Anwari v. Momand
- Martinez-Olguin
- 3:22-cv-04357
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Anwari v. Momand, Judge Martinez-Olguin denied Momand’s amended emergency motion seeking criminal-contempt proceedings against Anwari.
Momand’s request for criminal-contempt proceedings against Anwari was denied. The discovery stay was dissolved after Anwari withdrew her motion to dismiss, while the scheduled pretrial conference and bench trial remained in place.
What happened
In Anwari v. Momand, Ahmad Momand asked the court to require Sharifa Anwari to explain why she should not face criminal-contempt proceedings for allegedly failing to return their child from Germany to the United States. He relied on a December 7, 2023 court order and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42.
The court found that the December order did not require Anwari to return the child. Instead, it barred removing the child from Santa Clara County except as the order allowed, including travel to Germany to visit Anwari. The parties’ parenting agreement was not made part of the court’s order, so the court would not use criminal contempt to enforce it.
Judge Martinez-Olguin denied Momand’s amended emergency motion for an order to show cause. The court also dissolved the discovery stay because Anwari had withdrawn her motion to dismiss, and it kept the scheduled pretrial and trial dates in place.
The detailed version
- Anwari v. Momand · No. 3:22-cv-04357
- Martinez-Olguin
- May 17, 2024
Background
Ahmad Momand, the respondent in an international child-custody action, filed an amended emergency motion asking the court to issue an order to show cause against Sharifa Anwari for indirect criminal contempt. Momand argued that Anwari violated the court’s December 7, 2023 order by failing to return their child to the United States after the child traveled to Germany to visit Anwari under an agreement between the parties. Momand also asked the court to request that the United States Attorney’s Office prosecute the alleged contempt.
Momand relied on Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42(a), which governs notice, prosecution, trial, and punishment for criminal contempt. His underlying statutory argument relied on 18 U.S.C. § 401(3), which allows a federal court to punish disobedience of its lawful order.
Court’s analysis
The court first considered whether Anwari could be held in contempt for violating the December 7 order. That order stated that the child could not be removed from Santa Clara County without the court’s prior approval, except for a temporary trip within California or travel to Germany to visit Anwari as provided in the parenting agreement.
The court concluded that the order did not contain language requiring Anwari to return the child. The parties both acknowledged that the court had declined to incorporate their settlement or parenting agreement into its order. Because the agreement was not a court order, the court would not threaten criminal prosecution based on alleged noncompliance with that agreement. The court also rejected Momand’s argument that the prohibition on removing the child from Santa Clara County necessarily included a requirement that Anwari not retain the child outside California.
The court distinguished the cases Momand cited because, in those cases, the relevant court orders expressly supported the requested contempt proceedings. The court stated that Momand could not identify a court order supporting a finding of criminal contempt in this case.
Disposition
Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin DENIED Momand’s amended emergency motion for an order to show cause for indirect criminal contempt. The court therefore did not order Anwari to face the requested criminal-contempt proceedings. The court also stated that Anwari had withdrawn her motion to dismiss and, as a result, DISSOLVED the parties’ discovery stay. It kept the December 10, 2024 bench trial and November 14, 2024 pretrial conference dates in place and stated that a separate order would provide additional pretrial deadlines.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.