but see Hwang Geum Joo v. Japan, 172 F.Supp.2d 52, 54 & n. 1 (D.D.C.2001) (dismissing plaintiffs' World-War II era claims as nonjusticiable under the political question doctrine pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1)), aff’d on other grounds, 332 F.3d 679 (D.C.Cir.2003), vacated and remanded by-U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 2835, 159 L.Ed.2d 265 (2004); Burger-Fischer v. DeGussa AG, 65 F.Supp.2d 248, 284 (D.N.J.1999) (same). 6 . Plaintiff does not contend that it has been deprived access to the federal judiciary, and even under the liberal reading this Court must give its complaint, Plaintiff has not pleaded facts sufficient to establish that the delayed justice it has experienced rises to the level of a denial of access. See Los Angeles County Bar Ass'n v. Eu, 979 F.2d 697, 699-700, 707 (9th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). 7 . See also Raiser v. Daschle, 54 Fed.Appx.
holding that denial of access to carbon paper and reproduction equipment and denial of facetoface access to other inmates did not deprive an inmate of his right of access to the courts holding that the total denial of all access to the law library for seven months violated the plaintiffs constitutional right of access to the courts holding the delays of more than six years did not amount to the denial of access to the courts holding that an inmate alleging denial of access to the courts must show an actual injury recognizing right of prisoners to seek relief under 42 usc  1983 for denial of access to the courts