UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
APR 02 2009
) Clerk, U.S. District and
Billy G. Asemani, ) Bankruptcy courts
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.
) 09 0611
Mahmood Ahmadinejad, )
)
Defendant. )
--------------------------~)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This civil action, brought pro se, was transferred from the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of New York. Before the Court are the complaint and plaintiffs application
to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint will be
dismissed on the ground of res judicata.
Plaintiff is a prisoner at the Eastern Correctional Institution in Eastover, Maryland. He
sues the President oflran in his personal and official capacities under the Foreign Sovereign
Immunities Act, 28 U.S.c. §§ 1602-1611 (2008), for alleged torture and false detention based on
his religious beliefs. As observed by the transferring court, this Court previously dismissed on
the merits plaintiffs complaint presenting the same factual allegations by Order dated June 9,
2004. Asemani v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, Civ. Action No. 01-2231 (Bates, J.), aff'd App.
No. 04-7182 (D.C. Cir., Jun. 22, 2005). While acknowledging that his "torture claims are similar
to what he asserted in the D.C. case," Complaint at 6, plaintiff differentiates this case from the
earlier one because it is brought against "a new defendant (Ahmadinejad) whose orders caused
the infliction of the injuries to Asemani." Id. at 6. Plaintiffs new claim is incredulous
considering that the alleged events forming the basis of the complaint occurred in 2000, President
3
Ahmadinejad was elected to office in 2005, and plaintiff has not alleged that he gave such orders
in some other capacity.
In any event, under the principle of res judicata, a final judgment on the merits in one
action "bars any further claim based on the same 'nucleus of facts' .... " Page v. United States,
729 F.2d 818, 820 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (quoting Expert Elec., Inc. v. Levine, 554 F.2d 1227, 1234
(D.C. Cir. 1977)). Res judicata bars the relitigation "of issues that were or could have been
raised in [the prior] action." Drake v. FAA, 291 F.3d 59 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (emphasis in original)
(quoting Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94, 101 S.Ct. 411, 414, 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980)); see
IA.M Nat 'I Pension Fundv. Indus. Gear MIg. Co., 723 F.2d 944,949 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (noting
that res judicata "forecloses all that which might have been litigated previously"). Because the
underlying facts of this civil action existed at the time of the prior civil action, plaintiff is
foreclosed from litigating the claim anew. I
Date: March~, 2009
I A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
2
Asemani v. Ahmadinejad
Combined Opinion