UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Memorandum in Support of Notice
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
William Thomas, et. al. |
Plaintiffs pro se, |
v. | C.A. No. 95-1018
| Judge Charles R. Richey
The United States, et. al. |
PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF THE
NOTICE OF RELATED CASES AND MOTION FOR CONSOLIDATION
On December 22, 1994 , plaintiff, and others, filed Thomas, et. al v. United
States, et al, USDC CA No. 94-2747 ("Thomas I"). That case is presently pending
before this Court., and involves almost identical questions of fact and law.
Thomas I is a Bivens action, which also alleges constitutional violations arising
from plaintiff's "continuous presence" in the Park, and seeks injunctive relief regarding
the enforcement of various minor regulations in their application to First Amendment
activities. In fact, the specific sign at issue here is involved in Thomas I shows that it
There, like counsel in this case, the U.S. Attorney, defending different federal
defendants against claims similar to those at issue here, is also arguing that the sign
is "structure." From the record there it appears the "authority" for the "sign is
structure" argument is a letter, written by Mr. Randolph Myers, a DOI solicitor.
Most recently, in Thomas I the Court correctly refused to consider Mr. Myers'
"letter at any stage in the proceedings unless and until it is submitted in a form which
has evidentiary value." Thomas I, Order, July 3, 1995.
The questions raised by Mr. Myers' letter are identical to questions at the heart
of this matter. See, Opposition to the Federal and District of Columbia Defendants'
Respective Motions to Dismiss or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment, Exhibit
32, filed this date, compare, Thomas I, Supplemental Memorandum in Support of
Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, Exhibit 1, filed this date.
Respectfully submitted this 19th day of July, 1995
William Thomas, pro se
2817 11th Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001