Rossmann v. Faroughi
- Virginia Demarchi
- 3:25-cv-07080
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Brud Rossmann v. S. Faroughi, Judge Breyer dismissed the case without prejudice because venue was improper and allowed refiling in Washington, D.C. or Maryland.
Brud Rossmann, who may refile the action in the District of Columbia or Maryland; the named defendants are S. Faroughi, Omar Smith, and David Albouby.
What happened
Brud Rossmann, who was incarcerated and represented himself, sued doctors S. Faroughi and Omar Smith and Judge David Albouby over alleged wrongdoing connected to his Maryland criminal prosecution.
The court ruled that the Northern District of California was the wrong venue because the defendants and alleged events were in Washington, D.C., and Baltimore, Maryland. The court identified the federal courts in the District of Columbia or Maryland as proper venues.
Judge Charles R. Breyer dismissed the case without prejudice, allowing Rossmann to refile in either of those districts. The court granted Rossmann permission to proceed without paying filing fees based on his poverty affidavit, terminated that motion as moot, and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Rossmann v. Faroughi · No. 3:25-cv-07080
- Virginia Demarchi
- Oct. 8, 2025
Background
Brud Rossmann filed a self-represented action while incarcerated at the Maryland Reception, Diagnostic and Classification Center. He alleged various wrongdoing by doctors S. Faroughi and Omar Smith of Washington, D.C., and Judge David Albouby of Baltimore, Maryland, in connection with his criminal prosecution in Maryland state court.
Rossmann also sought permission to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The court granted that request based solely on his affidavit of poverty.
Venue ruling
Federal law permits a case to be filed in certain districts connected to the defendants or the events at issue. The court concluded that this case, which involved defendants in Washington, D.C., and Baltimore, Maryland, and alleged events in those locations, was not properly filed in the Northern District of California. The court stated that venue properly lay in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action without prejudice to Rossmann’s refiling it in either the District of Columbia or Maryland. The court explained that dismissal for improper venue did not decide the merits of the claims and therefore was without prejudice. The clerk was instructed to terminate as moot the pending motion listed as ECF No. 5 and close the case.
The order was signed by United States District Judge Charles R. Breyer.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.