Seems that old Barbara is not going to be allowed to file any more lawsuits in the courts without being subject to sanctions:
BARBARA SCHWARZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant-Appellee.
Ms. Schwarz is a German citizen who seeks records from the Central Intelligence Agency on: (1) President Dwight Eisenhower, who she claims is her grandfather; (2) her husband, Mark C. Rathbun, who she alleges is the secret heir to the Rothschild fortune; (3) her father, L. Ron Hubbard, who she alleges is the son of President Eisenhower and from whom German Nazis kidnaped her at an early age and forced her to live in Germany; and (4) herself allegedly the abducted granddaughter of President Eisenhower. Her goal in garnering Central Intelligence Agency records is to locate and rescue her husband, who she believes is wrongfully incarcerated in the United States for her rape and murder and to protect herself and others from a "German Nazi conspiracy." Her action against the United Postal Service stems from her claim it mishandled certificates of mailing relating to her FOIA requests.
The district court dismissed her action against the United States Postal Service for failure to meet jurisdictional prerequisites and failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The district court subsequently granted the Central Intelligence Agency's motion for summary judgment because Ms.
Schwarz failed to meet the prerequisite for her information demand because she is not a United States citizen.
We have reviewed the record de novo, see Montero v. Meyer, 13 F.3d 1444, 1446 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 888 (1994), and find no reversible error. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 201, we take judicial notice of the fact Ms. Schwarz is a German citizen and are unpersuaded by her contention that she knows she is a United States citizen because she remembers being born here.
*** Moreover, an examination of Ms. Schwarz's pleadings reveals they are purely frivolous and follow a recurring pattern of similarly unsuccessful FOIA actions filed by her against several other federal agencies, and at least two other actions against the United States Postal Service.***
*** In addition, Ms. Schwarz previously filed thirty-five frivolous petitions with the United States Supreme Court, prompting it to bar her from filing any prospective noncriminal filings with that Court.
See Schwarz v. National Sec. Agency, 119 S. Ct. 1109 (1999).***
*** This Circuit alone has entertained at least ten appeals filed by Ms. Schwarz. We admonish Ms. Schwarz for the frivolousness of the present action and put her on notice that any future frivolous filings in this court will result in sanctions. ***
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court's orders granting the government's motion for summary judgment and motion to dismiss. A copy of this order shall be filed in the records of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit related to repeated frivolous filers.
Entered by the Court:
United States Circuit Judge
From: email@example.com (Dicktop_Stud)
Subject: Proof that Barbara Schwarz is a very sick loon: Loses phony lawsuit vs. Scientology
Date: 7 Sep 2003 02:02:37 -0700
Barbara SCHWARZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, in Los Angeles CA, their executives; Utah State Department of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees.
Nos. 93-4082, 93-4092.
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Nov. 2, 1993.
Before SEYMOUR, ANDERSON, and EBEL, Circuit Judges.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT [FN1]
**1 After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R.
The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Barbara Schwarz, appearing pro se, filed actions for monetary and injunctive relief against the Church of Scientology International (CSI) and Utah State Department of Corrections.
Both suits were driven by Ms. Schwarz' attempts to ascertain the whereabouts of Mark Rathbun, whom Ms. Schwarz alleges is her husband. Her complaint against CSI alleges that Mr. Rathbun is a high official in that organization, and that CSI knows where he is but refuses to tell her.
Her suit against the Department asserts that Mr. Rathbun is incarcerated at one of the Department's institutions and seeks a court order allowing her to personally search for him in the Department's facilities. The district court consolidated the cases and, after a hearing, granted CSI's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim for relief and the Department's motion for summary judgment. We affirm. [FN2]
CSI argued below that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over it due to a lack of minimum contacts and, alternatively, that Ms. Schwarz had failed to state a claim for relief. The court ruled that it had jurisdiction but granted CSI's motion to dismiss.
We agree with the district court's conclusion that Ms.Schwarz has presented no legally cognizable theory to support her claim that CSI's failure to reveal the whereabouts of Mr. Rathbun entitles her to relief in federal court.
The Department filed a motion for summary judgment, supported by documents showing that the Department had searched its records and that Mark Rathbun was not then and never has been incarcerated or supervised under its authority.
The court considered this material together with that presented by Ms.
Schwarz and granted summary judgment for the Department. We have carefully reviewed the court's ruling, and we affirm substantially for the reasons set out therein. AFFIRMED.
FN1. This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
FN2. We grant Ms. Schwarz' motions to exceed page limits and her motion to expedite.