John Robert Demos, Jr. v. John Thune, et al.

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: April 10, 2026
• Docket: 2:26-cv-00973
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, JR., 9 Plaintiff, CASE NO. C26-973-RSM-BAT 10 v. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 11 JOHN THUNE, et al., 12 Defendants.

13 Plaintiff is well-known locally and nationally as an abusive litigant. He is under pre-filing 14 bar orders in a number of courts, including this Court, the Eastern District of Washington, the 15 Washington State courts, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme 16 Court. See, e.g., Demos v. Storrie, 507 U.S. 290, 291 (1993). In the current proposed action, 17 plaintiff appears to seek an injunction against several elected federal legislators in which he 18 challenges whether Washington is a state at all, the fairness of the legislative districts, and 19 aspects of the United States Constitution. Dkt. 1. It is nearly impossible to discern, however, 20 what he wants, why he has standing to pursue his claims, and the legal basis for his lawsuit. 21 As a bar order litigant, plaintiff may submit only three IFP applications and proposed 22 actions each year. See In re John Robert Demos, MC91-269-CRD (W.D. Wash. Jan. 16, 1992); 23 In re Complaints and Petitions Submitted by John Robert Demos (W.D. Wash. Dec. 15, 1982). 1 The 1992 Bar Order further provides that this Court will not accept for filing a proposed 2 complaint unless it “is accompanied by an affidavit that the claims have not been presented in 3 any other action in any court and that [Plaintiff] can and will produce evidence to support his 4 claims.” 1992 Bar Order at 3. Additionally, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), plaintiff must

5 demonstrate “imminent danger of serious physical injury” to proceed IFP because he has had 6 numerous prior actions dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state claim. See Demos 7 v. Lehman, MC99-113-JLW (W.D. Wash. Aug. 23, 1999). 8 Plaintiff may not proceed with this action. Because plaintiff has had more than three prior 9 actions dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim, he may not proceed in 10 formal pauperis unless he alleges that he is in “imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 11 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Demos, MC99-113-JLW. Plaintiff’s proposed complaint does not contain “a 12 plausible allegation that [he] faced imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time of 13 filing.” Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal citations omitted). 14 Plaintiff thus has stated neither a plausible allegation of imminent harm nor a plausible claim

15 upon which relief may be granted. 16 The Court recommends DENYING plaintiff IFP status, Dkt. 1, at 20–21, and 17 DISMISSING the proposed complaint, Dkt. 1, without prejudice in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 18 § 1915(e)(2)(B) & (g) and standing bar orders. See In re John Robert Demos, MC91-269-CRD 19 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 16, 1992); In re Complaints and Petitions Submitted by John Robert Demos 20 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 15, 1982). A proposed Order is attached. 21 22 23 1 OBJECTIONS AND APPEAL 2 This Report and Recommendation is not an appealable order. Therefore a notice of 3 appeal seeking review in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit should not be filed until the 4 assigned District Judge enters a judgment in the case.

5 Objections, however, may be filed and served upon all parties no later than April 24, 6 2026. Regardless of whether objections are filed, the Clerk should note the matter for April 24, 7 2026, as ready for the District Judge’s consideration. Objections and responses shall not exceed 8 twelve (12) pages. The failure to timely object may affect the right to appeal. 9 This Report and Recommendation is not an appealable order. Therefore a notice of 10 appeal seeking review in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit should not be filed until the 11 assigned District Judge enters a judgment in the case. 12 DATED this 10th day of April, 2026. 13 A 14 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA 15 United States Magistrate Judge

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23