Al-Mansur v. County of Alameda
- Martinez-Olguin
- 3:24-cv-06909
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.
In Al-Mansur v. County of Alameda, Judge Martinez-Olguin closed the docket to further filings, treating future motions as moot and warning of possible filing-privilege revocation.
Sabir Al-Mansur and the defendants in the closed action. The order directly governs Al-Mansur’s future filings and motions in this case.
What happened
Al-Mansur v. County of Alameda involved Sabir Al-Mansur’s case against the County of Alameda and several individuals. Al-Mansur represented himself and voluntarily dismissed the action, after which the court resolved the defendants’ fee motion and his recusal motion.
The court said Al-Mansur could appeal its orders to the Ninth Circuit when allowed, but could not ask another judge in the same district to review them. The court stated that the case was closed and that it would not consider further filings in the case.
Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin ordered that any further motions be summarily terminated as moot and warned that continued filings could lead to revocation of Al-Mansur’s electronic filing privileges without further notice.
The detailed version
- Al-Mansur v. County of Alameda · No. 3:24-cv-06909
- Martinez-Olguin
- July 15, 2025
Background
Sabir Al-Mansur sued the County of Alameda and several individuals. The opinion states that Al-Mansur represented himself and voluntarily dismissed the action. After the dismissal, the defendants moved for attorney’s fees, and Al-Mansur moved for the judge’s recusal, meaning disqualification from handling the case. The court had already resolved those motions in orders entered May 30, 2025: it denied the recusal motions and granted the motion for attorney’s fees.
Despite those orders and the case’s closed status, Al-Mansur continued filing documents. He also sought review of the court’s orders by the Northern District’s Chief Judge.
Court’s Ruling
The court explained that a party who disagrees with its orders may appeal to the Ninth Circuit when the circumstances and federal rules allow. It stated that a party may not seek review by another judge in the same district, describing that type of review as an improper “horizontal appeal.”
The court stated that the case was closed and would not consider filings submitted afterward. It ordered that all further motions be summarily terminated as moot. The court also warned that if Al-Mansur continued filing material in the closed case, it might revoke his electronic filing privileges without further notice.
Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin signed the order on July 15, 2025.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.