| Keyword | Case | Docket | Date: Filed / Added |     (11286 bytes)     (6712 bytes)

Like the district court, we read the materials submitted by Mr. Presley to constitute a request that the federal courts order investigation and prosecution of various people for various crimes. Aplt. Br. at 3-8. And like the district court, we hold that such an order would improperly intrude upon the separation of powers. "Broad [prosecutorial] discretion rests largely on the recognition that the decision to prosecute is particularly ill-suited to judicial review." Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598, 607 (1985).

Mr. Presley's remaining allegations fail to state any cognizable federal claim that we can determine. While we will liberally construe the pleadings of a pro se claimant, this liberality cannot transform "vague and conclusory arguments" into valid claims for relief. Ogden v. San Juan County, 32 F.3d 452, 455 (10th Cir. 1994).

For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Stephanie K. Seymour

Circuit Judge

^*.After examining appellant's brief and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

| Keyword | Case | Docket | Date: Filed / Added |     (11286 bytes)     (6712 bytes)