1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

--o0o--

REHAN SHEIKH,

5
6
7

Plaintiff,
vs.
BRIAN KELLY, et al.,

Defendants.

9
10

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:14-cv-00751-GEB-AC

Sacramento, California
Wednesday, August 13, 2014
9:54 A.M.
Hearing re: defendants motion
to dismiss; plaintiff's
motion for admissions and for
judgment; and to amend
complaint

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE HONORABLE ALLISON CLAIRE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12

APPEARANCES:

13

For Plaintiff:

REHAN SHEIKH, Pro Se

1219 W. El Monte Street
Stockton, CA
95207
(209) 475-1263

For Defendants:

MATTHEW T. BESMER
Attorney General's Office
2550 Mariposa Mall, Room 5090
Fresno, CA
93721
(559) 477-1680

Court Recorder:

(UNMONITORED)
U.S. District Court
501 "I" Street, Suite 4-200
Sacramento, CA
95814
(916) 930-4072

Transcription Service:

Petrilla Reporting &

Transcription
5002 - 61st Street
Sacramento, CA
95820
(916) 455-3887

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording;

transcript produced by transcription service.

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2014, 9:54 A.M.

2
3

(Call to order of the Court.)

THE CLERK:

Calling 14-cv-00751-GEB-AC, Rehan Sheikh

v. Brian Kelly, et al.

defendants' motion to dismiss and plaintiff's motion for

judgment, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

MR. SHEIKH:

10

THE COURT:

11

MR. SHEIKH:

Good morning, Your Honor.

Take a seat please, and then state your

Yes, Your Honor.

My name is Rehan

Sheikh, I'm plaintiff in this case.

14

THE COURT:

15

MR. BESMER:

16

Good morning.

appearances for the record.

12
13

This matter is on calendar for

Good morning, Mr. Sheikh.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Matt Besmer

for the attorney general representing the defendants.

17

THE COURT:

18

So we have the defendants' motion to dismiss on

Good morning, Mr. Besmer.

19

calendar.

20

admissions, the plaintiff's motion for judgment, and Mr.

21

Sheikh, you've filed a first amended complaint that I want to

22

talk to you about.

Also before me is the plaintiff's motion to compel

23

MR. SHEIKH:

24

THE COURT:

25

defendants' motion to dismiss.

Yes.
I want to focus this morning on
That's what I'll hear argument

on.

things that you have filed, just to give you some information

and clarify some procedural matters for your benefit.

But first I want to talk to you, Mr. Sheikh, about the

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

Okay.
And I will be issuing a written order

after the hearing which will spell all this out for you.

After a plaintiff files an initial complaint and the

defendants respond to it, either by filing an answer or a

motion to dismiss, that puts you in a position where you are

10

not free to simply file an amended complaint without a motion

11

seeking leave to do so and providing legal grounds.

12

that reason I want to just advise you that I will be ordering

13

the first amended complaint stricken because you have not made

14

a motion to file it.

And for

15

But the thing to bear in mind for now is that when a

16

motion to dismiss is on the table, if it's granted in whole or

17

in part, it is always my practice to permit the plaintiff at

18

least one opportunity to amend the complaint after the ruling

19

on the motion to dismiss.

20

any order or any findings and recommendations to the district

21

court any deficiencies that I find in the complaint, you will

22

have the benefit of that being laid out for you --

23

MR. SHEIKH:

24

THE COURT:

25

amend.

So after I have laid out for you in

Thank you.
-- prior to having an opportunity to

On the discovery issue, it -- from what I've read in

your papers, you told me that you did submit requests for

admissions to the defendants and at the time you filed your

motion to compel you had not yet gotten a response, is that

correct?

Let me break that down.

MR. SHEIKH:

I don't understand correctly, but I

filed a request for admission more than 30 days ago and my

understanding is that after 30 days it will be -- it can be

admitted.

10

THE COURT:

When you want to conduct discovery,

11

whether it's requests for admission, request for production of

12

documents or interrogatories, which are questions --

13

MR. SHEIKH:

14

THE COURT:

Right.
-- that you propound in writing you want

15

answers to, you're not supposed to file them with the Court at

16

all.

17

MR. SHEIKH:

18

THE COURT:

Right.
They don't get filed.

They need to be

19

served directly on the other side.

20

response from the defendants, if you're not happy with the

21

response -- for example, if their response is, we don't have to

22

answer that question, or they do answer the question but they

23

don't give you all the information you wanted, then the next

24

thing you do is talk to them and try to work it out.

25

MR. SHEIKH:

Yes.

And then when you get a

1
2

THE COURT:

file a motion to compel further responses.

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

That makes sense.

All right.
Thank you.

Mr. Besmer, did -- were you served with

requests for admissions?

6
7

And if you can't work it out, then you

MR. BESMER:

Just through the ECF service, Your

Honor, and we did submit a letter to Mr. Sheikh --

THE COURT:

MR. BESMER:

Okay.
-- addressing his, what we believe to be

10

an untimely request for admission -- or a premature request for

11

admission rather.

12

THE COURT:

Okay.

All right.

So the requests for

13

admission were propounded, although in an atypical sort of way,

14

and you did respond to them?

15

MR. BESMER:

Just in the letter format, Your Honor.

16

We explained to Mr. Sheikh that discovery has not yet opened in

17

this case.

18

THE COURT:

All right.

Which is true, there's been

19

no discovery and scheduling order.

20

Sheikh, once -- the usual way the thing proceeds is that after

21

the motion to dismiss has been ruled on, once we get a

22

complaint on file that provides a basis for continuing

23

litigation, then an order will issue setting deadlines

24

including for discovery and it is -- in the usual course of

25

events, you would wait for that to happen before conducting the

In a case such as this, Mr.

discovery.

But when you get there, again, the process is not to

file it with the Court, but to simply submit your discovery

requests directly to counsel for the defendants and only

involve the Court if you're not happy with the responses.

Okay?

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

Sure.

That makes sense to me.

And in that regard, as well as for

general guidance in litigating your case, I know it's very,

10

very challenging to be a plaintiff trying to prosecute a

11

lawsuit without the assistance of counsel.

12

you need to always look to are the Federal Rules of Civil

13

Procedure, the local rules of this Court and the law library at

14

this Court or the larger county law library can give you access

15

to civil procedure practice guides.

16

MR. SHEIKH:

17

THE COURT:

The primary things

Yes, ma'am.
There are several, if you haven't seen

18

them already, handy three-ring sets of binders that will give

19

you pretty concrete instructions on what you need to do,

20

particularly when it comes to pleading and discovery.

21

suggest that you consult those resources.

22

So I

Finally, Mr. Sheikh, you filed a motion for judgment

23

which also appears to me to be premature.

24

a civil lawsuit you, with very, very rare exceptions, can't get

25

judgment just based on the pleadings in your case.

As the plaintiff in

The burden

is on you ultimately to prove all your claims with evidence.

And there is a provision in Rule 56 of the rules of

civil procedure to move for summary judgment at a later stage

in the litigation, after all the discovery has been conducted.

If at the end of the discovery period you look at --

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

MR. SHEIKH:

If I may?
Go ahead, sir.
Yeah, I think I maybe did not name it

correctly in my memorandum supporting the motion.

I correctly

10

characterized it as motion for declaratory and injunctive

11

relief and that is simply based on the fact and the motion --

12

it's just procedural issues, they don't require discovery.

13

It's just the procedure that I have a driving license

14

and it's a basic necessity of life.

15

me an anonymous letter and they are not giving me basic

16

provision and posted provision heading.

17

And defendants have sent

So in my opinion, and Court will decide that, that it

18

made sense that I could submit a motion for declarative relief

19

that the defendants did not follow the procedures, that I'm

20

entitled to defend my driving license and to renew my driving

21

license.

22

So in that perspective, I mean, I'm just conveying

23

what I thought.

24

judgment, I tried to make up that remedial situation in my

25

memorandum.

So if I incorrectly titled it as a motion for

If you see, it is clearly labeled as motion for

declaratory and injunctive relief.

THE COURT:

All right.

Your -- I'm aware that your

complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief.

and injunctive relief, just like money damages, are types of

relief that you are entitled to at the end of a lawsuit if you

prevail, after you have proved your claims with evidence.

So --

8
9

MR. SHEIKH:

Declaratory

So in this case, defendants do not

dispute, sorry -- and defendants do not dispute that they did

10

not issue me timely notices of denial, they do not dispute that

11

over a period of last two years they denied me pre-deprivation

12

and post-deprivation --

13

THE COURT:

Well there are disputes about -- this

14

early in the litigation, when we're not even clear on the final

15

form that your complaint will take, it is too soon for anyone

16

to tell me that things are undisputed.

17

is, I'm seeing in this case plenty of room for dispute, both

18

about historical facts of what happened and about the legal

19

significance of what happened.

20

There, it seems to me

So again, if what you are seeking is judgment in your

21

favor without a trial, the way you get that is under Rule 56

22

with a motion for summary judgment.

23

Based on what you're telling me, you might also be

24

seeking -- there is a provision, again under the rules for

25

preliminary injunctive relief.

That's a very high bar.

In

order to bring a successful motion for a preliminary injunction

-- and what you submitted does not meet the requirements for a

motion for a preliminary injunction -- but you have to prove up

front that you are likely to prevail on the merits.

will leave it to you to research what the requirements are for

such a motion, but such a motion is not before me right now.

There -- I

And again, I leave it to you to decide what the

appropriate motions are to bring and how to bring them.

can't give you advice about that.

10

MR. SHEIKH:

11

THE COURT:

But you should look those things up.

12

All right.

Is there anything else, Mr. Sheikh, that

Yes, Your Honor.

13

you want to tell me about your -- the first amended complaint

14

you filed, your motion to compel admissions or your motion for

15

judgment?

16

want to clarify?

17

Anything you think I've misunderstood or that you

MR. SHEIKH:

Well I think, Your Honor, you correctly

18

stated that.

19

or simple situation of how do we see that.

20

is a basic necessity of life and we all need driving license.

21

We need to go to drive to work or we need to seek medical

22

treatment or whatever may be.

23

If I may add to that, it's an uncommon situation,

A driving license

So it's a very basic necessity.

And I have a driving license.

24

since the young age, like everyone else.

25

high bar for defendants.

I've been driving cars

So I mean it's a very

They just cannot -- I mean it doesn't

seem right for them to come and take your driving license

without the due process of law.

And they seems like mistaken, or they have a software

glitch in their computer that is just sending anonymous random

-- that's not up to me to tell, but it clearly seems like a

very obvious mistake and they are stating, well, there is a

failure to appear.

8
9

And in my declaration I pointed out probably more

than half dozen events that I have appeared before DMV and

10

before the county court.

11

there is a failure to appear.

12

in my side, I would be glad to make up for that.

13

there's a fine that I need to pay, if there is something

14

specific that -- but their allegations remain general and even

15

though I appeared before them, they do not remove that failure

16

to appear or they don't give you proof of appearance.

17

Issue is they won't specify what -I mean if there is a deficiency

I mean if

I mean the county court a number of times I have

18

appeared and they won't give you a proof of attendance, even

19

though I have requested specifically.

20

defendant bring another additional accusation that for a

21

particular traffic citation dated 2012, more than two years

22

ago, they claim that I missed a court date and they come with a

23

bench warrant that they claim that was issued in April 2012.

24
25

And now two days ago

And I have very well -- verifiable record that I

appeared before that court in February, in March and in May.

10

So I mean it's kind of a uncommon situation that defendant --

they are trying to bring court records that may have existed or

not, but they don't make sense, that for a traffic citation --

there's a one specific traffic citation and I went before the

court twice and the court signed and stamped my appearance.

They withdraw their accusation for verification the court

signed and stamped.

along with my declaration.

9
10

THE COURT:

And that -- the court's proof is submitted

Okay.

You're referring to the

declaration that you submitted yesterday?

11

MR. SHEIKH:

12

THE COURT:

Right.

Yes, Your Honor.

Well let me ask you a question about

13

that, Mr. Sheikh, because I'm confused.

14

me that the exhibit documents a withdraw of the traffic

15

citation, but this document isn't a court document or a

16

withdrawal of the traffic citation.

17

you were given by the sheriff's department --

18

MR. SHEIKH:

19

THE COURT:

Your declaration tells

This is a piece of paper

Yes, Your Honor.

-- when they released you from custody

20

and told you to go to court on 3/6.

21

anything that happened in court on 3/6.

22

of paper that you got at the jail saying this is when you need

23

to go to court.

24
25

MR. SHEIKH:

This doesn't document

Yes, Your Honor.

This is just a piece

I was told that I need

to go to court by 3/6, that's why I was explaining, even though

11

the document says I need to appear precisely on 3/6.

my first appearance before the judge on February 29th, but that

discussed another traffic citation.

So I had

And this one was specifically for this thing and I

decided not to bring declaration this piece of stamp, this is

signed by the court.

stamp and a signature.

court.

The signature and stamp is by the

So I got --

9
10

This is -- in the middle there is a big

THE COURT:

I see the court stamp and I see a date on

it --

11

MR. SHEIKH:

12

THE COURT:

Right.
--

which might -- which proves to me

13

that you appeared on that date, but it doesn't indicate

14

anything about any action that the court took.

15

MR. SHEIKH:

That's possibly -- I was there and they

16

did not bring any accusation and I verified with everyone, and

17

they are telling people about your accusations are withdrawn.

18

So I don't have a proof what the action the court did.

19

THE COURT:

20

MR. SHEIKH:

Okay.
But it definitely shows that I was

21

responsible enough to go to the court, I did all my due

22

diligence and the court, they overlooked to do whatever.

23

for the same traffic citation, the court signed it -- my

24

appearance of -- at least appearance -- for the same appearance

25

in April.

And

They are claiming that they have a bench warrant

12

against me.

know.

You know.

THE COURT:

I mean that doesn't make sense, you

Okay.

Let me -- I appreciate your

explanation.

your driver's license back.

for people to have driver's licenses.

I understand how important it is to you to have

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

I understand how important it is

Yes.
Let me turn to the defendants.

In your

motion -- the part of your argument that -- particularly your

10

mootness argument is based on the May 6th letter and that

11

letter does appear to provide information about why Mr.

12

Sheikh's license was suspended and how to clear the suspension,

13

but it doesn't address what I would agree is an independent

14

issue, which is the process for challenging the suspension

15

rather than taking care of the department's basis for it.

16

If Mr. Sheikh was to want to challenge the suspension

17

itself, saying you were, you know, wrong to do it, you can't

18

make me go clear up these things because I should never have

19

been suspended.

20

notify him how to do that?

21

Where, and when, and how did the department

MR. BESMER:

Yes, Your Honor.

First, the department

22

sent Mr. Sheikh the very first letter, and I don't have the

23

date right in front of me, but it was somewhere around November

24

2011.

25

informed him that his license was going to be suspended in 30

And it informed him -- I think it was December 2011.

It

13

days if he didn't clear up his failure to appear on his August

2011 citation.

The process that's established is that there really

is a hearing and that hearing is to go to the court that's

handling that traffic citation and the court, based on how the

statutory framework is set up, will automatically notify the

DMV when the failure to appear is cleared.

8
9

And that did in fact happen because Mr. Sheikh

eventually appeared on that traffic citation and that

10

suspension was removed when he showed up in court.

11

traffic citation then he was found guilty of a traffic

12

violation and ordered to pay a fine.

13

up is that when a --

14
15

On that

And similar system is set

And so to your question about what's the process to

challenge that.

16

THE COURT:

17

MR. BESMER:

Uh-huh.
That process is -- I mean we're inviting

18

him right now to challenge that process, to let us know that

19

he's paid that fine and that he's appeared in court on his

20

February 2012 citation.

21

I understand he's not challenged his failure to pay a

22

fine in oral argument, and as to the failure to appear, I

23

understand he's challenging that right now.

24

represent to the Court that the county court records -- the San

25

Joaquin County Court records show that Mr. Sheikh failed to

All I can do is

14

appear on his February 2012 citation.

is go to court and clear that up.

And all he needs to do

The DMV system is just simply set up based on the

statutory framework to get these notifications from the court,

and I'm not aware of any errors in that system.

have a hearing right to the extent that he goes to court and

says hey, you know, there's an error here, I need to get this

fixed.

clear that due process does not always require a formal

And based on the cases that we cited in our reply, it's

10

adjudicatory hearing.

11

the person to protect his or her interest.

12

So he does

It's just some type of process to allow

And at this stage, Your Honor, we believe we're

13

inviting Mr. Sheikh to do the three things we've asked him to

14

do.

15

I, you know -- well let me back up.

16

show us that he paid his traffic fine.

17

paid his traffic fine, the DMV is prohibited from lifting the

18

suspension of his license.

19
20
21

And there's really not a system set up for him to say hey,

THE COURT:

Right.

We are inviting him to

Until he shows that he

And Mr. Sheikh, what proof do you

have that you ever paid that fine?

MR. SHEIKH:

Well, Your Honor, there was a trial

22

connected and I dispute that part, the guilty part.

23

a trial connected.

24

I had challenged the jurisdiction of the cop.

25

for the private university in Stockton that is next to my home.

There was

There was a discussion with that judge and

The cop worked

15

The cop was parked at a position where no human -- I

mean it seems like I'm just saying it -- it was like clearly

impossible for him to have a visual of that street, which was

on his back.

could not satisfactorily answer his location and he made

statements that I don't have a good recollection of events at

that time.

8
9

So that was questioned in the trial and the cop

And the matter was before a judge and the judge

promised that he will issue his opinion.

There were a number

10

of matters that was discussed and I don't want to go in all the

11

details.

12

would establish the jurisdiction of the cop and see how the cop

13

-- did the cop have actually -- he was parked at a position

14

where it could have any visual where he could identify whether

15

a plaintiff completely stopped on a stop sign or not.

So what I'm expecting is opinion of the judge that

16

THE COURT:

17

MR. SHEIKH:

18

THE COURT:

19
20

So you had a trial?

Yes, Your Honor.
But there was no result?

The judge

didn't rule at the end of the trial?

MR. SHEIKH:

Well judge said that he will issue his

21

opinion because the jurisdiction was challenged and the cop did

22

not have a visual --

23

THE COURT:

Okay.

Let me just interrupt to say that

24

I'm a little confused about what your issue was, because the

25

ability of a witness to perceive things --

16

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

-- is an issue that I understand is a

trial issue.

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

Yes, Your Honor.

Yes, Your Honor.

going to jurisdiction.

I don't understand that to be an issue

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

MR. SHEIKH:

10

THE COURT:

But in any case, when was this trial?

Around May 25 of 2012.
Of 2012?
Yes, Your Honor.
And there has never been a decision by

11

the judge after that trial?

12

2012 to get a written opinion?

13

MR. SHEIKH:

You've been waiting since May of

That is my understanding, Your Honor.

14

Exactly.

15

have not received an opinion.

16
17
18

I have never seen -- I am waiting for opinion and I

THE COURT:

However --

And there is no record that you were

found guilty of the citation?

MR. SHEIKH:

Well they produced a form.

They said --

19

when I was leaving the court, the court stopped, asked me to

20

sign a form and I did.

21

forms and those forms say that they found me guilty and there

22

is no opinion.

23

THE COURT:

And now I -- defendants hand me those

Okay.

Well then that's what happened.

24

If that's what the forms say, that's what happened.

25

may have been expecting --

And you

17

MR. SHEIKH:

Well I -- I received from court in

sections and the court discussed that if I do not disagree with

the opinion I could challenge the court's opinion.

that form doesn't say whether the court has -- the cop has

jurisdiction and how the -- I mean all the details, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

All right.

So I mean

But you acknowledge that you

did receive and sign a form saying that you'd been found guilty

and ordering you to pay a fine?

MR. SHEIKH:

10

choice, Your Honor.

11
12
13
14
15
16

I was instructed to do so and I had no

THE COURT:

Okay.

So you were instructed to pay a

fine?
MR. SHEIKH:

I was instructed to sign a form that I

had no knowledge what I'm signing at that time.

THE COURT:

Did the form say that you were required

to pay a fine?

17

MR. SHEIKH:

18

THE COURT:

19

MR. SHEIKH:

20

THE COURT:

Yes, Your Honor.

Okay.

Did you ever pay that fine?

No, Your Honor.

Okay.

You know, in this court as a

21

magistrate judge I sometimes hear traffic matters which might

22

seem surprising because it's a federal court, but if someone

23

commits a traffic infraction on federal property, like if

24

they're going hiking up in the El Dorado Forest and they park

25

improperly in the parking lot on federal land, for example,

18

sometimes that will come into this Court.

And I am well aware that if I find that someone

parked improperly or drove under the influence of alcohol or

anything forbidden by the California Vehicle Code, even in this

federal court, what happens if I find them guilty and I impose

a fine is that gets automatically reported to the Department of

Motor Vehicles and the DMV does what it does on the basis of

that report from me.

That seems to be what happened for you.

The court

10

ordered you to pay a fine and regardless of your understanding

11

that there remained an outstanding legal issue and you didn't

12

feel that you were therefore obligated to pay the fine, your

13

opportunity to challenge that is in the state courts.

14

MR. SHEIKH:

15

THE COURT:

16

Did you appeal the decision of the

Superior Court?

17
18

I understand.

MR. SHEIKH:

I understand, Your Honor.

I cannot

challenge that opinion over here.

19

THE COURT:

20

MR. SHEIKH:

Right.
But I don't have any way to challenge

21

that opinion unless I have an opinion, so it's kind of a limbo,

22

you know.

23

THE COURT:

Well I can't advise you about how to

24

prosecute an appeal in state court, and the time to do so has

25

certainly expired a long time ago.

But based on the facts as

19

you are representing them to me, it seems that you were aware

that even though you dispute the validity of it, that you were

under an obligation to pay a fine in that matter and you have

not paid the fine in that matter.

restore your driver's license until the county court tells them

that you've taken care of the fine.

And the DMV is not going to

Mr. Besmer, what else do I need to know about this

case in order to rule on your motion?

to clarify or things you'd like to direct me to in the record

10
11

Are there facts you want

that would help me understand the procedural history?

MR. BESMER:

Yes, Your Honor.

On July 14th, in

12

response to Mr. Sheikh's request for admission we sent a

13

detailed letter to him, and in that detailed letter we included

14

copies of the certified records from the traffic court which

15

showed that he was found guilty of his traffic violation from

16

August 2011, and that also included a copy from the court

17

records that showed on August 4th, 2012 a $20,000 bench warrant

18

was issued because he failed to appear on his February 2012

19

traffic citation.

20

The third reason why his license is suspended is

21

because he's not appeared and completed a reexamination.

22

he was pulled over in February of 2012 based on his driving and

23

his behavior, the officer believed that there was some concerns

24

about his ability to safely operate a motor vehicle, and all

25

the statutory codes as referenced in our reply.

When

20

The officer issued to him what's called a notice of

reexamination and that says that you are to call the DMV within

five days and set up an appointment to retake your driver's

license exam.

license was suspended.

was -- suspension was added to his driving record.

He didn't do it within the five days and his

An additional reason for his license

He called up a few days later and scheduled a

reexamination and I believe the date of the reexamination was

March 26th, 2012.

When he showed up on March 26th, 2012 he

10

refused to complete the reexamination and because of that,

11

that's an additional reason his license is suspended.

12

DMV's committed and wants to provide Mr. Sheikh with the

13

opportunity to get his license, he just needs to do those three

14

things.

15

THE COURT:

As to the reexamination what opportunity,

16

if any, does a driver have to contest the need for the

17

reexamination?

18
19
20

MR. BESMER:

There's -- from the statutory framework

that I've reviewed, Your Honor, none.

THE COURT:

The

The --

Don't you see, I do -- that's the one

21

place where I think maybe there is a due process issue at least

22

worth thinking about here.

23

reports to DMV that someone hasn't paid a fine or has failed to

24

appear, that has an automatic consequence for the status of the

25

license and the DMV's role is fairly ministerial there.

I understand that when a court

21

But when it comes to the reexaminations, you know, if

I am issued this notice for a reexamination -- and I'm making

this up, right?

because, you know, someone doesn't like the way I'm dressed,

right, I shouldn't have to take that reexamination.

But in a hypothetical case, if I'm issued it

It seems to me that I should be able to get to a

hearing officer, even if it's just one of those telephone

things the DMV does in some contexts, to say hey, this was

given to me not because of anything I was doing as a driver

10

that indicates my driving skills need to be tested, but because

11

this person didn't like the way I was dressed, didn't like the

12

political slogan on my t-shirt.

13

Doesn't due process require that I have an

14

opportunity to make that argument and try to convince someone

15

that I shouldn't have to retake the test?

16

MR. BESMER:

Potentially under the facts that you

17

just -- without conceding anything, Your Honor -- under the

18

facts that you presented.

19

here that this is -- the reexamination process is similar in

20

some regards to what happens when somebody gets a DUI before

21

the DMV.

22

But I'd like to present an analogy

The police officer fills out a report, says that this

23

person was arrested for driving under the influence, and the

24

documents are forwarded to DMV, and the person can request a

25

hearing and the hearing's held on whether or not that person

22

was driving under the influence of alcohol.

doesn't get to contest or challenge the reporting officer's

report and whether there's a need for the hearing, that's taken

place during the hearing.

That person

So in this case, the statutory framework sets out

specific things that the officer needs to observe and report to

trigger the reexamination process.

And included in the letter that we sent to Mr. Sheikh

on July 2014 which is in the Court's record, we included a copy

10

of the police report that outlined his erratic behavior, his

11

cursing, his need to be placed in handcuffs and his ultimate

12

arrest over a traffic violation.

13

So to the extent that he believes that he was

14

mistreated by the police, that's not something the DMV

15

addresses, that's something that he needs to take up with the

16

police department.

17

So from the perspective of the reexamination process,

18

I think that the statutory framework that's established

19

protects a person's due process rights.

20

the DUI situation where a person's arrested for a DUI.

21

don't get to challenge, well I think the cop was picking on me,

22

I really wasn't drunk.

It's really not unlike

They

23

THE COURT:

24

Mr. Sheikh, I'm going to give you the last word.

25

Okay.

Thank you.

That's helpful.

What -- are there any things you've heard from Mr. Besmer that

23

you want to correct, any additional facts you think I need to

know?

MR. SHEIKH:

Well I think, or just a really important

point, that there's a process to challenge the need for their

demand for medical tests -- unspecified medical tests.

should be a mechanism to challenge those tests and somebody

needs to provide an opportunity as a justification.

8
9

There

Police saying something is that their accusation, a

report, or a proof of wrongdoing, you know.

I mean there's a

10

difference.

11

give -- they need to provide justification of demanding such a

12

reexamination.

13

That's their accusation that needs to be heard and

But I mean there are a couple of points.

For

14

example, one of the points defendant did -- well, as you know,

15

police -- behavior of the police is relevant.

16

me in custody once, they released me, my wife came to pick me

17

up.

18

your behavior on multiple occasions.

19

was deprived of medication.

20

know.

They came, took me in custody because really it builds

The Court -- you know, I

I could die over there.

I don't

So --

21
22

Like they took

THE COURT:

But you haven't raised claims based on

any of those facts in your complaint, sir.

23

MR. SHEIKH:

The --

So the point is that -- let me get to

24

the point.

25

is relevant -- my behavior before the police is relevant and --

The point is defendant not saying that my behavior

24

but what police did to me is relevant to this complaint, which

kind of makes sense, but I mean this establishes there is a

need for a hearing that could establish the need for such a

medical test or what they call a reexamination.

There are levels of problems.

I cannot go into

detail on all of these, but there are at least three major

problems in those.

there is a need for reexamination.

We are just talking on the first level,

THE COURT:

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Sheikh.

10

explain how -- what's going to happen next.

11

all these matters under submission.

12

order and findings and recommendations.

13

Okay.

Let me
I'm taking

I will issue a written

Some of the matters that are before me right now, I

14

have the authority as a United States Magistrate Judge to rule

15

on directly, that includes discovery related matters; but Judge

16

Burrell is the district judge in this case and he is the one

17

who has the authority to enter a final order on a motion to

18

dismiss.

19

So what I do is lay out my findings and

20

recommendations, my analysis of the issue and I tell Judge

21

Burrell which way I think he should go and you will receive

22

those.

23

objections to the findings and recommendations with Judge

24

Burrell.

25

And if you disagree with any part of it, you file

The instructions for that will be included.

MR. SHEIKH:

Yes, Your Honor.

25

1
2

THE COURT:
decision.

Okay?

MR. SHEIKH:

THE COURT:

And he's the one who will make the final

Yes, Your Honor.

Thank you very much.

The matter's under

submission.

MR. BESMER:

Thank you, Your Honor.

MR. SHEIKH:

Thank you so much, Your Honor.

8
9

(Whereupon the hearing in the above-entitled matter was

adjourned at 10:27 a.m.)

10

--o0o--

11

CERTIFICATE

12

I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from

13

the electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above-

14

entitled matter.

15
16

November 12, 2014

17

Patricia A. Petrilla, Transcriber

18

AAERT CERT*D-113

19
20
21
22
23
24
25