Miles-Baker v. U.S. Department of Agriculture - Foreign Agriculture Service
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-09252
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Miles-Baker v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Judge Swain denied a request for a diplomatic passport and dismissed the action.
Eric Tymell Miles-Baker’s request for a diplomatic passport and related relief was denied, and his action against the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Foreign Agriculture Service was dismissed.
What happened
In Miles-Baker v. U.S. Department of Agriculture – Foreign Agriculture Service, Eric Tymell Miles-Baker, representing himself, asked the court to require the Foreign Agriculture Service to issue him a diplomatic passport and return or restore his original passport information. He said the agency had not responded to his requests.
The court treated the case as a request for a court order requiring a federal agency to perform a legal duty. It ruled that Miles-Baker did not allege facts showing he was a Department of Agriculture employee who qualified for a diplomatic passport for official travel. He therefore did not show a clear right to the passport.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied the requested order and dismissed the action. She also declined to allow an amended complaint, denied fee-free status for an appeal, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Miles-Baker v. U.S. Department of Agriculture - Foreign Agriculture Service · No. 1:22-cv-09252
- Laura Swain
- May 30, 2023
Background
Eric Tymell Miles-Baker, who appeared without a lawyer, sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS). He asked the court to require FAS to issue him a diplomatic passport with his “family armory,” return his original standard passport and passport card, restore his original passport number, and apologize for the delay. He alleged that he submitted materials to FAS but received neither a response nor a diplomatic passport.
The court had previously allowed Miles-Baker to proceed without paying court fees in advance. In reviewing his complaint, the court explained that it had to dismiss a fee-free complaint that was legally frivolous, failed to state a claim for relief, sought improper monetary relief, or presented claims over which the court lacked authority.
Court’s analysis
The court treated the complaint as a request for mandamus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Mandamus is an extraordinary court order used to require a federal officer or agency to perform a nondiscretionary duty—one the official is legally required to perform rather than free to choose whether to perform. To obtain that relief, a person must show that no other adequate remedy exists, that the right to the order is clear and indisputable, and that the order is appropriate.
The court stated that FAS issues official or diplomatic passports to Department of Agriculture employees traveling abroad for the Department. Miles-Baker did not allege facts showing that he was a Department employee or that he qualified for a diplomatic passport because he would be traveling officially for the Department. The court therefore concluded that he had not shown a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief and had not stated a claim for mandamus relief.
Disposition
The court denied Miles-Baker’s request for mandamus relief and dismissed the action. It declined to allow him to amend the complaint because it concluded that the defects could not be cured through amendment. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal, terminated all other pending matters, and directed the clerk to enter judgment. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.