S. Myron Klarfeld v. United States of America United States District Court United States Marshal

944 F.2d 583 S. Myron KLARFELD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; United States District Court; United States Marshal, Defendants-Appellees. No. 89-56315. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 7, 1990 * . Decided Sept. 13, 1991. S. Myron Klarfeld, San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. James R. Sullivan, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before BROWNING, PREGERSON and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: 1 S. Myron Klarfeld appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim. Klarfeld contends the district court erred by dismissing the complaint without leave to amend. We reverse and remand. FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS 2 In his complaint, Klarfeld, an attorney, alleges that on or about April 12, 1989, he entered the United States Courthouse in Los Angeles dressed in a sports jacket, shirt and tie, slacks, loafers, and carrying only an appointment calendar. In anticipation of having to pass through the courthouse magnetometer, a mechanical device which is designed to detect metal…

concurring in the result.

I vote to reverse but on different grounds. Appellant S. Myron Klarfeld, Attorney at Law, does not challenge the government’s need to search persons seek *588 ing entry into the federal courthouse. He challenges the reasonableness of the search policy that required him to empty his pockets, remove his shoes, and walk several yards over a bare floor in his stocking feet.

As the per curiam opinion correctly points out, we have held that certain administrative searches are valid without a search warrant. United States v. $124,570 U.S. Currency, 873 F.2d 1240, 1243 (9th Cir.1989). But administrative searches nevertheless “must meet the Fourth Amendment’s standard of reasonableness.” United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 910 (9th Cir.1973). “To meet the test of reasonableness, an administrative screening must be as limited in its intrusiveness as is consistent with satisfaction of the administrative need that justifies it.” Id.

Requiring Klarfeld to remove his shoes and walk through the magnetometer a third time was not "as limited in its intrusiveness as is consistent with satisfaction of the administrative need that justifies it.” Davis, 482 F.2d at 910 .…

S. Myron Klarfeld appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim. Klarfeld contends the district court erred by dismissing the complaint without leave to amend. We reverse and remand.

FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

In his complaint, Klarfeld, an attorney, alleges that on or about April 12, 1989, he *585 entered the United States Courthouse in Los Angeles dressed in a sports jacket, shirt and tie, slacks, loafers, and carrying only an appointment calendar. In anticipation of having to pass through the courthouse magnetometer, a mechanical device which is designed to detect metal objects, Klarfeld removed his pocket change, keys, nail clipper, and wrist watch and placed them in a basket provided for that purpose. In addition, Klarfeld removed his sport jacket and placed it on the conveyor belt. When Klarfeld passed through the magnetometer, however, the alarm sounded. Klarfeld searched his pockets, removed a small pocket knife in the watch pocket of his slacks, and passed through the magnetometer a second time, whereupon the alarm sounded again. Klarfeld then alleges that he “held his arms outstretched and asked to be searched by the…