Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03121/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03121-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 950
Nature of Suit: Constitutionality of State Statutes
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Constitutionality of State Statutes

---

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

GARY L. MILANO,

Plaintiff,

v.

DANIELLE DOUGLAS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-03121-RS 

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the pending motions to dismiss are suitable for 

disposition without oral argument, and the hearing set for August 8, 2019 is vacated. Plaintiff 

Gary L. Milano, appearing in pro se, has filed a complaint listing in the caption as defendants, 

Danielle Douglas, Lisa Janine Mendez, and the “State of California, Inc.”1 The 24 page complaint 

states no cognizable claim against any defendant. While the allegations are difficult to summarize; 

a few excerpts may demonstrate the basic tone:

The U.S. is a Crown Colony. The U.S. has always been and remains 

a Crown (Roman) colony.

Whereas the Triple Crown of Ba’al aka the Papal Tiara and 

Triregnum In 1302 Pope Boniface issued his famous Papal Bull 

Unam Sanctum—the first Express Trust . . . .

The Bar Associations worldwide have been responsible ever since in 

 

1

 Although the State of California (with or without an “Inc.”) has not appeared in this action, 

given the nature of the allegations, this order of dismissal will dispose of the entire case.

Case 3:19-cv-03121-RS Document 17 Filed 07/29/19 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 19-cv-03121-RS

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

administering the “reaping” of the souls of the lost and damned . . . .

Thereby, the Plaintiff/Petitioner is NOT bound by secular de-facto 

alleged rules/statues/de-facto color of law, herein, noticed to all hueman legal fictions corporate creation of the inferior secular state by 

fraud of adhesion equity contract . . . .

The motions to dismiss suggest this action arose from a state law proceeding for 

dissolution of marriage, that defendant Douglas was the judge presiding in that action, and that 

defendant Mendes represented plaintiff’s former spouse. The few allegations against Judge 

Douglas are frivolous assertions challenging her entitlement to hold office. To the extent that 

Milano’s claims must be construed broadly, nothing in the facts alleged support any inference of a

potential claim against Judge Douglas that would fall outside judicial immunity, or the immunity 

from suit in this forum provided by the Eleventh Amendment.

Defendant Mendez is named in the caption, however, the complaint includes no allegations 

against her. On the record here, there is no reasonable basis to conclude plaintiff holds a viable 

claim against Mendez, or that any such claim would be subject to federal jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed without leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

RICHARD SEEBORG

United States District Judge

July 29, 2019

Case 3:19-cv-03121-RS Document 17 Filed 07/29/19 Page 2 of 2