The Shaivite Temple

[dstroy]

This video and the last video I made about Herbs are both about plants that are in the same family as Pepper, like the kind of Pepper you use on Food. You know how Pepper makes people sneeze? Those are the Terpenes, and some of those Terpenes are actually the same Terpenes that make Marijuana smell and that give marijuana some of its effects.


The plants in the Pepper family contain all kinds of different Alkaloids and Terpenes. Another family that is full of Alkaloids and Terpenes is the Mint family; I am currently growing Wild Dagga and will make a video about that soon. But everyone should know that these 2 families of plants contain tons of different things, and this is an example of the Cataloging things in your mind.

The Shaivite Temple- Herbs, Ep 1 (Uziza Leaf)

The Shaivite Temple- Herbs, Ep 2 (Kava Kava)

The law of primacy states that we remember what was first, the best, which means the important thing you want us to know should come first when speaking. You should write an outline before you make a video (basic public speaking technique) so you don't say UM or UH as much because you have an idea of what your talking points are. If you cough or clear your throat you should edit that out. Practice talking in front of a mirror, no one is going to take you seriously with your current demeanor, because you don't seem like you take your topic seriously and you are unkempt.

Pepper (Piper nigrum) makes people sneeze because the oleoresins contain piperine. Piperine is not a terpene. Pepper does contain limonene, a terpene. This is easily verifiable on google.

 

[ANC]

We are working on adding auto slap to this thread.

 

[Finshaggy]

The law of primacy states that we remember what was first, the best, which means the important thing you want us to know should come first when speaking. You should write an outline before you make a video (basic public speaking technique) so you don't say UM or UH as much because you have an idea of what your talking points are. If you cough or clear your throat you should edit that out. Practice talking in front of a mirror, no one is going to take you seriously with your current demeanor, because you don't seem like you take your topic seriously and you are unkempt.

Pepper (Piper nigrum) makes people sneeze because the oleoresins contain piperine. Piperine is not a terpene. Pepper does contain limonene, a terpene. This is easily verifiable on google.

It's YouTube, not a Campaign speech. And I am going to get way deeper into everything whenever I actually open the bags. These are just the intro videos, I am just getting everything out there so everyone knows what everything is and what is being done.

I write on my Website and on Facebook and Google+, I don't need to write for every Youtube video. It would probably help the videos show up in Searches, and I might do it for a few of them, whenever there are links and stuff that I need to show people. But right now I am just showing everyone what is about to be happening.

 

[Finshaggy]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
RYAN GALLAGHER, §
§
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § 1:16-CV-527-RP
§
AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT, §
§
Defendant. §
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Austin Police Department’s Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings. (Dkt. 15). Having considered the pleadings, the factual record, and the relevant case law,
the Court issues the following order.

BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Ryan Gallagher filed an action against the Austin Police Department in state court
on February 24, 2016. Defendant Austin Police Department (“APD”) removed the action to this
Court on April 29, 2016.

Plaintiff’s Complaint spans nearly 150 pages, but the relevant factual allegations are stated
briefly. Plaintiff appears to be an ordained minister of the Universal Life Church and runs a
religiously oriented business of selling seeds, herbs, fruits, and vegetables. Plaintiff states that he “is a
Hindu and practices Neurospirituality,” which appears to involve the use of nootropics. Plaintiff’s
examples of these substances include syneperine, tryptophan, and holy basil seeds, which, according
to Plaintiff, “are grown for Lord Krishna, and are definitely not illegal.”
In the week before he filed his lawsuit, Plaintiff alleges that police seized around 100,000
items, including basil, mango, peaches, pickling cucumbers, along with his nootropics. Plaintiff states
that the items were seized “on the ground that it did not show up as Cocaine, Methamphetamine or
Case 1:16-cv-00527-RP Document 16 Filed 03/22/17 Page 1 of 3

2
Heroine,” and that the narcotics sergeant told the other officers to take everything because they
could not identify it, though almost everything was labeled.
Plaintiff has alleged that this seizure has damaged his business because he cannot sell his
seed inventory or make a nootropic blend. At the time he filed his Complaint, Plaintiff also alleged
he would miss the growing season so he would be unable to restock his inventory or grow herbs for
food or religious use. Plaintiff alleges that the conduct of the APD officers violated his Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendment rights.

Defendant APD filed this motion for judgment on the pleadings on January 26, 2017.
Plaintiff has so far filed no response.

LEGAL STANDARD
A motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c) “is subject to the same standards
as a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).” In re Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. LLC, 624 F.3d 201,
209–10 (5th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, the court must accept “all well-pleaded facts as true, viewing
them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litig., 495 F.3d 191, 205
(5th Cir. 2007). The plaintiff must plead sufficient facts to “state a claim for relief that is plausible on
its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The court must initially identify
pleadings that are no more than legal conclusions not entitled to the assumption of truth, then
assume the veracity of well-pleaded factual allegations and determine whether those allegations
plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief. If not, “the complaint has alleged—but it has not
‘show[n]’—‘that the pleader is entitled to relief.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009) (quoting
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)).

DISCUSSION
APD argues that the Court should grant judgment on the pleadings for three reasons: (1)
APD is not a separate legal entity capable of being sued; (2) Plaintiff has failed to adhere to statutory
Case 1:16-cv-00527-RP Document 16 Filed 03/22/17 Page 2 of 3

3
prerequisites to suit; and (3) Plaintiff’s claims are not supported by his alleged facts. Because the
Court finds the first reason to be dispositive, it does not reach the others.
APD is a subdivision of the City of Austin and “cannot pursue a suit on its own unless it is
‘a separate and distinct corporate entity.’” Darby v. Pasadena Police Dep’t, 939 F.2d 311, 313 (5th Cir.
1991). “nless the true political entity has taken explicit steps to grant the servient agency with
jural authority, the agency cannot engage in any litigation except in concert with the government
itself.” Id. at 313–14. APD lacks status as a separate entity and thus is not capable of being sued.
Rivera v. Mike, No. A-11-CA-275-LY, 2011 WL 6025875, at *3 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2011).
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claims against APD must be dismissed. It appearing that there are no other
defendants in this action, this dismissal is dispositive of Plaintiff’s case.

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS APD’s Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings and thus DISMISSES Plaintiff’s claims. (Dkt. 15).
SIGNED on March 21, 2017.
_______________________________
ROBERT PITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Ok, so again, this is exactly what I am talking about. And this is why you said earlier that you didn't want to go by Wins and Losses, because I can actually explain everything.

Notice none of my cases are dropped for being Frivolous.

With the case you are talking about, they opened a Narcotics Investigation on me, they took a ton of stuff from me, and it went to the Forensics Lab for 6 months.

In the end, they completely dropped the Narcotics Investigation and case, then they gave everything back. And when the Evidence Release place was giving me my stuff back, they really seemed like they didn't want to give it to me. There was a used Marijuana Pipe and everything, but I emailed the Narcotics Sergeant after calling the Police Station and asking for the Detective on my case and him being really rude, and me going to the Police Monitor; and the Narcotics Sergeant was actually sending me C.S. Lewis quotes by the end of the 6 Months because he recognized it was my Religion.

But I filed that Lawsuit against the Police Station instead of Austin and again, I did not wait 6 Months for the Administrative Claim to go through, and the Court dropped the Case even though in Texas Code Title 5 Chapter 110, it states that I can sue the Police Station itself for Religious violations. They just didn't even get to the point where we could discuss it because they didn't want to do that case.



So, again, I always Win my Defensive Cases, and the only way they can beat me in Offensive Cases is by dropping them. So I really don't even see what your point is.


Really all you are doing is showing people that I am actually doing all the things I say I am doing, I am not afraid of the Police, or the DEA, or the NSA, or the FBI, I will practice my Religion in all their faces.

 

[Finshaggy]

Like that's a Federal Court, who I sent a Lawsuit to telling them I smoke Marijuana and use Nootropics and other Sacraments as part of my Religion, and all they have to say back is "We don't think you have standing to sue the Police Department because they are a part of the City".

And you come in here with that, then say I "lost".

Most people would be afraid to send that to a Judge because they would think that they would get arrested.

 

[Finshaggy]

Stop lying Ryan. That's not why your case against the DEA was thrown out:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
RYAN GALLAGHER,
Plaintiff,
V.
CHUCK ROSENBERG, DRUG
ENFORCEMENT AGENCY; LORETTA
LYNCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL;
STEPAN COMPANY; MALLINCKRODT
PHARMACEUTICALS,
Defendants.

A-16-CV-1117-SS-ML
ORDER ON IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS AND
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE MERITS OF THE CLAIMS
TO THE HONORABLE SAM SPARKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:

The Magistrate Court submits this Report and Recommendation to the United States
District Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 1 of Appendix C of the Local Court
Rules of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Local Rules for the
Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges.




C. Discussion

Plaintiff appears to have attempted to plead two types of claims: constitutional challenges to federal drugs laws and claims that Stepan Company and Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, in collusion with the DEA and AG, operate an illegal monopoly with respect to controlled substances.

1. Challenges to the federal drug laws

Despite the Complaint’s length, Plaintiff provides little to no coherent factual basis for his claims. For instance, Plaintiff alleges that law enforcement officers entered his property and “illegally seiz[ed] Marijuana which existed for Religious use.” Complaint at 2 ¶6. However, elsewhere in the Complaint, Plaintiff refers or quotes passages relevant to “Intoxicating Liquors,” id. at 11-14, bhang or marijuana, id. at 26-36, 45, and cocaine, id. at 36, with no explanation as to the relevance of cocaine or intoxicating liquors. Plaintiff’s Complaint is nothing more than naked assertions that his rights have been violated. Although Plaintiff’s statement of his proposed class refers to the Hindu faith (and other “similarly barred Religion”), Plaintiff has not pleaded what faith he practices, what that faith requires, or how the Controlled Substances Act interferes with the requirements of his religious beliefs. Even taking the few facts that Plaintiff pleaded as true, he has failed to state a claim that is plausible on its face. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice”). Accordingly, these claims should be dismissed.

2. Monopoly claims

Again, Plaintiff has failed to allege facts that are sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief or that he would have standing to bring such a claim if he could articulate it. 3. Any other claims To the extent that Plaintiff has attempted to plead any other claim that has not been addressed3 , he has similarly failed to plead sufficient facts, if accepted as true, that “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. 4. Conclusion Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a single cause of action that is plausible on its face. Accordingly, the Complaint should be dismissed.

III. ORDER AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Magistrate Court RECOMMENDS the District Court DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s cause of action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 3 As described above, Plaintiff’s Complaint also includes claims such as violation of international agreements (fifth cause of action) and gerrymandering (sixth cause of action) intertwined with his challenges to the Controlled Substances Act and monopoly claims. Case 1:16-cv-01117-SS Document 3 Filed 10/21/16 Page 8 of 9 9 IV. SIGNED October 21, 2016 _______________________________ MARK LANE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Again, you are only proving my point over and over. First off, this shows that I was willing to go to the Federal Court 2 Times, Once against the Police Department, and a second time Against the DEA, USAG, Mallinckdrodt and Stepan Company.

First off, just like last time, they made a very Eloquent Argument, but the simply dropped the case because they did not want to bring the DEA, the USAG, Mallinckdrodt and Stepan Company into a Court room with me.


Cruz V Beto
"a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim"
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/405/319/case.html

That case was dropped wrongly, they just don't want to deal with this. But I am filing in Colorado soon.


And again, I love that you are bringing all of these up, because it took the Federal Court less than 1 Month to come up with those Decisions. I filed a much better case in Dallas, and they have sat on it since March.

And I am filing it in Colorado now too, where it should be much more accepted by the Courts. I have already talked to people who have had Judges accept Religious Marijuana Arguments in Court.

 

[Finshaggy]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
RYAN GALLAGHER,
Plaintiff,
-vsCLERiC
U.S. O1STRCT COURT
WESTERN OSTRICT OF J.çXS BYJL
DEPUTY CE
CAUSE NO.:
A-16-CA-01117-SS
CHUCK ROSENBERG, DRUG
ENFORCEMENT AGENCY; LORETTA
LYNCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;
STEPAN COMPANY, MALLINCKRODT
PHARMACEUTICALS,
Defendants.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause,
and thereafter enters the following.

On October 3, 2016 Ryan Gallagher tendered to the Court as a petitioner pro se a large
volume of papers entitled "Complaint" and requested the right to proceed in this litigation in
forma pauperis. Mr. Gallagher's pleadings were referred to the United States Magistrate Judge
who granted Mr. Gallagher's request to proceed in forma pauperis but recommended the case be
dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Subsequently, Mr. Gallagher filed a pleading entitled "In Addition to the Original Claim in Response to Magistrate
Judge Mark Lane's Recommendation" on October 27, 2016 and his motion "Request to Certify
Class Action and Appoint Counsel" [#6] also filed on October 27, 2016 and, finally, his
"Objection to Recommendation" filed October 31, 2016.

After review, the Court ACCEPTS the recommendation of the United States Magistrate
Judge and DISMISSED this case without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifically state:
(a) Claim for Relief. A pleading that states a claim for relief must
contain. . . a short and plain statement of the grounds for the
court's jurisdiction,. . . a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and. . . a demand
for the relief sought. . The United States Supreme Court has clarified the pleadings requirement in Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) and Ashcroft v. Igbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) by ordering
that any claim for relief must specifically set out sufficient facts to establish a cause of action and
the remedy for the cause of action as well as specific factual allegations regarding the damages
requested.

Even considering Mr. Gallagher as a pro se litigant and construing the rules liberally,
there is no way to construe his pleadings comply with the Federal Rules.
The United States Magistrate Judge adequately describes his allegations and rantings. He
specifies no specific cause of action, only editorializing and surrounding each of his opinions
with meaningless legal citations.

Present before the Court is his Motion to Certify a Class pursuant to the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. Again, Mr. Gallagher fails to specify in his pleadings any legitimate class that
any federal judge could certify, particularly in light of his pleadings.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the above styled and numbered cause is
DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
SIGNED this the " day of November 2016.
SAM1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I love that you are posting all these, I wouldn't want to go on PACER and pay to do this. Just btw everyone, that is his life. I don't know how I made him so mad, but he is so mad he is spending money on this argument.

But anyways, again, all they are doing is looking for little Technicalities. They are actively trying not to take my cases, they literally don't even talk about much in the case, they just say "It was Incoherent" which just means they didn't understand it, which probably isn't even really true. They would just rather not Summon the DEA and USAG and Mallinckdrodt and Stepan Company.

At least they didn't say it was frivolous.

Again, they aren't. Not one of my cases is Frivolous. They are literally trying as hard as they can to ignore what I say, and drop the case.

 

[Finshaggy]

Notice not one of those at all says "This is not a real Religion" or anything like that.

And why don't you get some of the Transcripts of my Defensive cases, all the Cases I Won. Where they actually had to look over my points fairly because I was the Defendant, and had rights in Court that I could assert.

I won 4 Cases in Austin Municipal Court where I was the Defendant while this was going on. All those Judges knew who I was while this was happening, because I was also emailing media outlets and everything. It's not like some random Judge with no bias picked that up, and fairly looked over it, and just couldn't get over the fact that it "made no sense"; it was a Judge being influenced by the Community around him, and Police and Judges under him, and he dismissed my case.

 

[Finshaggy]

Wow I'm lying? You're sitting here pretending that I lost all these cases. As you said, it was Dismissed without prejudice, meaning that there was no ruling against me. You are sitting here trolling with legal cases.

You first said "I am not talking about wins and loses", then you said "You lost", and now you are falling back on "You lied".

And in fact I did refile that case, and if you go find it it is the one where they said I had no Standing. So your allegation that I am a liar because it was about the coherence and not the Standing is false, because the case you haven't put up here yet is the one I was talking about, before you came out and posted that one in response and called me a liar. I never said that that specific filing was dismissed for standing, but overall that case was.

Go ahead and find the refiling so you can accidentally prove that I am not a liar.

 

[Finshaggy]

And if someone could go on PACER and download all my filings in Dallas, it's like 300 pages or something like that, but if we could get a PDF or something; that would be a good discussion. The case that Dallas has been holding on to since March and has no idea how to handle it, because I filed an Administrative Claim 6 Months before filing the case, so they can't squirm out of this lawsuit like they have been.

And again, I am about to file again in Colorado, which will actually take the argument. Someone showed me their case where all they did was go to the Federal Judge and say "First Amendment" and the Judge accepted that it was their Religion. So talking about the case I file in Colorado as it goes through will be interesting also.

And if anyone wants to check out the filing in the Dallas Court, the one that they have just been sitting on for Months; here is that case. If someone could make a PDF of everything I filed and post it here that would be great.

3:17-cv-734-LBN

And when I say that I love that Pablo has been posting this stuff here I actually mean it, I am glad that people can see my cases as they went through the court, and how the Police Department and the City Decided that they were going to fight against me, and then the Federal Court caught wind after a few months and decided they wanted to join in the fight too.

And then they can see the difference between that, and my case in Dallas and my case in Denver that I am going to be filing soon.

 

[Finshaggy]

I'm glad that you love me posting this. I was worried for a bit. Now I'm not, so thank you. I haven't paid a dime for this. You're the one who's out at least a $400 filing fee - which is more than you make in a month (according to you). That had to sting.



So you're saying none of these entities have been sued by a Plaintiff, which made it past the pleading stage? Ever? Would you like me to prove you wrong?

If you are talking about Mckinney, I would actually love for you to post that. What happened in Mckinney is they won't even release my records from the jail where I was communicating with the Program's Director and she apologized for Religious violations, such as the priest telling me that I couldn't go to Bible study because I wasn't Christian. And they claim that they just can't find the records, or don't have access, and the judge won't subpoena the records for me.

So I just let that case go and went to Colorado, where I am now. I left in March and since then they have been doing the case without me.

So if you are about to post my Offensive case against Mckinney/Collin County, what you are posting is a case where I was denied access to records that would prove my case, and then they continued on without me because I went to Colorado.


And they claimed that my Lawsuit was being filed just to make their lives harder, when in fact I fled after winning a Defensive Case. What was happening was that I won a case, then while I was in jail winning my case, I had more rights violated. So I filed a big lawsuit, and they denied me access to the records. Then went along with the idea that I was just filing to give them more work to do, and that is how they went on with that. But I still have not gotten access to the records.

If anyone can call the Collin County Jail and actually get access to records for RYAN GALLAGHER from August to September 2015, I could actually refile a whole case about being denied access and win by proving the records exist.

 

[Finshaggy]

And what I really need from the Collin County System is the Grievance System Records, specifically between me and the Programs Director.

 

[Lucky Luke]

! I recommend spending some time in the led sub-forum as the lights you're working with at the moment aren't very efficient or cost effective.

What? his 1200 and 1500w (he is going to get 1500g of that one 1500w led...) lights are crap? His 100w HID and his CFLs are crap? Who knew?

They do match his plants though...


If he stopped wasting the courts time over and over again and stopped getting arrested and If he had a shower, washed his hair and got a job he could afford decent lights ....

 

[Finshaggy]

I'll show you something else also. They tried to give me a Felony in 2010 in this case, but it got dropped the first day a Judge looked at the case, and they tried to keep it on my record until 2016 when I called and started asking about it.

And you can't find that one, because they erased it from the records completely in 2016, and even told me "I don't know how you found that" but I printed it and I have a picture. So I'll go get that, and I'll get some pictures of other cases I have won, now that we have gone through all the cases where they were the Defendants and played the system.

 

[Finshaggy]

Also, if anyone wants to read how Pablo has changed his argument, because he is just a troll, here is the thread where we first talked about this
https://www.rollitup.org/t/dea-lawsuit-minus-the-trolls.924417

 

[Lucky Luke]

Also, if anyone wants to read how Pablo has changed his argument, because he is just a troll, here is the thread where we first talked about this
https://www.rollitup.org/t/dea-lawsuit-minus-the-trolls.924417

He is making you look pretty stupid isnt he?

Using facts to prove "stuff" you claim.

 

[Finshaggy]

Here is the Felony they tried to give me in 2010, then tried to get away with not taking off my record for 6 years.

The first picture is a background check place, and that is who I was talking to to make sure it was gone. But the first time I called they said it would be cleared after 2 weeks if there was no dispute, then I got this back (the one in the Picture), so then I called and talked to various people in the county, and suddenly it was gone and they were telling me "I don't know how you found that", but the first picture is what I have from the background check place, and the second picture is from the county website when it was still there. And they claim it just never happened.

Everyone go to the Collin County Court websites, or Google or wherever, and see if you can find this case existing anywhere now.

And btw, I have a clean record.

 

[Finshaggy]

I love that you are bringing all of this up, you are showing everything almost in order. I was actually just about to post a picture showing where I won the Marijuana case.

But here is some information about it, just proving that I have been saying I would win this case since the day I got to this website (that is why I actually came here, because I thought you guys would know something about the law, notice you have not proven anything about the law here today.

This thread has the information, and shows that it has been my true since I was a teenager. This is my Religion.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/police-break-the-law-marijuana-in-texas.600189/

Notice you have not shown one thing where I judge said I was wrong about my Religious argument.

 

[natureboygrower]

i have no dog in this fight,but why do you care so much? tbh,im a bit envious of all your free time.

 

[pabloesqobar]

i have no dog in this fight,but why do you care so much? tbh,im a bit envious of all your free time.

Why do you ask?