STATE OF RIDGEWAY
YASSEN28
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
DOCKET NO. RSC-AD-619
Plaintiff
v.
NATIONAL GUARD
Defendant
MOTION TO DISMISS
The Defendant in the aforementioned matter respectfully submits this motion to dismiss on the grounds
of the Plaintiff’s argument lacking valid standing.
ARGUMENT
In the Civil complaint provided by the Plaintiff, they alleged that the National Guard was implicated in
“unfair hiring practices” pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act. Further citing Section 2.8 where it reads
“A prejudicial or unfair hiring practice is a hiring practice that does not conform to what has been established
by law.” In addition, the Plaintiff alleges a Section 2.7 violation of the “objective criteria” for determining
background checks.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Section 2.7 of the Administrative Procedure Act, hereinafter the “APA,” reads the following.
“Departments shall background check applicants and new-hires on the following criteria:... (vii) Moderator
action against them.” [Administrative Procedure Act. Section 2.7(c)(vii)]. When referencing the National Guard
Application Tracker, on row 75, column F, it reads as the note for denial “previous moderation action.” The
Plaintiff, yassen28, has an extensive moderation history on his official record, (see Exhibit A and Exhibit B.)
Pursuant to the APA as set forth in the Inaugural Laws, no violation can be found on behalf of the National
Guard.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
In accordance with the Ridgeway Code of Statues, 1 R. Stat. § 314 reads “Any individual who is a
public servant and commits anact relating to his office but constitutes anunauthorized exercise of his official
functions, knowing that such act is unauthorized; or refrains from performing a duty which is imposed upon him
by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of his office.” In subsection (i), the Code of Statues reads “The
plaintiff must prove that the official misconduct from that individual caused concrete injury to himself.” In the
Plaintiff’s own civil complaint, they have failed to state how the background check caused injury to him.
Pursuant to the aforementioned statue, no injury has occurred, either physically or abstract harm. The Plaintiff
has failed to prove how the official misconduct has resulted in injury to relief to be granted, thus making the
argument lack standing. Additionally, Captain ConstantlyVerbal conducted himself in an authorized manner
while operating within reason of the Administrative Procedure Act, Section 2.7(c).
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
While the Plaintiff has a statutory privilege and rights to be free from unfair hiring practices, the
Plaintiff did not meet the requirements set forth by the Administrative Procedure Act. “Any policy, order,
procedure, or directive that impedes on an individuals rights, immunities, or privileges secured by law, charter,
or the constitution shall be subject to the injunctive relief of a permanent restraining order against the
government prohibiting them from enacting this policy, order, procedure, or directive; and injunctive relief
reversing any harm done.” (1 R. Stat. § 316). In addition to this outline, section (i) provides that the Plaintiff
demonstrates they received concrete, non-hypothetical harm from the policy, order, procedure, or directive. In
accordance with the aforementioned APA, none of the Plaintiff’s rights were violated in the decision to make a
denial in the background check, as it is allowed per the Administrative Procedures Act, Section 2.7(c).
CONCLUSION
Thus, for the foregoing reasons, this court ought to dismiss the claims against the Ridgeway National
Guard, and all affiliated defendants listed in the Civil Complaint, for the lack of standing the argument
possesses.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/RyanJSyndicate
RyanJSyndicate
Attorney At Law; Office of the Solicitor
General
R.W. Bar #18106
EXHIBIT ANames of Moderators have been redacted by the Moderation Team due to security reasons.
EXHIBIT BNames of Moderators have been redacted by the Moderation Team due to security reasons.
