COMPLAINT FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY AND FOR DECLARATORY AND EQUITABLE RELIEF: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA MICHAEL J. LINDELL and MYPILLOW, INC., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MERRICK GARLAND in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States, the United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota, and CHRISTOPHER WRAY in his official capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Defendants.

 Mike Lindell’s Complaint and TRO To Stop U.S. Government’s Abuse of Power

By Brannon Howse, 22 September, 2022

 

Lindell v. United States of America (0:22-cv-02290)

District Court, D. Minnesota

Assigned To: Eric Christian Tostrud

Referred To: Elizabeth Cowan Wright

Date Filed: Sept. 20, 2022

Date of Last Known Filing: Sept. 22, 2022

Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other

Jury Demand: Plaintiff

Jurisdiction Type: U.S. Government Defendant

   

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GSJSZkaB-hx2Fe1ATBT9uMvd70KZIVL2/view?usp=sharing

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

MICHAEL J. LINDELL and MYPILLOW, INC., Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MERRICK GARLAND in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States, the United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota, and CHRISTOPHER WRAY in his official capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,

Defendants.

INTRODUCTION

Case No. 0:22-cv-2290

COMPLAINT FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY AND FOR DECLARATORY AND EQUITABLE RELIEF

Jury Trial Demanded

COUNT I
Violation of the First Amendment

COUNT II
Violation of the Fourth Amendment
Use of cell site location information without a warrant

COUNT III
Violation of the Fourth Amendment Unreasonable Search and Seizure

COUNT IV
Violation of the Fourth Amendment Unlawful seizure of Plaintiff

COUNT V
Violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause

 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that the Court enter an Order:

(a)  Declaring that the actions of Defendants violated Mr. Lindell’s rights guaranteed by the First Amendment,

(b)  Declaring that the Defendants’ actions violated Mr. Lindell’s rights guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment,

(c)  Declaring that the Defendants’ actions violated Plaintiffs’ rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment,

(d)  Declaring that the Warrant is invalid,

(e)  Requiring under Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that the Defendants return the cell phone to Plaintiffs that it seized from them on September 13, 2022, and any data the Defendants may have accessed,

(f)  Granting a temporary restraining order prohibiting the Defendants from attempting any access to the data collected on Plaintiffs’ cell phone,

(g)  Requiring Defendants to immediately provide Plaintiffs with a copy of the Affidavit submitted to the Court to obtain the Warrant,

(h) Granting Plaintiffs the right to recover their attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses pursuant to § 28 U.S. C. 2412, and 

(i) Such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.