Rossmann v. Miller
- Virginia Demarchi
- 3:25-cv-07085
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Brud Rossmann v. Taylor Miller, Judge Breyer dismissed Rossmann’s duplicative prisoner complaint under a screening law.
Brud Rossmann’s prisoner action against Taylor Miller, Justin Dickman, and Ivan Bates was dismissed and the file was closed.
What happened
Brud Rossmann sued Maryland state attorneys Taylor Miller, Justin Dickman, and Ivan Bates over alleged wrongdoing connected to his criminal prosecution in Maryland state court.
The court said Rossmann had already raised and litigated the same general allegations in at least two earlier prisoner complaints, both dismissed with prejudice.
Judge Charles R. Breyer dismissed this action as duplicative under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) and ordered the file closed. The order did not decide the alleged prosecutorial wrongdoing.
The detailed version
- Rossmann v. Miller · No. 3:25-cv-07085
- Virginia Demarchi
- Oct. 8, 2025
Background
While incarcerated at the Maryland Reception, Diagnostic, and Classification Center, Brud Rossmann filed this action without a lawyer. He alleged various wrongdoing by Maryland state attorneys Taylor Miller, Justin Dickman, and Ivan Bates in connection with their prosecution of him in Maryland state court.
Earlier proceedings
The court stated that Rossmann had raised the same general allegations of wrongdoing in at least two prior prisoner complaints. Those earlier complaints were dismissed with prejudice.
Ruling
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, a statute requiring screening of certain prisoner complaints. Because Rossmann had already raised and litigated the same general allegations and claims of prosecutorial wrongdoing in two prior complaints dismissed with prejudice, the court deemed this complaint duplicative and abusive.
The action was DISMISSED as duplicative under § 1915A(b). The clerk was instructed to close the file. The order did not resolve whether Rossmann’s allegations of prosecutorial wrongdoing were valid.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.