John Doe v. United States Attorney's Office

Background

Juan Sejas filed this action without a lawyer and paid the filing fee. The complaint originally identified him as John Doe, but the court directed the Clerk to replace that name with “Juan Sejas” after construing his letter as confirming that he wanted to proceed under his real name. Human Rights Solution Foundation Inc. (HRSF) was also named as a plaintiff.

Sejas sought orders requiring the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York to investigate alleged “narco-terrorism,” enforce the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act, and provide records requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). He also sought orders requiring searches for responsive records, production of records and indexes, and access to certain infrastructure in Bolivia.

Claims on behalf of HRSF

The court dismissed without prejudice any claims Sejas brought on HRSF’s behalf. It explained that a nonlawyer may represent only his own interests, and that a corporation cannot appear in federal court without a licensed attorney. The dismissal left HRSF able to retain counsel to assert those claims.

FOIA claims

FOIA provides public access to some records held by federal executive agencies. Before seeking judicial review, a requester generally must complete the agency’s administrative appeal process. The court concluded that Sejas had not stated facts showing that he requested the records from the United States Attorney’s Office or the Department of Justice, the agency overseeing that office, or that he exhausted the required administrative remedies. The court therefore dismissed his personal FOIA claims without prejudice.

The court granted Sejas 30 days to file an amended complaint asserting a FOIA claim against the Department of Justice and stating facts showing exhaustion of administrative remedies.

FCPA and Kingpin Act claims

The court dismissed Sejas’s FCPA claims because the statute’s antibribery provisions do not create a private right of action—that is, they do not authorize a private individual to sue under those provisions. The court also dismissed his claims under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act because that criminal statute does not provide a private right of action.

Requests to compel investigation or prosecution

The court dismissed Sejas’s request to direct the United States Attorney’s Office to investigate alleged violations or compel compliance with federal law. Prosecutors have discretion over whether to bring criminal proceedings, and a private person cannot direct a prosecutor or initiate another person’s criminal prosecution through a federal court action. The court stated that Sejas therefore lacked standing and that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over this request.

Disposition

The court dismissed without prejudice HRSF’s claims, dismissed Sejas’s FCPA and Kingpin Act claims, and dismissed all claims against the United States Attorney’s Office for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The United States Attorney’s Office was dismissed as a defendant. The court granted Sejas 30 days’ leave to file an amended complaint against the Department of Justice asserting a FOIA claim. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied payment-free appeal status.