UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 20-CV-23439-GAYLES 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE REID 

AL-RABAT MOROCCO 

EMPIRE KINGDOM 

ISLAMIC SOVEREIGNTY 

NATION 37-180026, et al., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

U.S. SUPREME COURT 

NINE JUSTICES, 

Defendant. 

 / 

REPORT OF MAGISTRATE, JUDGE 

I. Introduction 

Plaintiff, Drelijah Muhammad-Ali, an inmate in the Alabama Department 

of Corrections, has filed this pro se petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. [ECF 

No. 1]. In his petition, Plaintiff appears to raise a class action, contesting 

Alabama’s occupation of “Spanish Lands” and requesting that the land be returned 

to the “Creek Indians.” [ECF No. 1 at 6]. Ali, who also refers to himself as Marcus 

Tate, further requests his immediate release from prison. [Id. at 8]. 

This case has been referred to the Undersigned for the issuance of all 

Case 1:20-cv-23439-DPG Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2020 Page 1 of 5
2 

preliminary orders and any recommendations to the District Judge regarding 

dispositive motions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). [ECF No. 2]. 

As explained below, because it is evident that summary dismissal is 

warranted, no order to show cause has been issued. See Rule 4, Rules Governing 

Section 22541

 Proceedings; see also, Broadwater v. United States, 292 F.3d 1302, 

1303-04 (11th Cir. 2002). 

II. Discussion 

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, “District courts are limited to granting habeas relief 

‘within their respective jurisdictions.’” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 442 

(2004) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a)). Thus, “for core habeas petitions challenging 

present physical confinement, jurisdiction lies in only one district: the district of 

confinement.” Id. at 443. 

As to non-habeas civil actions, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) does not allow a prisoner 

to bring an in forma pauperis civil action in federal court “if the prisoner has, on 3 

or more prior occasions, while incarcerated . . . , brought an action or appeal in a 

court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, 

malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the 

prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” When § 1915(g) does 

1

 Pursuant to Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2554 Cases in the United States District 

Courts, Rule 4 may be applied to cases brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

 

Case 1:20-cv-23439-DPG Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2020 Page 2 of 5
3 

not allow a prisoner to proceed in forma pauperis, the complaint should be dismissed 

without prejudice, and a prisoner wishing to pursue his or her claims must refile the 

action with full payment of the filing fee. See Dupree v. Palmer, 284 F.3d 1234, 

1236 (11th Cir. 2002). 

Here, the petition is vague and nonsensical. Particularly, Petitioner sues 

“United States Supreme Court Nine Justices,” seeking a mandatory mandate for 

“indictments, affidavits,...his treason convictions, sentences [and] verdicts” under 

“Al-Quran jurisprudence.” [ECF No. 1 at 7]. He also moves for the “Spanish Land 

Grant Mandate” to be returned from the “Alabama State Corporation” to “this 

Sovereignty Nation 37-180026.” [Id. at 8]. Even when read liberally, the Petition 

makes little sense, and the Court cannot discern any argument regarding a 

constitutional violation in the petition. 

When considered as a federal habeas petition under § 2241, this action is filed 

in the wrong jurisdiction because Petitioner is presently incarcerated in the Alabama 

Department of Corrections, and his custodian of confinement is located there. While 

the Court is aware that it may, in the interest of justice, transfer the case to the court 

in which venue would be proper, see 28 U.S.C. § 1631, transfer is not warranted 

based on the unintelligible nature of the Petition. 

Case 1:20-cv-23439-DPG Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2020 Page 3 of 5
4 

Moreover, to the extent that this action could be construed as a non-habeas 

civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983,2 it must be dismissed because Plaintiff has filed 

at least three civil actions that have been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state 

a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Muhammad v. Rance Reehl Coldwell 

Bank Real Estate, et al., No. 1:18-CV-00501-TFM-B, Order Adopting Report and 

Recommendations (S.D. Ala. Mar. 8, 2019) [ECF No. 11]. Plaintiff does not allege 

sufficient facts to demonstrate that he is imminent danger of serious physical injury 

so as to circumvent the payment of the filing fee. 

III.Conclusion 

 As discussed above, it is recommended that this case [ECF No. 1] be 

DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction when construed as a petition brought under 28 

U.S.C. § 2241, and DISMISSED as a three-striker pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) 

when construed as a complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It is further 

recommended that this case be closed. 

Objections to this Report may be filed with the District Judge within fourteen 

days of receipt of a copy of the Report. Failure to do so will bar a de novo

determination by the District Judge of anything in the Report and Recommendation 

2 See United States v. Jordan, 915 F.2d 622, 624-25 (11th Cir. 1990) (“Federal courts have . . . 

have an obligation to look behind the label of a motion filed by a pro se inmate . . ..”). 

Case 1:20-cv-23439-DPG Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2020 Page 4 of 5
5 

and will bar an attack, on appeal, of the factual findings of the Magistrate Judge. See 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 

 SIGNED this 25th day of August, 2020. 

 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

cc: Al-Rabat Morocco Empire 

Kingdom Islamic Sovereignty 

Nation 37-1880026 

180664 

Drelijah J Muhammad-Ali 

565 Bibb Ln 

Brent, AL 35034 

PRO SE 

XYZ Indigenous Aboriginal 

28,000 B.C. Natives American Citizens 

180664 

Drelijah J Muhammad-Ali 

565 Bibb Ln 

Brent, AL 35034 

Noticing 2241/Bivens US Attorney 

Email: usafls-2255@usdoj.gov 

Case 1:20-cv-23439-DPG Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2020 Page 5 of 5