Jaden Investment Trust v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.

District Court, D. Nevada

Jaden Investment Trust v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 9 JADEN INVESTMENT TRUST,

10 Plaintiff, Case No. 2:13-cv-02153-RCJ-NJK 11 vs. ORDER 12 JP MORGAN CHASE BANK N.A., 13 Defendant. 14

15 Plaintiff attempted to register a civil judgment that it obtained from the Shaykamaxum 16 Grand Supreme Court, which as this Court noted, “There is no such American jurisdiction, and 17 there is no indication of any foreign sovereignty or recognized Indian tribe by that name.” (ECF 18 No. 18.) This Court denied this claim for lack of jurisdiction and standing. (Id.) Movant 19 Shaykamaxum Republic Tribal Nations on behalf of the Shaykamaxum Grand Supreme Court 20 moves “this court to suppress the record [of this case] from the public record via this Motion to 21 Strike from the record.” (ECF No. 23.) Movant, however, provides no authority by which this 22 remedy would be proper. Indeed, this appears to be a motion to seal the case, which is only proper 23 where the records are filed “to gratify private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous 24 statements, or release trade secrets.” Demaree v. Pederson,

887 F.3d 870, 884

(9th Cir. 2018) 1 || (quoting Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu,

447 F.3d 1172, 1179

(9th Cir. 2006)). Movant 2 || has presented no such basis, only that “documentation submitted to [this Court] did not have our 3 || authorization.” (ECF No. 23.) Movant has not shown that this Court requires such authorization. 4 CONCLUSION 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Motion to Strike (ECF No. 23) is DENIED. 6 || IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 || Dated November 30, 2020. 8 L? y 9 AL. . ROBKAT C. JONES 10 United if es District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

YQ nf 9

Reference

Status
Unknown