United States District Court, D. Columbia.
RORY M. WALSH, Plaintiff,
FBI DIRECTOR JAMES B. COMEY, JR., et al., Defendants
RORY M. WALSH, Plaintiff, Pro se, York, PA.
For JAMES B. COMEY, FBI Director, GEORGE C. VENIZELOS, FBI SAIC, EDWARD J. HANKO, FBI SAIC, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, JAMES L. JONES, JR., KATE L. MERSHIMER, AUSA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RICHARD P. QUINN, FBI SA, Philadelphia Office, Defendants: Eric Joseph Young, LEAD ATTORNEY, U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Washington, DC.
JAMES E. BOASBERG, United States District Judge.
Pro se Plaintiff Rory Walsh filed this action against the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and a cohort of high-ranking government officials. He alleges a fantastical farrago of facts stemming from a purported decades-long government conspiracy that includes harassment,
surveillance, break-ins to his house, intimidation, defamation, tampering with his prescription medication, and so on. This, moreover, is hardly Walsh's first journey into court. On the contrary, he has filed suit numerous times over the last decade, each time crossing the boundaries of imagination into another dimension. All of those actions have been unsuccessful, and this one is no different.
Believing his claims patently insubstantial, the Court will grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). In addition, to further conserve judicial and governmental resources, the Court will require Walsh to show cause why a pre-filing injunction should not issue.
This time around, Walsh named as Defendants FBI Director James Comey; several other high-level FBI officials; an Assistant United States Attorney; James L. Jones, the former U.S. Marine Corps General and National Security Advisor; the FBI; and the United States. He alleges a number of disjointed causes of action, all deriving from a long-running government-wide conspiracy. More specifically, according to Walsh, the FBI used warrantless surveillance to gather the " intelligence" that he and his family were going out for dinner and to rent a movie, and it then passed this " intelligence" along to Jones, who then drove from Virginia to Pennsylvania to " strike at the Walsh's [ sic ]." Compl. at 3. Walsh further claims that Jones " lunged twice" at him, but Plaintiff " held his sons back." See id. Upon attempting to " file [a] complaint" about this incident with a magistrate judge, Walsh claims that the FBI interfered and prevented Jones from being arrested. See id. at 3-4. The Bureau also allegedly " took jurisdiction over Jones's crime, [and] also seized all evidence." Id. at 17. The FBI purportedly " tail[s] Walsh everywhere [and] break[s] into his car." Id. at 7. It even " posted gunmen in [Walsh's] parking lot . . . . [; ] two armed FBI agents exited their vehicle as if on cue, and attempted to create an incident with [Walsh and his son.] No warrant, no arrest, just open armed intimidation." Id. at 14.
This is just the beginning, however. Plaintiff also asserts that the FBI " routinely intercepts the U.S. Mails, FEDEX, and threatens and intimidates postal workers (specifically Doug Creech of the Dallastown Post Office) as [the FBI agents] commit their crimes." Id at 5. One of those " intercepted" letters was a message Plaintiff attempted to transmit to President Obama, repeating the allegations contained in his Complaint, and urgently requesting an audience with the President and Attorney General. See id. at 22; id., Exh. aa (Letter of Feb. 28, 2015) at 2. In that letter, Walsh offered " to testify on the Senate floor, and on national TV over Jones [ sic] incredible crime spree against my family and his continual abuse of the FBI" and noted that he could " be at the White House in a day" if the President granted his request for an audience. See Letter of Feb. 28, 2015 at 2. He similarly claims that the FBI interferes with and intercepts his communications with his Congressman. See ECF No. 40 (Motion for Reconsideration) at 11-12.
Plaintiff also believes that the FBI is interfering with his and his family's medical treatment by dispatching agents to break into his house and " obnoxiously chop up multiple pills, in a blatant demonstration that [Special Agent in Charge George C.] Venizelos and the FBI think they are above the law." Compl. at 8. To " prove" this claim, he produced a dark photograph of what appear to be some broken pills
next to other whole pills. See id., Exh. H (image captioned: " Numerous Pills OBNOXIOUSLY Chopped by the FBI" ). Walsh also charges the FBI with repeatedly delaying his payments for his son's oral surgery, though it is unclear how the FBI is alleged to have accomplished this. See id. at 9.
Jones and the FBI, finally, ostensibly conspire together to dictate court actions through a " secret conduit for ex parte communications." Id. at 18 (" Most troubling, Jones also uses the FBI, that protect federal judges, as his secret conduit to dictate court action." ). Relying on these facts, he brings claims under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, various criminal statutes, the Federal Tort Claims Act, several state statutes, and he seeks three million dollars in compensation. See id. at 10-12.
Defendants have now moved to dismiss ...