Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05261/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05261-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 400
Nature of Suit: State Reapportionment
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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 4

 Attorney DeWitt’s tenth claim is not an independent claim but rather a summary of the other claims

and a prayer for relief.

9

effects proper service of the defendants herein, this Court is without personal jurisdiction over

any of the defendants, and a three-judge court is not required.

Accordingly, Attorney DeWitt’s sixth claim is DISMISSED and his motion to refer the

case to the chief judge of the circuit for the appointment of a three-judge panel is DENIED. 

Attorney DeWitt may seek leave to amend this claim (and only this claim).

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, all of Attorney DeWitt’s claims are hereby DISMISSED.

4

He shall have FOURTEEN DAYS from the date of this order to seek leave to amend his sixth

claim, for vote dilution. To be clear, Attorney DeWitt may not seek leave to amend any other

claim. 

Although Attorney DeWitt might ordinarily be granted leave to amend as to the other

claims for which he lacks standing (claim three against Former Governor Arnold

Schwarzenegger and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and claim nine against Clerk of the

Supreme Court Scott S. Harris), the claims against those parties are improperly joined with

Attorney DeWitt’s claims against Secretary of the State Alex Padilla and the California Citizens

Redistricting Commission which neither arise from the same transaction or occurrence nor

present common questions of law or fact. Rule 20(a)(2). Attorney DeWitt should not serve any

defendant in this action until, if ever, leave to amend his complaint is granted.

Attorney DeWitt’s motion to refer the case to a three-judge panel is DENIED. This is

without prejudice to a renewed motion if leave to amend is granted and once the defendants

have been served. Such motion should be filed and noticed for a hearing on the normal thirtyfive day calendar.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 12, 2016. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-05261-WHA Document 16 Filed 01/12/16 Page 1 of 1