Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-05457/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-05457-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
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 GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS—No. C 08-5457 RMW

TER

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

E-FILED on 1/15/10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

GARY W. HAYNIE,

Plaintiff,

v.

DOWNTOWN SUPERIOR COURT, PEYTON

SCHULER,

Defendants.

No. C 08-5457 RMW

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS'

MOTION TO DISMISS

[Re Docket No. 19]

Defendants Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara (erroneously sued as

Downtown Superior Court) and Peytie Schuler (erroneously sued as Peyton Schuler) move to

dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) on the grounds that plaintiff has not alleged a valid

federal claim and that plaintiff's claims are barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Plaintiff

Haynie, pro se, opposes the motion to dismiss. Having considered the papers submitted by the

parties, and the arguments at the hearing, and for good cause appearing, defendants' motion to

dismiss is granted.

Plaintiff's complaint centers on allegations that defendant Schuler, a court reporter for the

Superior Court, did not accurately transcribe a hearing and intentionally edited the transcript to

delete evidence. The complaint also appears to take issue with the Superior Court's order finding

Case 5:08-cv-05457-RMW Document 30 Filed 01/15/10 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

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS—No. C 08-5457 RMW

TER 2

plaintiff to be a vexatious litigant, and a subsequent decision by Presiding Judge Gallagher declining

to permit plaintiff to file his proposed action based on the court reporter’s transcript. 

The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Moreover, to the

extent the complaint seeks to challenge the decision of the Superior Court declining plaintiff leave to

file a complaint under the vexatious litigant order previously entered, plaintiff's remedy is to appeal,

not to file an action in federal court challenging the state court's action. Under the Rooker-Feldman

doctrine, federal courts do not have jurisdiction to review judgments or final determinations of state

courts. Worldwide Church of God v. McNair, 805 F.2d 888, 891 (9th Cir. 1986).

Accordingly, defendants' motion to dismiss is granted. It does not appear that plaintiff could

allege any set of facts that would give rise to a claim for relief against these defendants, such that

granting leave to amend would be futile. Therefore, the dismissal is without leave to amend.

DATED: 1/15/10

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:08-cv-05457-RMW Document 30 Filed 01/15/10 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 GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS—No. C 08-5457 RMW

TER 3

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to:

Counsel for Defendants:

Paul T. Hammerness 

Email: paul.hammerness@doj.ca.gov 

A Copy of this document has been mailed to:

Plaintiff (Pro Se):

Gary W. Haynie

545 Sobrato Drive 

Campbell, CA 95008-4631 

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.

Dated: 1/15/10 TER

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 5:08-cv-05457-RMW Document 30 Filed 01/15/10 Page 3 of 3