Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-01992/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-01992-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

ORDER DISMISSING CASE—No. C-06-01992 RMW

JAH

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

E-FILED on 7/24/06

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

OMAR F. MOUSA,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA; SANTA CLARA

COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY;

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE;

PROBATION DEPARTMENT

Defendant.

No. C-06-01992 RMW

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Omar Mousa initiated this action on March 15, 2006, five days after Judge Arthur

Weissbrodt dismissed his complaint against the Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office and

Martha Donohoe. See Adv. Proc. No. 05-53923, docket no. 59 (N.D. Cal. Bankr. Mar. 10, 2006). 

This court has previously denied Mousa's application to proceed in forma pauperis. After this

court affirmed its original denial of Mousa's application, he filed an amended complaint (adding to

the caption a request for habeas corpus relief, even though he is not in custody) and a new

application to proceed in forma pauperis. 

As previously noted, there is no basis for federal-court jurisdiction over Mousa's petition

for a writ of mandate or prohibition. His habeas petition appears fatally defective because he

Case 5:06-cv-01992-RMW Document 8 Filed 07/24/06 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

1

 In addition to not being in custody, it does not appear Mousa has exhausted state remedies, which

prevents this court from considering his habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b), (c); Rose v.

Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 515-16 (1982). 

2

 The court also notes Mousa appears to be litigating the same issues here that he has lost on before

the bankruptcy court in Case No. 05-53923 (closed April 22, 2006) and related adversary proceeding

No. 05-05471 (closed March 28, 2006). On March 28, 2006, Mousa initiated related adversary

proceeding No. 06-05084 against Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office and Martha

Donohoe (the same defendants as in adversary proceeding No. 05-05471). 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE—No. C-06-01992 RMW

JAH 2

alleges that he is not in custody.1 See 1st Am. Compl. at 8; De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144,

1146 (9th Cir. 1990). Mousa's action is therefore dismissed in its entirety and with prejudice to

refiling.2

 His latest application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Mousa is not given leave

to amend as it appears that future attempts to state a claim would be futile. The clerk shall close

the file.

DATED: 7/21/06

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:06-cv-01992-RMW Document 8 Filed 07/24/06 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

ORDER DISMISSING CASE—No. C-06-01992 RMW

JAH 3

This document will be sent to:

Plaintiff:

Omar F. Mousa 

109 Town & County Village 

Sunnyvale, CA 94086 

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not

registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

Copies of this order will be sent to:

The Honorable Arthur S. Weissbrodt

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California

280 South First Street 

San Jose, CA 95113 

USBC Manager-San Jose 

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California

280 South First Street , Room 3035 

San Jose, CA 95113 

Dated: 

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 5:06-cv-01992-RMW Document 8 Filed 07/24/06 Page 3 of 3