceed IFP 1 is DENIED. Plaintiffs' complaint is DISMISSED. Signed on 8/16/16 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION KENNETH MEDENBACH, et al., No. 3:16-cv-01617-MO OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, v. ANNA J. BROWN, et al., Defendants. MOSMAN, J., Pro se Plaintiffs filed a Complaint [2] alleging Judge Brown lacks the authority to oversee their pending criminal case No. 3:16-cr-00051-BR. Plaintiff Kenneth Medenbach filed an Application for Leave to Proceed IFP [1]. For the following reasons, I DENY the Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP [1] and DISMISS the case. DISCUSSION Plaintiff Medenbach invokes 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to apply for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. A complaint filed in forma pauperis may be dismissed if it is determined that the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 1 – OPINION AND ORDER There are three reasons why this case is frivolous and thus must be dismissed. First, it is untenable to use a civil case to dismiss a criminal case. Second, this precise issue has been decided several times in the criminal case [932], and I view those decisions as binding, at least until the conclusion of the criminal case. Third, the merits of Plaintiffs’ arguments are frivolous. See United States v. Medenbach, 1997 WL 306437, at *3 (9th Cir. June 5, 1997) (holding “we reject Medenbach's claim that the district court judge's oath of office was deficient”). CONCLUSION Mr. Medenbach’s Application for Leave to Proceed IFP [1] is DENIED. Plaintiffs’ complaint is DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 16th day of August, 2016. /s/ Michael W. Mosman_________. MICHAEL W. MOSMAN Chief United States District Judge 2 – OPINION AND ORDER

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.