Dastmalchian v. Department of Justice
71 F. Supp. 3d 173
D.D.C.2014Background
- This is a pro se civil action by Shabnam Dastmalchian against DOJ, AUSA Tait, USMS, Judge Wu, and Senate Judiciary Committee arising from a central California forfeiture related to her husband’s criminal case.
- Plaintiff asserts constitutional, Bivens, 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), and FTCA theories, seeking injunctive relief and damages.
- The underlying events concern a preliminary and final forfeiture order in United States v. Bamdad and subsequent ancillary proceedings and a buy-out arrangement with MSB and the USMS.
- Plaintiff, as MSB’s managing member and Bamdad’s wife, contends government coercion and improper pressure to recover proceeds from the forfeited property.
- The District of Columbia is the initial venue, but the court determines proper venue and transfers most claims to the Central District of California; one claim against the Senate Judiciary Committee is dismissed for lack of standing or immunity.
- The court dismisses or transfers claims as described in the analysis, scheduling a separate order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Venue for Bivens/FTCA claims | Dastmalchian asserts proper venue where damages sought | Defendants argue venue improper; California proper | Transfers Bivens and FTCA to CD Cal. |
| Venue for §1985(3) and Fifth Amendment claims | Venue appropriate where events occurred | DC venue permissible but transfer appropriate | Transfers §1985(3) and Fifth Amendment to CD Cal. |
| Senate Judiciary Committee standing/ immunity | Committee violated rights via confirmation process | Committee immune; standing lacking | Dismiss claim; protectively immune or lack standing |
| Overall disposition of claims | All claims viable in proper forum | Many claims lack proper venue or basis | Dismiss/transfer as described; Senate claim dismissed; others transferred to CD Cal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lamont v. Haig, 590 F.2d 1124 (D.C. Cir. 1978) (venue may be determined per action and necessity of proper forum)
- Galindo v. Gonzales, 550 F. Supp. 2d 115 (D.D.C. 2008) (venue and transfer provisions for federal defendants; district court transfer authority)
- Chastain v. Sundquist, 833 F.2d 311 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (Speech or Debate Clause immunities for legislative bodies)
- Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168 (1880) ( Speech or Debate immunity extends to committee actions)