Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03143/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03143-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH PETER SANCHEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

V.A. OAKLAND REGIONAL OFFICE, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-03143-EMC 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Docket No. 1

Joseph Peter Sanchez, an inmate at Salinas Valley State Prison, filed this action seeking a 

writ of mandamus against the Oakland Veterans’ Affairs regional office. 

Mr. Sanchez alleges that he is a veteran of the Gulf War who was in a unit in that war that 

“was given insecticides and pyridostigmine bromide (B.P. pills) to protect [soldiers] from 

chemical warfare,” and thereafter developed Gulf War illness. Docket No. 1 at 2. He further 

alleges that the 2012 report from the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans Illness 

(RACGWVI) concluded that the exposure to the insecticides and P.B. pills caused the illness and 

recommended, among other things, that vets flood their nasal cavities with a saline fluid. Id. Mr. 

Sanchez has tried a different saline solution than that recommended by the RACGWVI and has 

had positive results. Id.

In the present action, Mr. Sanchez seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the Oakland 

Veterans’ Affairs regional office to (1) authorize another Gulf War registry exam for him, and (2) 

mail to the RACGWVI a label from a saline solution that Mr. Sanchez used with success and that 

he believes is a cure that other veterans will want to know about. 

The federal mandamus statute provides that "[t]he district courts shall have original 

Case 3:19-cv-03143-EMC Document 10 Filed 12/12/19 Page 1 of 3
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the 

United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff." 28 U.S.C. § 1361. 

The petition must be dismissed for two separate reasons. First, the claim seeking another 

registry exam must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Claims regarding veterans’ benefits fall 

within the exclusive purview of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See Veterans for Common Sense v. Shinseki, 678 F.3d 1013 (9th 

Cir. 2012). A registry exam would qualify as a veterans’ “benefit” as that term is defined in 38 

C.F.R. § 20.3(e), which provides: “Benefit means any payment, service, commodity, function, or 

status, entitlement to which is determined under laws administered by the Department of Veterans 

Affairs pertaining to veterans and their dependents and survivors.” This Court lacks jurisdiction to 

issue a writ of mandamus compelling the Oakland Veterans’ Affairs regional office to authorize 

another Gulf War registry exam for Mr. Sanchez. His only judicial recourse, if any, would be in 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Second, the claim seeking to compel the Oakland Veterans’ Affairs regional office to mail 

a label from a saline solution container to the RACGWVI does not support mandamus relief 

because Mr. Sanchez could simply mail the label to the RACGWVI himself. Mandamus relief is 

only available to compel an officer of the United States to perform a duty if: (1) the plaintiff's 

claim is clear and certain; (2) the duty of the officer is nondiscretionary, ministerial and so plainly 

prescribed as to be free from doubt; and (3) no other adequate remedy is available. See Agua 

Caliente Tribe v. Sweeney, 932 F.3d 1207, 1216 (9th Cir. 2019) (citing Patel v. Reno, 134 F.3d 

929, 931 (9th Cir. 1997)); Fallini v. Hodel, 783 F.2d 1343, 1345 (9th Cir. 1986). Because Mr. 

Sanchez has the adequate and available remedy of mailing the label himself, a writ of mandamus 

Is not appropriate to compel the Oakland Veterans’ Affairs regional office to mail it for him. Even 

///

///

///

///

///

Case 3:19-cv-03143-EMC Document 10 Filed 12/12/19 Page 2 of 3
3

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

if that was not considered an adequate remedy, Mr. Sanchez has not alleged facts showing he has 

Article III standing to compel the mailing of the label – he wants to help other veterans but does 

not allege any injury to him as a result of the label not being mailed to the RACGWVI. 

For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed. The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 12, 2019

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:19-cv-03143-EMC Document 10 Filed 12/12/19 Page 3 of 3