Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05374/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05374-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 195
Nature of Suit: Contract Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HANA HILSENRATH, and OLIVER

HILSENRATH,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

CREDIT SUISSE(CS), UNITED BANK OF

SWITZERLAND (UBS), and DOES 1–10,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-05374 WHA

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Mr. Hilsenrath pled guilty to tax evasion and securities fraud in February 2007. 

See United States v. Hilsenrath, CR 03-00213 WHA. Because his assets held in the Swiss

banks were suspected of having been illegally acquired, the Swiss government ordered a freeze

on them. Mr. Hilsenrath has filed numerous motions and initiated various other actions in this

Court regarding the assets seized by the Swiss government (not exhaustive):

(i) In the instant action, Mr. Hilsenrath filed suit against

Credit Suisse and the United Bank of Switzerland. He

claimed that defendants should be ordered to have a

product-warning label that alerted current and prospective

clients that the banks would not comply with the United

States Constitution. Defendant UBS’s motion to dismiss

was granted on the grounds that plaintiff failed to state a

claim upon which relief could be granted.

(ii) In Hilsenrath v. The Swiss Confederation et al., C 07-

02782 WHA, Mr. Hilsenrath sued the Swiss Confederation

and Swiss government officials for freezing his assets

during a criminal investigation. An order held that the

Swiss defendants were entitled to sovereign immunity under

the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Because the Court

Case 3:07-cv-05374-WHA Document 28 Filed 01/11/08 Page 1 of 2
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

2

lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims,

defendants’ motion to dismiss was granted.

(iii) In the same action, Hilsenrath v. The Swiss

Confederation et al., C 07-02782 WHA, Mr. Hilsenrath

filed a motion to alter judgment and dismiss his financial

commitments in United States v. Hilsenrath, CR 03-00213

WHA. He claimed that the earlier order granting

defendants’ motion to dismiss on grounds of lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction legitimized the Swiss seizure of his

assets. Because he had agreed, under the terms of his plea

agreement, to pay restitution out of legitimate funds and had

not agreed to the “criminal forfeiture of legitimate assets,”

Mr. Hilsenrath argued that his financial obligations under

the plea agreement should be dismissed. An order denied

Mr. Hilsenrath’s motion.

(iv) In Hilsenrath v. United States, C 07-05100 WHA, Mr.

Hilsenrath moved to enjoin the United States from returning

to Switzerland proof of service of process of a Swiss order. 

The Office of International Affairs had already mailed the

Swiss order to Mr. Hilsenrath and he had signed the return

receipt. An order dismissed the action due to the failure to

state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Not having prevailed, Mr. Hilsenrath continues to file additional material seeking

relief on the same or similar grounds from different judges. This barrage of frivolous requests

is draining the limited resources of this Court. Accordingly, Mr. Hilsenrath is ORDERED TO

SHOW CAUSE within fourteen days of the filing of this order as to why he should not be

declared a vexatious litigant and obtain a pre-filing review from the undersigned with respect

to any future actions or appeals involving the underlying proceeding. The Clerk shall close this

file and file a copy of this order in a newly-numbered miscellaneous proceeding file. 

Mr. Hilsenrath’s response to the order to show cause shall bear the number of the miscellaneous

matter and shall be filed therein.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 11, 2008. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-05374-WHA Document 28 Filed 01/11/08 Page 2 of 2