Rossmann v. Aldouby
- Virginia Demarchi
- 3:25-cv-07082
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Brud Rossmann v. David Aldouby, Judge Breyer dismissed the duplicative prisoner complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Brud Rossmann's prisoner action was dismissed as duplicative, and the clerk was instructed to close the file.
What happened
Brud Rossmann v. David Aldouby involved a complaint Rossmann filed without a lawyer while incarcerated. He alleged wrongdoing by a Maryland state-court judge connected to his criminal prosecution.
The court said Rossmann had raised and litigated the same general allegations in a prior related prisoner complaint, which had been dismissed with prejudice. It therefore treated this complaint as duplicative and abusive under the prisoner-screening statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Judge Charles R. Breyer dismissed the action as duplicative under § 1915A(b) and instructed the clerk to close the file.
The detailed version
- Rossmann v. Aldouby · No. 3:25-cv-07082
- Virginia Demarchi
- Oct. 8, 2025
Background
Brud Rossmann filed this action without a lawyer while he was incarcerated at the Maryland Reception, Diagnostic and Classification Center. The complaint alleged various wrongdoing by David Aldouby, identified in the caption as a judge, in connection with Rossmann's criminal prosecution in Maryland state court.
The court stated that Rossmann had raised the same general allegations of judicial wrongdoing in at least one prior prisoner complaint. That earlier complaint had been dismissed with prejudice.
Court's analysis
The court explained that a prisoner complaint that merely repeats pending or previously litigated claims may be treated as abusive and dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the statute authorizing screening of prisoner complaints. Because Rossmann had previously raised and litigated the same general allegations and claims, the court deemed this complaint duplicative and abusive.
Disposition
The action was dismissed as duplicative under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The clerk was instructed to close the file. The opinion does not state that this action's dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.