*This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicataand collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### MAY 25 1999 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

__________________________ BARBARA SCHWARZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 99-4016 (D. Utah) (D.Ct. No. 97-CV-85-B)

____________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BRORBY , EBEL , and LUCERO , Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). T he case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Appellant Barbara Schwarz appeals pro se the district court’s order-2-

granting the Central Intelligent Agency’s motion fo r summary judgment in her action filed under the Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and order granting the United States Postal Service’s m otion to dismiss her action for improper handling of her mail. We affirm.

Ms. Schwarz is a German citizen who seeks records f rom the Central Intelligence Agency on: (1) President Dwight Eisen hower, who she claims is her grandfather; (2) her husband, Mark C. Rathbun, who she alleges is the secret heir to the Rothschild fortune; (3) her father, L. Ron H ubbard, who she alleges is the son of President Eisenhower and from whom German Na zis kidnaped her at an early age and forced her to live in Germany; and (4 ) herself – allegedly the abducted granddaughter of President Eisenhower. He r goal in garnering Central Intelligence Agency records is to locate and rescue her husband, who she believes is wrongfully incarcerated in the United States forher rape and murder and to protect herself and others from a “German Nazi cons piracy.” Her action against the United Postal Service stems from her claim it m ishandled certificates of mailing relating to her FOIA requests.
The district court dismissed her action against the United States Postal Service for failure to meet jurisdictional prerequi sites and failure to state a claim-3-

on which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 19 15(e)(2)(B). The district court subsequently granted the Central Intelligence Agency’s motion for summary judgment because Ms. Schwarz failed to meet the pre requisite for her information demand because she is not a United States citizen.

We have reviewed the record de novo , s ee Montero v. Meyer , 13 F.3d 1444, 1446 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 888 (1994), and find no reversible error
. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 201, we take judicia l notice of the fact Ms. Schwarz is a German citizen and are unpersuaded by her contention that she knows she is a United States citizen because she re members being born here. Moreover, an examination of Ms. Schwarz’s pleadings reveals they are purely frivolous and follow a recurring pattern of similar ly unsuccessful FOIA actions filed by her against several other federal agencies , and at least two other actions against the United States Postal Service. In addit ion, Ms. Schwarz previously filed thirty-five frivolous petitions with the Unit ed States Supreme Court, prompting it to bar her from filing any prospectiv e noncriminal filings with that Court. See Schwarz v. National Sec. Agency , 119 S. Ct. 1109 (1999). This Circuit alone has entertained at least ten appeals filed by Ms. Schwarz. We admonish Ms. Schwarz for the frivolousness of the p resent action and put her on notice that any future frivolous filings in this co urt will result in sanctions.-4-

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s orders granting the government’s motion for summary judgment and motionto dismiss. A copy of this order shall be filed in the records of the Uni ted States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit related to repeated frivolous fil ers.
Entered by the Court: WADE BRORBY United States Circuit Judge