Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-akd-3_15-cv-00046/USCOURTS-akd-3_15-cv-00046-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Louis Holger
Plaintiff
Jacob Joseph Lew
Defendant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

LOUIS HOLGER, a/k/a LOUIS 

HOLGER EKLUND,

1

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

JACOB JOSEPH LEW,

 Defendant. Case No. 3:15-cv-00046-TMB

ORDER PERMITTING AMENDED COMPLAINT

Filing this case without an attorney, under the name “Louis Holger,” the 

Plaintiff titles his Complaint “Libel of Review” and notes that this is a “common 

law counterclaim in admiralty – notice lis pendens and – verified statement of 

right – RE: God-given unalienable rights in the original estate – Article III; 

Constitution.”2

 

When a plaintiff is self-represented, the Court is obligated to liberally 

construe pleadings and to give the plaintiff the benefit of the doubt.

3 However, 

“[i]f the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the 

1 Docket 1 at 1 (“legal names (Louis H. EKLUND, LOUIS HOLGER EKLUND . . . etc.)”).

2 Id.

3 See Hebbe v. Plier, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[O]ur ‘obligation’ remains [after 

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)], ‘where the petitioner is pro se, particularly in 

civil rights cases, to construe the pleadings liberally and to afford the petitioner the 

benefit of any doubt.’”) (citation omitted); Pagayon v. Holder, 675 F.3d 1182, 1188 (9th 

Cir. 2011) (“We are particularly careful to give claims raised by pro se petitioners their 

most liberal construction.”) (citation omitted).

 

Case 3:15-cv-00046-TMB Document 4 Filed 04/07/15 Page 1 of 6
court must dismiss the action.”4

 Unfortunately, the Court cannot understand the 

Complaint; therefore, it cannot determine if it has jurisdiction to hear the case.5 

Plaintiff has brought suit against Jacob Joseph Lew,

6 the Secretary of the 

United States Treasury.7 Plaintiff claims that Lew “has been making false claims 

and this counterclaim and notice lis pendens are now in the ‘exclusive original 

cognizance’ of the United States through the district court - see the First Judiciary 

Act of September 24, 1789, Chapter 20, page 77.”

8

In his Complaint, Plaintiff writes about kidnap and theft, treason, the 

“saving to suitors” clause, Article III judges researching cases in chambers, the 

Thirteenth Amendment, parental rights, vaccinations, the spelling of the last 

4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (emphasis added); see also Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 

526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999) (“Subject-matter limitations on federal jurisdiction . . . keep the 

federal courts within the bounds the Constitution and Congress have prescribed. 

Accordingly, subject-matter delineations must be policed by the courts on their own 

initiative even at the highest level.”) (citing Rule 12(h)(3)) (additional citations omitted); 

United States v. Hays, 515 U.S. 737, 742 (1995) (“The federal courts are under an 

independent obligation to examine their own jurisdiction[.]”) (citation omitted); 

Washington Environmental Council v. Bellon, 732 F.3d 1131, 1139 (9th Cir. 2013) (“[A] 

jurisdictional defect . . . may be raised at any time during the proceedings[.]”) (citations 

omitted).

5 See Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014) (Jurisdiction is “[a] court’s power to decide 

a case or issue a decree”).

6 Docket 1 at 1.

7 http://www.treasury.gov/about/Pages/Secretary.aspx.

8 Docket 1 at 1.

3:15-cv-00046-TMB, Holger, a/k/a Eklund v. Lew

Order Permitting Amended Complaint

Page 2 of 6

 

Case 3:15-cv-00046-TMB Document 4 Filed 04/07/15 Page 2 of 6
name of his child, private credit from the Federal Reserve, the national debt, and 

ownership of his house and property.

9

 

Plaintiff’s attachments to his Complaint include documents related to his 

child’s vaccinations,10 general health,11 and his intention not to register the birth 

of his child.12 Plaintiff also attaches a statement regarding his attempts to secure 

information in state criminal case number 2KB-15-00033CR.13 And Plaintiff 

attaches an affidavit stating that he has unsuccessfully attempted to obtain the 

oaths of office for various judges and other public servants.

14

Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a complaint 

“must contain . . . a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 

pleader is entitled to relief.”15 And “Rule 8 . . . demands more than an 

unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.”16 The Complaint 

filed by Plaintiff in this case does not meet the requirements of Rule 8; it fails to 

9 Id. at 2-4.

10 Docket 1-1 at 1.

11 Id. at 2-3.

12 Docket 1-2 at 1.

13 Id. at 2.

14 Id. at 3-4.

15 Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); see also Black’s Law Dictionary (A complaint is the “initial 

pleading that starts a civil action and states the basis for the court’s jurisdiction, the 

basis for the plaintiff’s claim, and the demand for relief.”). 

16 Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (citation omitted).

3:15-cv-00046-TMB, Holger, a/k/a Eklund v. Lew

Order Permitting Amended Complaint

Page 3 of 6

 

Case 3:15-cv-00046-TMB Document 4 Filed 04/07/15 Page 3 of 6
“contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that 

is plausible on its face.’”17 Unfortunately, the Court does not understand it.

Finally, “a complaint . . . is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either 

in law or in fact.”18 A complaint may be dismissed as frivolous if it “merely 

repeats pending or previously litigated claims.”19 “Factual frivolousness includes 

allegations that are clearly baseless, fanciful, fantastic, or delusional.”20

Amending Complaint

It appears that the Complaint may be frivolous. Nevertheless, Plaintiff will 

be permitted to amend his Complaint to clearly state cognizable federal claims 

against an appropriate Defendant. In an Amended Complaint, Plaintiff must 

state, specifically, what the Defendant did or did not do which he believes 

violated his federal rights, how he was harmed, and what specific relief he seeks 

from the Court – whether in the form of damages or injunctive relief. 

The Court is sending a form upon which Plaintiff must amend his

Complaint in compliance with this Order. In completing this form, Plaintiff must 

give dates and facts in support of each claim – i.e., he must state what 

happened, who was involved, how they were involved, when the events 

17 Id. (citation omitted).

18 Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); see also Martin v. Sias, 88 F.3d 774, 

775 (9th Cir. 1996); Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995).

19 Cato, 70 F.3d at 1105 n. 2 (citations and internal quotations omitted).

20 Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992) (citing Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 325, 

327, 328).

3:15-cv-00046-TMB, Holger, a/k/a Eklund v. Lew

Order Permitting Amended Complaint

Page 4 of 6

 

Case 3:15-cv-00046-TMB Document 4 Filed 04/07/15 Page 4 of 6
occurred, where those events occurred, how he was hurt, and what the injuries 

were. Plaintiff should state the facts in his own words, as if he were briefly and 

concisely telling someone what happened. The facts must specifically allege how 

the Defendant has harmed him. Plaintiff must avoid stating conclusions.

21 Later, 

if the claims proceed before the Court on the merits, at the discretion of the 

Court, Plaintiff may be given an opportunity to file a brief on the issues in which 

he may more thoroughly argue the case.22

The Amended Complaint must be complete in itself without reference to 

any prior pleading.23 Thus, in his Amended Complaint, Plaintiff should make no 

reference to the initial Complaint or other extraneous documents.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 

1. The Complaint, at Docket 1, is DISMISSED with leave to amend.

2. On or before May 6th, 2015, Plaintiff must file an Amended Complaint on 

the form provided by the Court. Plaintiff must specifically state the source of this 

Court’s jurisdiction over his case, and clearly state a plausible federal claim for 

relief against an appropriate Defendant.

21 See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678-79.

22 Black’s Law Dictionary (A brief is a “written statement setting out the legal contentions 

of a party in litigation . . . consisting of legal and factual arguments and the authorities in 

support of them.”).

23 See D.Ak.LR 15.1(3); but see Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 

2012) (“For claims dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend, we will not 

require that they be repled in a subsequent amended complaint to preserve them for 

appeal. But for any claims voluntarily dismissed, we will consider those claims to be 

waived if not repled.”) (citation omitted).

3:15-cv-00046-TMB, Holger, a/k/a Eklund v. Lew

Order Permitting Amended Complaint

Page 5 of 6

 

Case 3:15-cv-00046-TMB Document 4 Filed 04/07/15 Page 5 of 6
3. The Clerk of Court will send Plaintiff a form PS22, Complaint, with this 

Order.

4. Plaintiff is warned that, if Defendant prevails in this action, Plaintiff may be 

ordered to pay costs and attorney’s fees to Defendant.24

5. So in the alternative, Plaintiff may file the enclosed Notice of Voluntary 

Dismissal, without prejudice, on or before May 6th, 2015.

6. The Clerk of Court is directed to send form PS09, Notice of Voluntary 

Dismissal, to Plaintiff with this Order.

7. No further action will be taken in this case until Plaintiff fully complies with 

this Order. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this Order, this action may be 

dismissed without further notice.

8. The Clerk of Court is directed to send the District Court’s handbook, 

“Representing Yourself in Alaska’s Federal Court,” to Plaintiff with this Order.

DATED at Anchorage, Alaska this 6th day of April, 2015.

/s/ Timothy M. Burgess

TIMOTHY M. BURGESS

 U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE

24 See Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d).

3:15-cv-00046-TMB, Holger, a/k/a Eklund v. Lew

Order Permitting Amended Complaint

Page 6 of 6

 

Case 3:15-cv-00046-TMB Document 4 Filed 04/07/15 Page 6 of 6