UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RANDEEP SINGH MANN, : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 20-1337 (RC) : v. : Re Document Nos.: 20, 21, 32, 34, : 38, 40, 41 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., : : Defendants. : MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AND SECOND MOTIONS TO AMEND; GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS; DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT; GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD MOTIONS TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Randeep Singh Mann is currently incarcerated and serving a life sentence following conviction on charges related to a bombing attack in Arkansas. Defs.’ Mot. to Dismiss at 1–2 (“Defs.’ Mot.”), ECF No. 21. Mann alleges that law enforcement officials violated his Fifth Amendment rights by committing bribery and coercing witnesses against him, as well as planting and fabricating evidence. Compl. at 5, ECF No. 1. Mann seeks relief under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 702, in the form of an investigation of law enforcement officials involved in his conviction. Compl. at 19. Pending before the Court are multiple motions filed by Mann, including motions to take judicial notice 1 and motions for leave to file an amended complaint. Pl.’s Mot. to Take Judicial Notice, ECF No. 38; Pl.’s 2d Mot. to 1 Mann has filed three motions for the Court to take judicial notice, which this Court grants, but none of those cases elucidate a change of law or alter the analysis of this case, particularly since most of the cases deal with § 1983 and Bivens actions, which Mann no longer pursues in his amended complaint. Take Judicial Notice, ECF No. 40; Pl.’s 3d Mot. to Take Judicial Notice, ECF No. 41; Pl.’s Mot. to File Am. Compl. (“Pl.’s Mot.”), ECF No. 32. The Defendants replied by filing a motion to dismiss and multiple oppositions to the motions for leave to file an amended complaint, to which Mann has responded in support. The Court addresses the motions for leave to file an amended complaint and motions to dismiss in turn below. 2 II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Mann is currently incarcerated and serving a life sentence following conviction by a jury in 2010 on charges related to a bombing attack in Arkansas. Defs.’ Mot. at 1–2. Mann appealed his conviction and was resentenced in 2012 on counts of aiding and abetting in the use of a weapon of mass destruction, causing damage or destruction of a vehicle by means of explosives resulting in personal injury, possession of unregistered grenades, and possession of a machine gun. Id.; United States v. Mann, 701 F.3d 274 (8th Cir. 2012). Mann then filed a motion to vacate in 2014, which was denied in 2016 as the court found that Mann had failed to raise the issues on direct appeal and failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of constitutional rights. Defs.’ Mot. at 2; Mann v. United States, No. 4:09-cr-00099 BSM, 2016 WL 4500779 (E.D. Ark. Aug. …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals