Thanks clay I knew you and others here are a wealth of good information. I thought that a claim did have to have said mineral on claim to be valid.
You are welcome Jim.
Claims do have to have a valuable mineral deposit to be valid but the courts have consistently ruled that a claimant has a right to due process and a right to develop the claim validity over time unless there is a challenge from the United States.
Unless the BLM is prepared to perform an expensive mineral examination (due process) there is no chance another prospector could legally determine whether there was a valuable mineral deposit on that claim without committing the crime of mineral trespass.
The BLM only performs mineral exams when an area has been withdrawn from the mining laws and they need to respect prior rights. A valid claim is a prior right. The BLM used to occasionally perform mineral exams before they issued a mineral patent but that won't happen again until the Congresscritters allocate the funds for processing patent applications again.
Think about this for a minute. If you could somehow magically convince the BLM to perform a mineral exam on this claim there are only two outcomes possible:
1. The claim is validated as containing a valuable mineral deposit. Result - you can't make a claim there.
2. The BLM declares the claim is invalid because there is no valuable mineral deposit. Result - you can't make a valid claim because it's been established there is no valuable mineral deposit.
Heads you lose / Tails you lose.
Of course you have the right to make a junior adverse claim over the top of the other senior claim. You would then have 30 days to file suit and serve on the senior claimant.
When the local court hears all your wonderful reasons why you should have the claim and the senior locator shouldn't the judge will have a choice - award you the claim or allow the senior claimant to sue you for mineral trespass and claim jumping. Mineral trespass and claim jumping are criminal acts. Your original suit to prove your overclaim was a simple civil act.
You could easily go from being the predator to the prey in a few minutes when suing a senior claimant. Pretty high price to pay for a chance at jumping another man's claim? The law is designed that way on purpose. Something about this country being founded on the idea that property rights are really important. The courts hate lawsuits brought to object to a locators paperwork, description or lack of claim development. That's where the term "claim jumping" came from, lawyers trying to take a man's mining claim by challenging them in court.
There is a time and place to personally challenge a claim in a civil action. The simple fact that someone doesn't think the claimant deserves the claim is not that time or place.
Heavy Pans
