Secretary of the Treasury et al et al v. United States of America et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Secretary of the Treasury et al. 	)
)
Chahta Okla Nanih Foka Homma Trust, a trust 	)
organized under the laws of the State of Wyoming 	)
on behalf of the Indigenous Tribe known as Chaha 	) 	REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Okla Nanih Foka Homma; 	)
)
Ayowumi Iretemi ex rel. Bobbi Jo Helgeson et al., 	)
)
Petitioners, 	)
)
vs. 	)
)
United States of America; 	)
)
State of North Dakota; 	)
)
Wells Fargo & Company d/b/a Wells Fargo Bank, 	) 	Case No. 1:26-cv-267
N.A; 	)
)
and all other unknown persons, government 	)
agencies beneficiaries , creditors, claimants, and 	)
persons or entities claiming any right, title, estate, 	)
lien, claim, demand, security interest, beneficial 	)
interest, possessory interest, or other interest in 	)
the subject real estate, 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
On August 18, 2026, Ayowumi Iretemi (“Iretemi”) initiated the above-captioned ex rel.1 or
on behalf of Bobbi Jo Helgeson, the Chahta Okla Nanih Foka Homma Trust, and unnamed others
with the submission of an application to proceed without prepaying fees and costs and what the
undersigned construes as a proposed complaint. (Doc. Nos 1 and 1-1). Iretemi seeks, inter alia, to
1 The abbreviation ex rel. stands for ex relatione, a Latin legal term meaning "by or on the relation of.” EX
REL., Black's Law Dictionary (12th ed. 2024). “A suit ex rel. is typically brought by the government upon the
application of a private party (called a relator) who is interested in the matter.” Id.
1
Case 1:26-cv-00267-DLH-CRH Document 2 Filed 08/21/26 Page 1 of 5

quiet title to real estate described as Lot 4, Block 2, Morning Side Addition to the City of Dickinson,
Stark County, North Dakota (hereafter referred to as “the subject property”). (Doc. No. 1-1). In so
doing, Iretemi references pending federal bankruptcy proceedings concerning the subject property.
(Id. at pp. 3 through 6). Iretemi also appears to challenge the legitimacy of a pending state
foreclosure action involving the subject property on the ground that Bobbi Jo Helgeson and Andrew
E. Helgeson hold unencumbered title to the subject property. (Id. at pp. 6 thru 9). Specifically, she
alleges that “Bobby Jo Helgeson and Andrew E. Helgeson claim an unencumbered fee simple
absolute interest in the [subject property] by virtue of the Notice of Land Patent Certified and
Certificate of Acceptance of Declaration of land Patent filed with the Recorder’s Office of Stark
County, North Dakota on November 8, 2022, as Document No. 3175167.” (Id. at p. 7).
Iretemi has, by his/her own admission, no personal stake in the subject property. 2 Thus,
Iretemi has no personal entitlement to relief. Kay v. Bemis, 500 F.3d 1214, 1217 (10th Cir. 2007)
(“ Dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim is proper only where it is obvious that
the plaintiff cannot prevail on the facts he has alleged, and it would be futile to give him an
opportunity to amend.”).
Further, Iretemi is not an attorney licensed to practice law in this district. Consequently,
Iretemi cannot represent others in a representative capacity. In other words, Iretemi cannot proceed
against Defendants on behalf of Petitioners’ Bobbi Jo Helgeson, the Chahta Okla Nanih Foka
Homma Trust, or others. See Jones ex. rel., 401 F.3d at 952 (8th Cir. 2005) (affirming the district
court's order of dismissal on motion by a defendant of an action filed by a non-attorney on behalf
of others); Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 664 (9th Cir. 2008) ("[C]ourts have routinely
2 There is nothing in the pleadings to indicate that Ayowumi Iretemi is a pseudonym or alias for Bobbi Jo
Helgeson or any other named or unnamed petitioner.
2
Case 1:26-cv-00267-DLH-CRH Document 2 Filed 08/21/26 Page 2 of 5

adhered to the general rule prohibiting pro se plaintiffs from pursuing claims on behalf of others in
a representative capacity."); see e.g., Emrit v. Burnett, et al., No. 1:25-CV-00988-SMD-GJF, 2025
WL 3111012, at *2 (D.N.M. Nov. 6, 2025) (opining that Emrit could not assert claims on behalf of
his “committee” or other persons as he was not an attorney authorized to practice in the District of
New Mexico); Christenson v. City of Roseville, No. 18-1059, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 14305 at *4
(6th Cir. May 30, 2018) (“a non-lawyer ... may not bring an action on behalf of another party”); see
also D.N.D. Gen. L.R. 1.3 (B) and (C) (setting forth the eligibility and admission requirements for
the bar of this court); Jones ex. rel. v. Corr. Med. Servs., 401 F.3d 950, 951–52 (8th Cir. 2005)
(finding that a non-attorney administrator of decedent's estate may not proceed pro se on behalf of
estate); Gross v. 	United States, No. 06–4211, 2009 WL368664, at * 1 (D.S.D. Feb. 	13, 2009)
(opining that a pro se plaintiff was “not permitted to litigate the claims of the Estate or beneficiaries
of the Estate, with or without their consent, because doing so would amount to engaging in the
practice of law on behalf of others”); cf. Bailey v. Cobbs, No. 422CV00149DPMJJV, 2022 WL
22236411, at *2 (E.D. Ark. Feb. 22, 2022) (“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a),
every pleading must be signed by an attorney or pro se plaintiff, and the Court ‘must strike any
unsigned pleading unless the omission is promptly corrected.’”).
As Iretemi is the only petitioner to submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees
and costs and to sign the proposed complaint, the undersigned recommends that the Court DENY
Imereti's application to proceed without prepaying fees and costs (Doc. No. 1) and DISMISS the
above-captioned action without prejudice as Iretemi admittedly has no entitlement to relief and
cannot proceed on behalf of others.
.If any of the other named petitioners intend to proceed with a quiet title action, they each
3
Case 1:26-cv-00267-DLH-CRH Document 2 Filed 08/21/26 Page 3 of 5

must submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees and costs or pay their portion of the
civil filing fee. Greene v. Rochester Villas Apartments, Inc., No. 25-13926, 2026 WL 30640, at *2
(E.D. Mich. Jan. 5, 2026) (“[A]ll plaintiffs must file an application to proceed without prepaying
fees and costs, else the filing fee must be paid by any plaintiff who does not file such an
application.”). They each must also sign any proposed complaint they submit. Id. at *1 (citing Fed.
R. Civ. P. 11(a) for the proposition that “every pleading must be signed by each unrepresented party
it brings claims on behalf of.”).
Should petitioners submit applications to proceed without prepaying fees and costs and
submit a proposed complaint, their claims are subject to the screening standards established in 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Under this subsection, a court may dismiss a claim if it: “(I) is frivolous or
malicious, (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or (iii) seeks monetary relief
against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). To state a claim
on which relief can be granted, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true,
to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)
(quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570, (2007)). “A claim has facial plausibility
when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. “[D]etailed factual allegations” are not
necessary, and exhibits may be attached to the complaint, but the complaint itself must contain
numbered paragraphs, the complete set of factual allegations, and “more than an unadorned,
the-defendant-harmed-me accusation.” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555; Fed. R. Civ. P. 8,
10(b).
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO FILE OBJECTIONS
Objections to this Report and Recommendation are due within fourteen day of service.
4
Case 1:26-cv-00267-DLH-CRH Document 2 Filed 08/21/26 Page 4 of 5

D.N.D. Civ. L.R. 721.(D)(3). Failure to file appropriate objections may result in the recommended
action being taken without further notice or opportunity to respond.
Dated this 20th day of August, 2026.
/s/ Clare R. Hochhalter
Clare R. Hochhalter, Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
5
Case 1:26-cv-00267-DLH-CRH Document 2 Filed 08/21/26 Page 5 of 5