FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
OCT 1 7 2011
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA cClerk. u.s. District & Bankruptcy
ourts for the DIStri4:t ot ColumbIa
Joseph L. Gallardo, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.
)
United States Federal Governnment et al., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff's pro se complaint and application
to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint will be
dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (requiring dismissal of a prisoner's complaint upon a
determination that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted).
Plaintiff is a California prisoner incarcerated in Imperial, California. He seeks a
declaration that the time limitation of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
("AEDPA") for challenging criminal convictions is unconstitutional. The Court lacks
jurisdiction to entertain a petition for a declaratory judgment where, as here, the remedy of
habeas corpus is available. LoBue v. Christopher, 82 F.3d 1081,1082-84 (D.C. Cir. 1996); see
Williams v. Hill, 74 F.3d 1339, 1340 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (stating that "it is well-settled that a
[person] seeking relief from his conviction or sentence may not bring [actions for injunctive and
declaratory reliefJ") (citations omitted); accord Jackson v. Scalia, 780 F. Supp. 2d 81 (D.D.C.
2011). Furthermore, this Court has no authority to review the decisions of other courts, see 28
U.S.c. §§ 1331, 1332 (general jurisdictional provisions); Flemingv. United States, 847 F. Supp.
N
170, 172 (O.D.C. 1994), cert. denied 513 U.S. 1150 (1995), which this action would necessarily
require. See Dogan v. Roe, 8 Fed. Appx. 612,613 (9 th Cir. 2001) (rejecting argument that
AED P A's statute oflimitations violates the due process, equal protection, and suspension clauses
of the United States Constitution); Compi. at 8-17 (recounting habeas litigation history in the
California courts and in the Ninth Circuit). A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this
Memorandum Opinion.
Date: October~, 2011
2