NDOROMO v. BONDI

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AKUBE WUROMONI NDOROMO, )
a/k/a AKIUBER NDOROMO JAMES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 26-0195 (UNA)
)
PAM BONDI, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on initial review of Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2), and his pro se complaint (ECF No. 1). The Court GRANTS
leave to proceed in forma pauperis and DISMISSES the complaint without prejudice.
Rather than alleging facts, the complaint appears to quote portions of transcripts from
Plaintiff’s criminal case. See generally Compl. at 6-20. It further appears that Plaintiff was
convicted of criminal offenses and that certain property has been seized and forfeited. See, e.g.,
id. at 1-2. The court understands Plaintiff to challenge his conviction and sentence, to demand
compensation for wrongful imprisonment and other harms he has suffered, and to challenge the
property forfeiture. See id. at 24. Plaintiff is entitled to none of the relief he purportedly seeks.
First, a challenge to his conviction and sentence would proceed in the sentencing court by
motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and Plaintiff’s efforts failed long ago, see United States v.
Akiuber Ndoromo James, No. 1:06-cr-0019 (D.D.C. June 18, 2008) (Minute Entry) (denying
Petitioner’s § 2255 motion); see also United States v. Akiubir Ndoromo James, No. 06-cr-0019
(D.D.C. Nov. 8, 2012) (ECF No. 157) (denying petition for writ of habeas corpus construed as
one under 28 U.S.C. § 2241). Second, to the extent Plaintiff demands compensation for a
Case 1:26-cv-00195-UNA Document 3 Filed 03/24/26 Page 1 of 2

2
wrongful conviction and sentence, Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), bars such relief.
“[I]n in order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or
for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence
invalid . . . plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct
appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such
determination, or called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.”
Id. at 486-87. Plaintiff does not demonstrate that his conviction has been overturned or
otherwise rendered invalid, without which his demand for compensation fails. Third, Plaintiff’s
challenge to property forfeiture has been considered and rejected. See United States v.
$455,273.72, No. 05-cv-0356 (D.D.C. Sept. 26, 2011), aff’d, No. 11-5327 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 7,
2012).
An Order is issued separately.
/s/
TANYA S. CHUTKAN
DATE: March 20, 2026 United States District Judge
Case 1:26-cv-00195-UNA Document 3 Filed 03/24/26 Page 2 of 2