Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 28, 2022

Ross v. Cook

Judge
Beth Freeman
Docket
5:22-cv-00832
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil RightsCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Ross v. Cook, Judge Freeman dismissed the action because Ross neither paid the filing fee nor stated a valid civil claim.

Who this affects

Ira Jerome Ross and the named defendants, Tim Cook and the Board of Directors of Apple, Inc.; the case was dismissed and closed.

What happened

In Ross v. Cook, Ira Jerome Ross, representing himself, filed a handwritten document that the court treated as an attempt to bring a civil-rights case against Tim Cook and Apple’s Board of Directors.

Ross did not pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying it by the deadline. He also described the matter as a criminal complaint and accused the defendants of stealing intellectual property under a federal criminal law.

Judge Beth Labson Freeman dismissed the action because Ross had not paid the filing fee and the complaint did not state a valid civil claim. The clerk was directed to end all pending motions and close the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Ross v. Cook · No. 5:22-cv-00832
Judge
Beth Freeman
Date
Mar. 28, 2022

Background

Ira Jerome Ross, who was representing himself, filed a handwritten document on January 31, 2022. The court construed it as an attempt to bring a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The filing named Tim Cook and the Board of Directors of Apple, Inc. as defendants and alleged theft of intellectual property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641.

The Clerk notified Ross that he had to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying the fee within 28 days. Ross did neither. He later filed letters saying that the matter was a criminal complaint and that he wanted it filed in criminal court.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that the decision to bring criminal charges generally belongs to a prosecutor, not the court. It also stated that criminal statutes generally do not create a private right of action—that is, a way for an individual to sue under those statutes in a civil case. The court therefore concluded that Ross’s complaint did not state a legally recognized civil claim.

Disposition

Because Ross had not paid the filing fee and the complaint did not state a legally recognized claim, the action was dismissed. Judge Beth Labson Freeman directed the Clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the file. The order did not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.