July 24, 2026  ·  Complaint filed June 26, 2026  ·  United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:26-cv-05417-UA

By David Brunk, civil litigation attorney

Read the complaint

Jan v. Trump Alleges RICO Scheme to Silence Whistleblower

Pro Se Plaintiff Claims Judges, Sheriffs, and Trump Conspired to 'Weaponize Their Offices'

Sanaz Derakhshani Jan, a California resident, has filed a verified consolidated civil RICO complaint in the Southern District of New York against former President Donald J. Trump, California Attorney General Robert Andres Bonta, U.S. Attorney General Todd Wallace Blanche, and more than a dozen other defendants. The complaint states that Donald J. Trump is "a key member of the alleged Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) enterprise" (Compl. ¶22). Jan seeks treble damages exceeding $36 trillion and an emergency injunction to halt a sham hearing scheduled for June 29, 2026.

The complaint alleges that the enterprise engaged in wire fraud, witness retaliation, and deprivation of rights under color of law, resulting in the deaths of more than 14 athletes nationwide (Compl. ¶3, IV.2). The complaint further alleges that Defendants "weaponize their offices, including the exploitation of federal authority" to dismiss Jan's complaints (Compl. ¶9).

Causes of Action Against All Defendants

The complaint asserts six primary causes of action against the defendants:

1. RICO Violation: 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961, 1962(c), 1962(d), 1964(c) (Plaintiff vs. all Defendants).
2. Wire Fraud: 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Plaintiff vs. all Defendants).
3. Witness Retaliation & Obstruction: 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (Plaintiff vs. all Defendants).
4. Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law: 18 U.S.C. § 242 (Plaintiff vs. all Defendants).
5. Civil Rights Violations: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Plaintiff vs. Defendants acting under color of law), including:
   • First Amendment violations;
   • Fourth Amendment violations;
   • Fifth Amendment violations; and
   • Fourteenth Amendment violations, encompassing retaliation, conspiracies, death threats, equal protection, and due process.
6. Obstruction of Justice: 18 U.S.C. Chapter 73 (Plaintiff vs. Defendant Richard J. Oberholzer).

Alleged Fraud in Court Proceedings

The complaint centers on the alleged fraudulent handling of Jan's case in the Orange County Superior Court, specifically in her "main RICO case," Case No 1:26-cv-05417-UA. 30-2026-01557392-CU-RI-CXC (Compl. ¶20). Jan alleges that on June 12, 2026, she filed a Form CIV-110 Request for Dismissal without prejudice at the Orange County Central Justice Center. However, on June 24, 2026, Defendant Richard J. Oberholzer, a retired citizen acting under color of authority, issued a fraudulent post-dismissal "Minute Order" from a fabricated Department C09. The complaint states that "Defendant Oberholzer is actively accepting bribes and acting as a de facto defense attorney for the co-defendants" (Compl. ¶26).

The complaint further alleges that the proceeding in Department C09 occurred "without a publicly verifiable assignment order from the Chief Justice of California" (Compl. ¶23). Defendant Lawrence Paul Yellin is accused of manipulating court logs to place Oberholzer on the bench of Department C15 without a valid assignment (Compl. ¶24). Additionally, Defendant Lori A. Kim is alleged to have illegally denied Jan's fee waiver request and recused silently, routing the file to Oberholzer (Compl. ¶12). Defendant Joanny, a Clerk Supervisor, is accused of attempting to frame Jan and calling armed deputies to intimidate her (Compl. ¶25).

Allegations of Obstruction and Intimidation

The complaint details a pattern of intimidation and obstruction, including life-threatening messages demanding Jan dismiss her lawsuits. The complaint alleges that Jan received "explicit life-threatening messages demanding the dismissal of her lawsuits under the threat of assassination" (Compl. IV.7). It further states that "non-compliance would result in her death by the Defendants and other members of the RICO enterprise" (Compl. ¶16).

Jan alleges that Defendants orchestrated physical intimidation, including slashing her vehicle tires, breaching her bank accounts to steal funds, and attempting to entrap her at her workplace (Compl. ¶17). The complaint also alleges that Defendant Johnny Chad Bianco was notified of imminent danger to Jan’s life through official channels (Compl. ¶18-19).

Broader Impact and Sought Relief

The complaint alleges that the enterprise's obstruction resulted in the deaths of 14 athletes nationwide (Compl. IV.2). Jan claims the racketeering pattern disrupted federal commerce and caused systemic harm, including the loss of 34 medals and 30 trophies held by her fiancé (Compl. ¶6).

Jan seeks compensatory damages exceeding $36 trillion, mandatory statutory trebling under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), and an immediate emergency injunction to halt the June 29, 2026, state court proceeding. The complaint also demands a grand jury investigation into the alleged RICO enterprise and a jury trial on all issues (Compl. IV.5).

The allegations in the complaint are unproven, and no defendant has yet responded to the claims. The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, with jurisdiction asserted under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c). Venue is claimed proper under 18 U.S.C. § 1965(a) and (b) due to interstate wire fraud and racketeering activities (Compl. ¶1-2).

The allegations described here are taken from the filing and remain unproven; no responsive pleading is reflected in the source document.

David Brunk is a civil litigation attorney. He can be reached at david@newmanbrunk.com.