Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College et al
Filing
576
EXHIBIT 1 by Lawrence Crawford. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 2, # 2 Exhibit 3, # 3 Exhibit 4, # 4 Exhibit 5, # 5 Exhibit 6) *Note that the envelop of this filing states that it is being made as 2 of 2 but Clerk's Office never received envelop 1 of 2 so there is no motion to link this to on the docket*(McDonagh, Christina)
~-
*
l
~..~
.. <,-··:;i
·• l ~:
··-~
(')
,-
rn
::!
::ti=--""-~•
;n (·
~
(l) ff"]
oo
~t,
"Yl
~·
.·/
.
.J ,l
I
COURT OF APPEALS
AL .,
FOR THE 4TH . CIR CU IT ET .
----~--------------LINA
PE TIT I~N FROM SOUTH CARO
ETo AL .,)
(CASES 2:1 ~-c v-1 127 -JM C-M GB
~~~-----------------
R E C E IV E D
JAN 17 2013
S.C. SUPREME CO UR T
;
17 -69 60 ; 17 -71 39 ; 17 -71 37
NO .(S ) 17 -66 93 ; 17 -69 25 ;
DOCKET
99 ;
; 16 -21 41 ; 17 -14 15 ; '16 -22
17- 713 4; 17 -70 68 ; 16 -19 53
; 17- 753 2 ET . AL c,
17- 718 6; 17- 741 0; 17 -74 28
--------------~-----
LAWRENCE
; JASON MORRIS GOURDINE;
CHRISTOPHER DARNELL WILSON
JAHJAH
EL JAHJAH Te TIS HB ITE AKA
La CRAWFORD AKA JONAH GABRI
AL MAHDI ETm AL .,
PE TIT ION ER (S)
Vso
ER IN CASE
JUDGES WHO SIGNED THE ORD
JUDGE ROBERT E. HOOD; THE
.,
; WARDEN McFADDEN ET . AL
16 -19 53 ; THE UNITED STATES
DEFENDANT(S)
------------~------i
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
E
HEREBY CE RT IFY , THAT WE HAV
TOPHER WILSON ET . AL ., DO
WE, CHRIS
TS GIVING
Y OF AN AF FID AV IT OF FAC
MAILED AND OR SERVED A COP
ON
OR; MOTION FOR AN INJUNCTI
NOTICE; FIL ING WRIT OF ERR
JUD ICI AL
N TO CHALLENGE
MOTION FOR RECUSAL; MOTIO
AND OR PROTECTIVE ORDER;
17 -71 86 ;
UNDER CA SE( S) 17- '75 32 AND
THE COURT'S JUR ISD ICT ION
ENTS
WAIVE THE (6) MONTH STATEM
TION FOR A STAY; MOTION TO
MO
1-o f-3 4
/
'
IN CASE(S) 17-7410 AND 17-7428; MOTION 10 EXCEED THE PAGE LIMIT;
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND MOTION TO MOTION THEREFOR, ON THE 4TH.
CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AND ALL INVOLVED PARTIES BY U.S. MAIL
POSTAGE PREPAID BY DEPOSITING IT IN THE INSTITUTIO N MAILBOX
ON DECEMBER 22 1 2017.
RESPECTFULLY 6
JAHJAH AL MAHDI
'===-==~-l.~_.: ;. ~
JA~~RDINE
)
CHRISTOPHER DARNELL WILSON
DECEMBER 22, °101~
2-of-34
..
J
..
L.,_
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE 4TH. CIRC UIT ET
...
-
. . •..
. ....
0
AL.,
-·-- -- - - - - - - - --
PETIT ION FROM SOUTH CAROLINA
(CASES 2:17- cv-11 27-JM C-MG B ET. AL., )
,
-------------------DOCKET NO.( S) 17-66 93; 17-69 25; 17-69 60; 17-71
39; 17-7 137;
\
17-7 134; 17-70 68; 16-19 53; 16-21 41; 17-14 15; 16-22
99;
17-7 186; 17-74 10; 17-74 28; 17-75 32 ETc AL.,
------------~------CHRISTOPHER DARNELL WILSON; JASON MORRIS GOURDINE;
LAWRENCE
LB CRAWFORD AKA JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH T~ TISHB ITE AKA
JAHJAH
AL MAHDI ET. AL~,
PETIT IONE R(S)
Vs ..
JUDGE ROBERT E. HOOD; THE JUDGES WHO SIGNED THE
ORDER IN CASE
16-19 53; THE UNITED STAT ES; WARDEN McFADDEN ETc
AL.,
DEFENDANT(S)
-------------------AFFID AVIT OF FACTS GIVING JUDIC IAL NOTICE; FILIN
G
WRIT OF ERROR; MOTION FOR AN INJUNCTION AND OR
PROTECTIVE
ORDER; MOTION FOR RECUSAL; MOTION TO CHALLENGE
THE
COUR T'S JURIS DICT ION UNDER CASE (S) 17-75 32 AND
17-71 86;
MOTION FOR A STAY; MOTION TO WAIVE THE (6) MONTH
STATEMENTS IN CASE (S) 17-74 10 AND 17-74 28; MOTIO
N TO
EXCEED THE PAGE LIMI T; MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND
MOTION
TO MOTION THEREFOR
-------------~-----3-of- 34
'- j
.....
IN RE: TO GIVING ALL CASES CAPTIONED NOTICE OF EVENTS RELATED
TO BOTH CASE(S) 17-7532 AND 17-7186.
TO: THE 4TH .. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ET. AL.,
THE PETITIONERS IN THESE PARALLEL CASES GIVE THE
COURT AND PARTIES JUDICIAL NOTICE. HERE THE COURT IN BOTH CASE(S)
17-7532 AND 17-7186 WILL FIND:
(1) A COPY OF EXHIBIT,
11
17-6960 11 ., THIS IS THE
(65) PAGE AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS GIVING JUDICIAL NOTICE; FILING
WRIT OF ERROR;***, DATED OCTOBER 15, 2017. A TYPED VERSION OF
THE PLEADING IS ALREADY FILED IN ALL PARALLEL CASES.
(2) PLRA.APPLICATIONS TO PROCEED WITHOUT PAYMENT
OR FEES FOR GOURDINE, WILSON AND CRAWFORD, THE KING-KHALIFAH
AKA JAHJAH AL MAHDI ..
(3) A COPY OF EXHIBIT, "GOURDINE". THE [14] PAGE
AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS GIVING JUDICIAL NOTICE, FILING WRIT OF ERROR;
NOTICE OF SEEKING LEAVE TO APPEAL;***, DATED JULY 2, 2017.
(4) EXHIBIT, "MAHDI" .. A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT
OF FACTS GIVING JUDICIAL NOTICE; MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE CAUSES
OF ACTION AGAINST JUDGE HARWELL****, [23] PAGES DATED JULY 8,
2017.,
(5) A COPY OF EXHIBIT,
11
TRUSTEE 11 • THIS IS THE
DOCUMENT THAT MAKES UP CASE 16-2299.
ALL CLAIMS, ISSUES, DEFENSES, PETITIONS, MOTIONS ARGUED
WITHIN THESE DOCUMENTS ARE NOW BEING ARGUED WITHIN BOTH CASES
17-7532 AND 17-7186. ENOUGH GAMES HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE 4TH.
CIRCUIT. YOU ARE TO GRANT THE INJUNCTION AND OR PROTECTIVE ORDER
SOUGHT WITHIN THESE PARALLEL CASES. WE MOTION FOR THIS AND THAT
MOTION IS TO BE NOW GRANTED BY YOU BY DECREE AND JUDGMENT OF
THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE AND COURT WHOSE
4-of-34
,,,
~
~·r
!;ft:~'
.
\
RAND LEGISLATIVE POWER AND AU'l'liO
SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY, JUD ICIA L
DUE TO THE CLAIMS OF DEFAULT
ITY ARE BINDING UPON THI S COURT
NG FROM CASE 201 3-C P-4 00- 008 4
AND COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL EMERG1
CH THE UNITED STATES IS PARTY
IN RICHLAND COUNTY S.C . TO WHI
PROTECTED UNDER BOTH ARTICLE 1
TO THAT DEFAULT WHICH IS ALSO
OF THE U.S .. CONSTITUTION. THE
SECTION 10 AND ARTICLE IV § 2
T NOW BE DEEMED FORFEITED DUE
GRANTING OF THE INJUNCTION MUS
CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND FRAUD
TO THE OBSTRUCTION, MACHINATION,
AND ALL COURTS INVOLVED ALSO
ENGAGED IN BY THESE DEFENDANTS
T RIS ES TO AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL
PRODUCING STATE INTERFERENCE THA
THESE CLERKS AND CASE MANAGERS
LEVEL BY THE JUDGES ALSO USING
F0S upp .2d e, 200 0 WL 331 287 26
AS PROXY, MQQGKlW~-~.-~E~~~£QN 7
958 FoS upp . 761 (19 97) ; ~A~ KlW £
(S. D.I nd. 200 0); gv~ ~-~ o-£ CG ~~T
am2 014 ); 2A~ Q~~ £-~ 9-~ ALE ~r 58
v~- W~ ~ZE ~r 201 4 WL 491 881 3(D .C.P
C-& -~A ~LG Ry- ~~C ~-Y .-W MI~ ~-~ L~~ ~y
FeS upp .3d r 514 (DS C.2 014 ); LGR
r 720
(Md .20 15) ; U~£~-~~-£GU~W-~A~QL~MA
~w~~r 780 F3d . 211 CA4
14)
.-WA~~T 741 F3d . 492 CA4 (Va .20
F3d . 518 CA4 (S. C.2 013 ); WA~b-~
• IT IS SO ORDERED.
AND PARTIES JUD ICIA L NOTICE
THE PET ITIO NER S GIVE THE COURT
ENTATION OF THE FAC TS. WE ARE
TO ENSURE THERE IS NO MISREPRES
NG
THI S IS A MISNOMER .. WE ARE·ARGUI
NOT ARGUING "THEOCRATIC LAW" ..
CH
HAVE THEOCRATIC COMPONENTS WHI
11
FOREIGN LAW", WHICH HAPPEN TO
o RULES OF CIV IL PROCEDURE AND
WAS ARGUED UNDER RULE 44 OF SeC
ACT THAT WAS DEFAULTED ON BY
THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
THE (19 3) MEMBER STATES OF THE
THE S.C . ATTORNEY GENERAL AND
VATICAN AND THE UNITED STA TES ,
UNITED NATIONS WHICH INCLUDE THE
ARY
AH, IS FOREIGN SOVEREIGN FIDUCI
WHERE CRAWFORD, THE KING-KH.ll_I.-IF
IWITH SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY, JUD
HEI R TO THE (4} GLOBAL THRONES
AUTHORITY THAT IS BINDING UPON
CIA L AND LEG ISL ATI VE POWER AND
TUS AS SUCH BEFORE THI S NATION
THI S COURT, BY HIS ORIGINAL STA
FEDERAL PRo'BATE LAW, BY LEGAL
WAS FORMED VIA INTERNATIONAL AND
MADE OR UNMADE BY THE COURTS
BIN DIN G CONTRACT THAT CANNOT BE
OVED
ED IN CASE 201 3-C P-4 00- 008 4 REM
WHICH WAS ARGUED AND ESTABLISH
I TELL YOU THAT THE RULES ARE
TO THE FEDERAL COURT. SO WHEN
DED
PARALLEL CASES, THEY ARE SUSPEN
SUSPENDED WITHIN ALL OF THESE
S.C . ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OR THE
UNLESS YOU CAN SHOW THAT THE
THE AFF IDA VIT (S) OF DEFAULT AND
UNITED STATES MOVED TO DEFEAT
5-o f-3 4
,
'.•
'VOIDING OF JURISDICTION IN A TIMELY MANNER OR PRODUCE AN ORDER
THAT IS NOT TAINTED BY FRAUD OR REMOVAL. I, JAHJAH AL MAHDI,,
GIVE THE COURT AND PARTIES JUDICIAL NOTICE THAT I AM OFFICIALLY
EXERCISING THAT POWER AND AUTHORITY GIVEN BY THE DEFAULT AND
11
11
CONTRACT 11 ,
COVENANT 11 ,
ESTABLISHED BY THE SOLE CORPORATION
W~ICH IS PROTECTED UNDER BOTH ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 AND ARTICLE
IV§ 2 OF THE U.So CONSTITUTION . WHERE THERE IS CONTRACT AND
FIDUCIARY DUTY, ••• THERE IS OBLIGATION. THE OBLIGATION OF THE
CONTRACT IS THE LAW THAT BINDS JAHJAH AL MAHDI, TO ACT RENDERING
VOID CASE 17-7532 AND STAYING THAT CASE DUE TO ADDITIONAL ACTS
OF FRAUD UPON THE COURT, AND RENDER VOID ANY ACT DONE BY ASHLEY
BROWNLEE IN CASE 17-7186~ THE 4TH. CIRCUIT CANNOT MAKE (OR ALTER)
THE CONTRACT ESTABLISHED BY THE SOLE CORPORATION (MAKE ANOTHER
INTERPRETATIO N OTHER THAN THAT WHICH IS ESTABLISHED BY THE SOLE
CORPORATION, RENDERING ITS OBLIGATION OR POWER VOID BY JUDICIAL
DETERMINATION OR USE OF EX POST FACTO LAW)o I, JAHJAH AL MAHDI,
AM SOVEREIGN BY WAY OF MY ORIGINAL STATUS AS SOVEREIGN WITH
ALL SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY, JUDICIAL AND LEGISLATIVE ATTRIBUTES,
(10) THOUSAND YEARS BEFORE THIS NATION WAS FORMED WHERE THE
COURTS CANNOT MAKE A JUDICIAL DETERMINATION BASED UPON OR STANDING UPON SUCH EX POST FACTO LAW TO BURDEN THE OBLIGATION OF
THE CONTRACT AND OBSTRUCT JAHJAH AL MAHDI IN HIS FIDUCIARY OUTIES
TO MY GOD AND MY ,HOLY COMMONWEALTH WHO ARE BENEFICIARIE S OF
JU([ElU;CAW-WU~ ... -I.llllii!R~X-If;i!~ ... -<;O.,.-lil.,.-IU.~WQQC.12I.A~~.cs
CORP. 7 81 F.Supp. 157(DSC.1948 ); G~ARAW-~.-~WE-N~W-¥GRK-GI~~
Q~R~.-G~-EQU C.r F.Supp.3d., 2015 WL 4240733(N.Y. D.C.2015); ~w~~R~
NA~IGWAL-AIRGRAR~-LQCGE-l6S2-~v-l~~~RWA~IQWAL-AIRCRA~~-SERU~C~
THE
11
TRUST 11 ,
J;WC,.-+Ci:IARI.li:S~Otll.).,r- ...:02 F2d. 808,.
49 L.R.R.M.
(BNA) 2976 ( 4'i'H.Cir.
_1962); E~~E-R.-GO.-~ ,-~MQM~K~~£ r 304 U.Sm 64(1938); QGCEN-~v
~AN~ERSr 25 u.s. 213(1827); ~RY£~EE£-GR-CAR~liMOY~~-CQLL~~E-v,
WQQQWARCr 17 u.s. 518, 1819 WL 2201; ~~y~~-~.-U.5~ r 133 s.ct.
2072, 186 L.Ed.2d. 84, 81 u.s.L.W. 4372(2013); u.s.-~.-WEI.I. Sr
-
L
234 CA4 (Va.2014); £~IRES-Vv-SC~ OQLS 7 --F.Supp.3d.
--, 20t7,WL 4174774(DSC. 2017); ~lR~W-~WlRO-S ANCGR~-~.-CU C~N~
~OEE~ERr 132 s.ct. 2459, 189 L.Ed.2d. 457, 82 u.s.L.w. 4578(u.s.
578 Fed. Appx'
2014); ~W-RE~-~REEW 7 980 F2du 590(9th.Cir.1 992); AW~ERSO~-lil,
~iaER~~-LQSS Y-lWC.r 477 u.s. 242, 106 s.ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d.
'202(U.S.198 6); WlLLER-v.-~A RRi£~r F.Supp.2d., 2013 WL 1868028
6-of-34
'-
'(Ya .. 2013); WIL£Q~-~~-GMAC-MOR~G9r-LLCr F.Supp e3do, 2015 WL
5244967 (DSCo2 015)~-A ~SQ-~E E-EX~I ~I~r-~~ RU£~iE ~v
THE "TERM" OR "CONCEPT" OF A "JUDGE " OR "ATTORNEY" DO
NOT COME FROM YOU OR YOUR LAWS .. THEY DO NOT COME FROM YOUR NATION, NOR DO THEY COME FROM ENGLAND OR ENGLISH LAW. THEY COME
FROM US, THE SOLE CORPORATION 8 AND IS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
GIVEN TO YOUR NATIONS AS A "GRANT" WITH RESTRI CTIONS , AS IS
I
THE RIGHT TO LEGALLY MARRY, SET IN PLACE THROUGH ADAM AND ABRAHAM
EXHIBI T,
u MEMBERS OF THE SOLE CORPORATION AS IS ARGUED WITHIN
"TRUST EE" .. THEIR OWNERSHIP IS WITH ME, JAHJAH , AS THE FIDUCIARY
HEIR KING, KHALIFAH OF THE SOLE CORPORATION BEING THE ORIGIN AL
6
FOUNTAIN OF ALL LAW AND SOVEREIGN POWERe YOU CANNOT LEGALLY
ATTACH, ARREST OR EXECUTE THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF A FOREIGN
SOVEREIGN SOLE CORPORATION WITHOUT CONSENT, WHICH IS WITHDRAWN,
ABSENT OF ITS RIGHTS AND PREROGATIVESQ DUE TO THE DEFAULT EMER11
11
GING FROM CASE 2013-C P-400-0 084, AND BY THE COVENANT , "CON1
TRACT" , AS FIDUCIARY HEIR PROTECTED UNDER BOTH ARTICLE 1 SECTION
10 AND THE PRIVILE GE AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE OF ARTICLE IV§ 2
OF THE U~S. CONSTITUTION, THE COURT CANNOT BY MY ORIGINAL STATUS
/
RIGHTS OR PREROGATIVES,
UNDER CONTRACT TAKE AWAY THE KING'S
OR BURDEN THE OBLIGATION OF THE CONTRACTo THE EXPROPRIATION
EXCEPTION UNDER THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ACT IS ALSO INVOKED WHERE THE TAKING, ATTACHING ETC. RELATED TO THIS INTELL ECTUAL PROPERTY IS IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL AND INTERNATIONAL PROBATE
LAW, ALSO INVOLVING THE OTHER (192) MEMBER'STATES OF THE UNITED
NATIONS IN EFFORTS TO DISMANTLE MY VOTING AND DISCRETIONARY
POWERS ON THESE MA'l''i'ERS r DESTROYING THE RESTRIC TIONS PLACED
UPON THIS INTELLECTUAL. PROPERTY WHERE THERE IS NO "JUSTIC E OR
FAIRNE SS" IN VIOLATION OF THE CONTRACTu THUS DESTROYING MY CONTROL AS THE SOLE CORPORATIONe THE F.SmI~A g APPLIE S WHERE BY
YOUR ACTS THERE IS DISCRIMINATION BASED UPON NATIONALITY, RELIGION, SUCH AS MY ISRAEL I DESCENT AND THE FACT THAT I AM MUSLIM,
CHRIST IAN AND JEW COMBINED, A NOVELTYg AND I ~ OF AFRICAN BLOODe
THIS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, THESE LEGAL TERMS OR CONC,EPTS, ARE
IMMOVABLE, WHICH INCLUDE THE RIGHT TO LEGALLY MARRY BEING IMMOVABLE PROPERTY HERE IN THE UNITED STATES FALLING UNDER THE F.S.I.A .
THE U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY, CONVENTION ON JURISDI CTIONA L IMMUNITY
7-of-34
.',;
STATES AND THEIR PROPERTY, RES., 59/3
I
8, ART S. 5, 10-1 2 (DE C.
2, 2004 )(AD OPT ING A RES TRIC TIVE THEO
RY OF IMMUNITY AND WITHDRAWING IMMUNITY FOR LOSS OF PROPERTY WHE
RE, AMONG OTHER REQ UIR ~MENTS, "THE ACT OR·O MIS SION OCCURRED
IN WHOLE OR 'IN PART IN
THE TERRITORY OF THE OTHER STA TE" );
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY, REPORT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE
ON JUR ISDI CTIO NAL IMMUNITY·
OF STATES AND THEIR PROPERTY SUP P.
A/5 9/22 NOo 1, PP. 7-11 (MAR
I
1-5 , 200 4). ALSO SEE EXH IBIT , "TRU
STEE"., ALSO SEE THE CONTR)\CT
UNDER LUKE ·11: 52; ISAI AH 11:1 -5; ZECH
ARIAH 6:12 -13 ; ISAI AH 16:5 ;
isAI AH 32: 1-4 ; ISAI AH 42:1 8-22 ; JERE
MIAH 23:5 -6; JEREMIAH 33:1 521 (CRUCIAL ONE ); EZE KIEL 34:2 2-30
; EZE KIEL 37:2 2; DANIEL 11: 13; ALSO SEE alMO W-~ .-RR ~U~ ~I~- OR- WUW
GAR ~y-- FoSu pp .. 3d. --, 201 7
WL 440 229 3(D .. D.C .. 201 7); ~QL I~~A -RE~
Q~~ l~-G R-~E w~z g~~A -~.-~ E~M ii:~Gfl ".".& -~A'! i-;WE -.lW~ ERW r-I;n; ~,lI., I,;U,
I~-C ~ 137 s.,c t .. 131 2, 197 L.E d.2d
.,
663 , 85 U.,S.,L.,W" 4221 !(U .. S .. 201 7}.
·"CJ~'
STATE AND OR FEDERAL REGULATION IN
THIS CASE, OF DESCENT
AND DIST RIBU TION OF DECEDENT'S ESTA
TE MUST GIVE WAY IF SUCH
REGULATION IMP AIRS THE FIDUCIARY DUTY
AND SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY,
JUD ICIA L, LEG ISLA TIVE AND EXECUTIVE
POWER OF THE CROWN, IMP AIRI NG
EFFE CTIV E EXE RCIS E OF U.,S., FOREIGN
POLICY RELATED TO OUR FOREIGN
LEGAL SYSTEM TO INCLUDE THE SUPERSED
ING AUTHORITY AND POWER
OF THE KIN G-K HAL IFAH 'S DECREES, i£~M
ER~l~-R~-MI~LERz 389 U.S .
429 , 88 s.c t .. 664 , 19 L.E d.2d .. 683(
U .. S.,1 968 ); QQij;,..!,r.,._S:E.Q~RAI.
CEM QCR A~IC -R~~ g~~I C-0~ -~~W IQ~I Ar 189
F.Su pp.3 d., 6 (D., D.C .,20 16);
ARM igIL ~O-D IS~R I2U~ lG~- EW~ ER~ RI£E £~IW
Co-R 0-~A .l¼g w_M US~ CA~ -lW£ ~RU ~
MEN~S-MAWU~AC~URE-CO.-~~Q~r F.S upp
e3d ., 2014 WL 281 594 3(D .C.F la.
201 4); ~AS Sl~R -~~- X~!S iEW ~aQ RNE MliZ
A-C QL~ E~~ lQ~- ~QU NQA ~~Q ~r
73- F3d . 613 (9th QCi re20 13);
✓
A~-~ M~M AR~ -Y~- ~oA ~Co ~v-lW ~ER Wr- ~N~ .r
679 F3d . 205 (4th .Cir .20 12) .
IN THE GLOBAL NATIONS CONSPIRING TO
ATTACH, EXECUTE OR
ARREST THE KIN G-K HAL IFAH 'S INTELLEC
TUAL PROPERTY IN GIVING SODOMITES AND GOMORRAHRITES THE RIGHT
TO LEGALLY MARRY BY JUD ICIA L
DETERMINATION. SUCH ACTION PRODUCES
VIOLATIONS OF THE HOBBS
ACT WHICH SET FORTH PRO HIBI TION AGA
INST CONSPIRACY TO INTERFERE
WITH COMMERCE BY ROBBING, ATTACHING,
EXECUTING OR ARRESTING
THIS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS VALID
UNDER COMMERCE CLAUSE ON
8-o f-34
HAVE ESSENTIALLY
ITS FACE AND IS APPLIED TO THESE DEFENDANTS WHO
LECTUAL PROPERTY,
ROBB~D AND HIGH-JACKED THE KING-KHALIFAH'S INTEL
"GRANT" UNDER
REMOVING THE RESTRICTIONS PLACED UPON IT BY THE
HOTEL AND HONEY"CONTRACT", WHERE CATERING AND WEDDING SERV ICES,
CREDIT CARD
MOON ACCOMMODATIONS, FINANCIAL VENTURES SUCH.AS
PRODUCE COMMERCE
AND OTHER BANKING USAGES NATIONALLY AND GLOBALLY
INTERNATIONAL
ACTI VITIE S AND ARE DONE AND MADE ACROSS STATE AND
RAL, EVEN
BORDERS. THE APPLICATION OF YOUR STATE AND OR FEDE
NEXUS TO INTE RINTERNATIONAL LAWS COULD BE BASED ON DE MIN.IMUS
ACTI VITY
STATE COMMERCE, SO LONG AS STATUTE OR LAW REGULATED
TANTIAL EFFE CT
WHICH, THROUGH REPE TITIO N, IN AGGREGATE HAD SUBS
ING SERVICES
ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE, WHERE MANY OF THESE WEDD
ING GIFTS SUCH
ARE EVEN DONE ON THE INTERNET, WHICH INCLUDE WEDD
U.S. SUPREME
AS THOSE MATTERS THAT ARE PRESENTLY BEFORE THE
RIGHTS COMCOURT IN THE MASTERPIECE CAKESH0P v~ COLORADO CIVIL
TS AND PUBL IC
MISSION •.•• ADDRESSING FREE SPEECH, RELIGIOUS RIGH
e YOU ARE IN
ACCOMMODATION PRODUCING INTERSTATE COMMERCE CLAIM
u.s0 1011 , 118
VIOIL ATIO N OF THE HOBBS ACT, GU5~ 0-Y~- U~£~ x 523
sQct. 1201 (MEM) 140 LDEd a2d. 329(U .Se19 98); u~~.- ~~-W lLES r
1v § 8 Cle
122 F3d~ 235( 5thD Cir.1 997) ; U.S.C sA. CONST. ARTe
r F.Su pp.3 d.,
3; 18 UeS.C .Ae § 1951 ; UWI~iC-S~A~E£-~w-ME~C~RSON
UEr FoSu ppQ3 d.,
2016 WL 6084 637(S ~D.T ex.20 16); YW~~EC-£~A~Ea-~~-R
~QER r F.Su pp.2 d.
2015 WL 5007 930( S.D.T ex.20 15); SI~~E X-~o- ~ER~ E~RQ
, 2006 WL 3354 137(D .C.M d.200 6).
, THE
DUE TO THE AIDS THAT 'S PRODUCED BY SUCH ACTI VITY
ASSOCIATED WITH
DEBAUCHERY AND VIO~ATIONS OF RELIGIOUS BELIE FS
TO THE TERMS
SUCH PRAC TICES , THAT STAND IN BLATANT DEFIANCE
11
NO'r LAY WITH
OF THE 18 CONTRACT WHICH CLEARL~ STATE, "THOU SHALT
SHALL NOT WEAR
A MAN AS THOU LAYETH WITH A WOMAN", "THE WOMAN
NOT WEAR THAT
THAT WHICH PERTAINETH TO A MAN AND A MAN SHALL
ARE AN ABOMINATION
WHICH PERTAINETH TO A WOMAN FOR ALL THAT DO SO
E OF THE BELIEVERS
UNTO THE LORD THY GOD", "THERE SHALL BE NO WHOR
Y 22:5 AND 23:1 7.
NOR A SODOMITE OF THE BELIE VERS ". SEE DEUTERONOM
11
YOUR NATIONS
THIS IS CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE GRANT" GIVEN TO
FOREIGN SOVEREIGN
WITH REST RICTI ONS AS THUS STATED IN PART. THE
RTY EXIST ING
POWER WHOSE AUTHORITY OVER THIS INTELLECTUAL PROPE
TO PROTECT
VIA THE SOLE CORPORATION HAS THE PARAMOUNT RIGHT
9-of- 34
-·
'THE LIVES 9 HEALTHu MORALS, COMFORT AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE
PEOPLE WHICH INCLUDE HIS HOLY COMMONWEALTH WHO RESIDE WITHIN
ALL GLOBAL AND OR NATIONAL BORDERSr MQW~-~~Q~.-&-LQA~-AS~!W
v.-~AISQE~~r 290 UoS. 398, 54 ScCt. 231, 88 AaL.Rc 1481, 78
L.Ed. 413(U.S.1934 ); ~LLXQ~~-Y~-2Q ARQ-OE-£C~QQ ~-~~u~~E~a-OE
MACISGN-COW SG~~QA~EQ-SC MCQL£r--F3do- -, 2017 WL 5988226(7the Cir.
2017); ~OR~~-~ARQL I~A-A££!~-O~- EQYCA~QR£r- I~C9-Yv-S~A~E r 368
NoCo 777, 786 S.Ee2dc 25S(NoCo2016 )o SINCE THE KING-KHALIFAH
WAS NOT PARTY TO ANY OF THESE ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS IN QUESTION
DEALING WITH THIS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND YOUR COURTS HAD
NO CONSENT, THE RULINGS ARE VOID FOR FRAUD AND DUE PROCESS VIOLATION, GQRQGW-Y.-~v ~eCw-RE~AIL-~ RQURy-~WC.z FcSupp.3d., 2016
WL 4247738(DSC .2016); RE~Q-¥v-S~G-W A~ER-RE~QR~r -b~Cvr F.Supp 3d.,
0
2016 WL 2935891(DSC~ 2016); QAW-RXAW-~O b~OER£r-~~C~- ~.-CR~~A~
RIQGE-QE~~LQREMEW~r-IWC. 7 783 F3do g76, 91 Fed~ R~ SERV.3do
625(4th.Cir.2 015); WEAVER-Vv-MA££A~~U£~~~£r 137 S.Ct. 1899,
198 L.Eda2d. 420, 85 UoSoLeWo 4433(UoSe201 7); ~~R~~A-V,-~Q R~~
--Fed. Appx'--, 2017 WL 4176224(3rdo Cir.2017).
THE S5Co ATTORNEY GENERAL MUST RESPOND, NOT THE 4THB
CIRCUIT JUDGES OR YOUR CLERKS OR CASE MANAGERS ACTING AS PROXY
FOR THE JUDGES CONSPIRING UNDER COLOR OF LAW OR AUTHORITY IN
ACTS OF FRAUD UPON THE COURT TO ABSTAIN FROM ADDRESSING SUBSTANTIAL FEDERAL QUESTIONS TO CONCEAL MATERIAL FACTS IN VIOLATION
OF 18 U.S.C. §§ 242 AND 1001 RENDERING ILLEGAL THESE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS. THE S.Co ATTORNEY GENERAL OR THE FEDERAL ATTORNEYS
MUST RESPOND AND DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY TIMELY SOUGHT TO DEFEAT
. ~HE DEFAULT AND VOIDING OF JURISDICTION DGNE BY AFFIDAVIT{S)
IN CASE 2013-CP~400- 0084 OR ALL RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, TITLES AND
IMMUNITIES STANDa IN SUCH, THE 4TH. CIRCUIT, NOR YOUR CLERKS
OR CASE MANAGERS ACTING AS PROXY FOR THE JUDGES CONSPIRING TO
CREATE AN INCOMPLETE RECORD AND CIRCUMVENT RULING, ABSTAINING
FROM ANSWERING FEDERAL QUESTION, NOR THE.STATE MAY EXCLUDE A
PERSON, NAMELY, THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN FIDUCIARY KING-KHALIFAH
WITH SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY, JUDICIAL AND LEGISLATIVE POWER AND
AUTHORITY BY HIS ORIGINAL STATUS AS SUCH BEFORE THIS NATION
WAS FORMED, TO PRACTICE LAW (LAWGIVER OF GOD, ATTORNEY, JUDGE,
LEGISLATOR), OR ANY OTHER OCCUPATION GIVEN TO HIM BY "COVENANT",
l0-of-34
·J
"CONTRACT" (FIDUCIMY -KING-KHA LIFAH), IN A MANNER OR FOR REASONS
THAT CONTRAVENE THE DUE PROCESS POWER AND AUTHORITY GIVEN TO
HIM OR IN A MANNER THAT VIOLATES THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE
LAWS CLAUSE OR ARTICLE l SECTION 80 OR ARTICLE IV§ 2 OF THE
U.S. CONSTITUTION, ~!;:liWARE-1 .'~-~QARQ-Q i: ... li:XAWS-Qi:- ~W:i-S~A~li: -QE
u.s.
232, -r:, s.ct. 752, 64 A.L.R.2d. 288, 1 L.Edo2d.
796(U.S.1 957); ~Ar;;:•R~-v. -SUL~.~AW r 2017 WL 3710066(D .C.Nev.201 7);
U~R~~WlA- 2QARC-0~-M li:C•Gl~E-~. -~ACKRk£Q Wr 6~ Va. Appe 461, 796
~oW•r 353
S.E.2d. 866(2017) ; ~Q~-~~-ROG ER~~ 139 F.Supp.3do 120(D.C.C .2015);
SQ~~S-~~~Y •RG~~AA-2 ~v-G~-~AR- EXAMI~ER Sr 811 F.Supp~2d . 1260
(E.D.Va.2 011); ~~Ri:Z-v.-~ ~!ME5 ... Q.£~RIC~-G ~-CQ~UM2 XAr-l~C.r
F.Supp.3d ., 2016 WL 6124679(D .C.Mdo201 6); I~-Rli:~ ... QRli:E~r 980
F2d. 590(9th.C ir.1992). WE MOTION TO EXCEED THE PAGE LIMIT.
IT IS GRANTED.,
I, JAHJAH AL MAHDI, FULFILLED MY DUTY BY YOUR NATION'S
DUE PROCESS LAWS AND PEACEFULLY, AS A NON-COMBATANT, FILED LEGAL
ACTION TO ESTABLISH ALL RIGHTS, TITLES, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES
e
I GAVE PROPER NOTICE AND PROPERLY SERVED ALL PARTIES INCLUDING
THE UNITED STATES AND BROUGHT THE MATTERS TO THEM UNDER CASE
2013-CP-4 00-0084 WHERE WE WERE SUBJECTED TO OUTRAGEOUS ACTS
OF FRAUD UPON THE COURT, CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND OBSTRUCTION
OF JUSTICE, WHERE THEY DEFAULTED AND JURISDICTI ON WAS MADE VOID
FOR DUE PROCESS VIOLATION AND OTHE~ UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTION,
THEREU~ON THAT CASE WAS REMOVED TO THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT
WITHIN THESE PARALLEL CASES SUB-JUDIC E. THE PRIVILEGE AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE PROTECTS RIGHTS OF CITIZENS, TO INCLUDE OUT OF STATE
AND OR EVEN FOREIGN STATE CITIZENS IN THIS INSTANCE VIA THE
F.S.I.A. CONNECTIONS, TO PLY THEIR TRADE, PRACTICE THEIR OCCUPATION AND PURSUE A COMMON CALLING& IN THIS INSTANCE THE COMMON
CALLING OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE SOLE CORPORATION IS THAT OF PROPHET
, KING, KHALIFAH, IMAM, LAWGIVER AND HIGH PRIEST WITH SUPERSEDING
ATTORNEY, JUDICIAL AND LEGISLATIVE POWER AND AUTHORITY AND THE
COURTS CANNOT IMPAIR THE KING-KHALIFAH ON ACCOUNT OF HIS OUT
OF STATE CITIZENSH IP ACTING FOR PROTECTORATE PURPOSES, W~2UR~E¥
~.-~QUW~r 569 u.s. 221, l33 s.ct. 1709, 185 L.Ed.2d. 758(u.s.
2013); WEWR¥-v.-U~RWQNXr 20fl7 WL 2167t23(2 017); SCHQ~~~~~~Q ·
v.-SCWWli::t,Cli:JiU4AWr 821 F3d. 27 3 (2nd. Cir. 201 6).,
)
11 -of-34
·-
NOW LETS WITH THIS FRAUD UPON
PRODUCED IN THE FORM OF CASE 17-753 2
6960 RENDERING THIS CASE VOID AND IN
DUE PROCESS VIOLA TION, WHICH INCLUDE
THE COURT THE 4THm CIRCU IT
AS THEY DID IN CASE 17FORFEITURE FOR FRAUD AND
ALL ORDERS PRODUCED THEREIN
MAKING THIS CASE ILLEGAL AND A CRIMINAL ACT TO PROCEED WITH
17IT AS FILED . THIS INCLUDE WHAT ASHLEY BROWNLEE DID IN CASE
7186. THIS IS CHALLENGE TO THE 4TH., ·CIRCU IT'S JURISD ICTION .
CIRJURISD ICTION LIES WITH TRUSTEE JUDGE AUSTIN WHERE THE 4TH.
R
CUIT'S JURISD ICTION IS LIMITED AND RESTRICTED., SUBJECT MATTE
JURISD ICTION IS RAISED IN BOTH CASES 17-753 2 AND 17-7i8 6 AS
IT WAS IN CASE 17-696 0 AND THIS CASE AND ALL PARALLEL CASES
...
SHALL NOT FAIL TO TAKE NOTICE. SEE EXHIB IT, "17-69 60"~
WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER A PERSON HAS STANDING TO SUE,
THE COURT MUST FOCUS ON THE STATUS OF THE PARTY WHO HAS FILED
E
THE COMPLAINTm BY THE PLEADINGS WITHIN THESE CASES TO INCLUD
MAHDI,
THOSE UNDER CASE 16-229 9, EXHIB IT, "TRUSTEE"., I, JAHJAH AL
ACT"
AM FOREIGN SOVEREIGN FIDUCIARY HEIR, KING, KHALIFAH BY "CONTR
.
WITH SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY, JUDICI AL AND LEGISLATIVE POWER AND
TED
AUTHORITY WHICH CANNOT BE MADE OR UNMADE BY THE COURTS PROTEC
ITIES
UNDER BOTH ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 AND THE PRIVIL EGE AND IMMUN
CLAUSE UNDER ARTICLE IV§ 2 OF THE U~S~ CONSTITUTION, WHERE
PLAIN ALL ACTS WHERE DONE SPECIF ICALLY TO THE KING AND THE OTHER
TIFFS WHO ARE BENEF ICIARI ES OF THE ,uTRUST", WHO SOUGHT TO AID
THE KING-KHALIFAH EXERCISE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS
WITH
IN VIOLATION OF 42 u.s.c. A. § 12203 (a)(b) OF THE AMERICANS
DISAB ILITIE S ACT. WHAT AND WHO I, JAHJAH AL MAHDI AM, AS WELL
PARALLEL
!.S MY HOLY COMMONWEALTH IS, THE PETI'lI ONERS IN THESE
11
APPEA LS, WAS ESTABLISHED BY "COVENANTvv, nCONTRACT BY MY, OUR,
BE
ORIGIN AL STATUS BEFORE THIS NATION WAS FORMED WHICH CANNOT
AND
UNMADE BY THE COURTS WITH EX POST FACTO LAW. THE FIDUCIARY
'
llQQI.S r
JUDIC IAL DUTY COMMAND'S IT, 29 U., S .c.A. § U 04; Sli?J;RS :S-ll.-SC
R~
--F.SU PP.3d .~-, 2017 WL 41747 74(DS C.20t7 ); ~J;~~~- ~~~R~- 2AMCQ
~.-gu~~ ~MO~~ ~ERx 132 S.Ct. 2459, 189 L~Ed. 2d. 457, 82 U.S.Le We
4578( U.S.20 14); BER~Z -~.-~H IW~S-Q I£~RIC ~-O~-~ OLQM 2~A-~~ C.r
QL~WA
F.Sup p.3d., 2016 WL 61246 79(D.C .Md.20 16); SCQ~~-~~~sou~H-~AR
8
2017 WL 87585 8(DSC .2017) ; w~~LE ~-~.-£~ AXURO r 2016 WL 395166
U.S.
(DSC. 2016); GRY~O -QA~A ~~UX-Y .-A~LA £-G~Q2 A~-GR QU~-L .~. 7 541
12-of- 34
UMX~~-~.
dc2 de 86 6(U .S. 20 04 ); LQ
124 S.C te 19 20 , 158 L.E
56 7,
(20 14 ); ~.£ .-Y .-~ ISD A~ Er
~~ -S~ A~ Esi · 65 F.S up p~ 3d . 19
uw ~~
); S~ ~~~ ~U ~-~ ~-A Y~ gR ~-R
200 7 WL 21 56 66 6(D SC .20 07
F.S up pe 2d
81
81 7, 184 L~ Ed .2d . 62 7,
~QiCA~-CiN~~Rr 133 Se Ct .
GIOWA~-W
~Q-~.-~~QQ&~r F.S up p.2 d., 2013
.L .W . 40 53 (U .S8 20 13 ); ~.zwA
u.s
0
,
WL 70 70 18 (D SC .20 13 }c
ER
CASE. 17 -69 60 , POSSESS SEV
E CASE 17 -75 32 , AS DID
TH
TO THE H
S THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT
AL STRUCTURAL DE FIC IEN CIE
FAT
VOID
SE 17 -75 32 AND 17 -71 86
OR DOCTRINE RENDERING CA
LESS ERR
TION ES TA BL IS
T AND DUE PROCESS VIOLA
FOR FRAUD UPON THE COUR
GRANTED BY DECREE OF THE
E BY SANCTIONS SOUGHT AND
FO RF EIT UR
ST , WE MOT
BAL THEOCRATIC COURTo FIR
CH IEF JU ST ICE OF THE GLO
TON, G ·',...GORY
Z, THACKER, DA VIS , HAMIL
THE RECUSAL OF JUDGES DIA
FOR
l86 . AS LO ~
H CASES 17 -75 32 AND 17 -7f
, DUNCAN AND SHEDD IN BOT
ALLE
N THESE AND THE OTHER PAR
OF THESE JUDGES SIT UPO
AS ANY
.
T VOIDS YOUR JU RIS DI ION
VE A STRUCTURAL ERROR THA
APPEALS YOU HA
RECORD:
RULED ON, ON THE COURT
THE ISS UE OF RECUSAL IS
UNTIL
OR § 22 54 , W
§ 19 83 , NOT A MANDAMUS
UNDER THE PR OV ISI ON S OF
CA S.
RT FIL ED THE APPEAL OF
TS OF FRAUD UPON THE coµ
YOU IN AC
THE FRAUD
INGS ARE ILLEGAL DUE TO
-75 32 UNDER. THE PROCEED
17
A
NG TH IS STRUCTURAL ERROR
USE CASE 17 -75 32 PO SSE SSI
AND BECA
UGS.
GES SIT . THE LANGUAGE THE
CASE 17 -71 86 IF THESE JUD
DO
,
~£¥LYAWlAt 136 s.c t. 18 99
USED IN WlLLlAM£-H.-~EW
PRE~E COURT
AR AND UNEQUIW. 43 59 (U eS e20 16 ) IS CLE
L.E d.2 de 13 2, 84 U.S .Ls
195
'
LY ADJUDICATED CASES ON
CLAR.ITY TO ALL PREVIOUS
VOCAL GIV ING
USAL IS MANDAPRONGS. IF ONE EX IST REC
.'
SU BJE CT o THERE ARE (3)
THE ,
URT,.
UNITED STATES SUPREME CO
THE LANGUAGE USED BY .fiiE
TO RY . WATCH
A CASE
N CASE NOR CAN A MAN TRY
N SHALL SIT UPON HIS OW
NO MA
SHALL HE SIT
EST IN THE OUTCOME NOR
TO WHICH HE HAS AN INTER
IONAL LE VE L.
RIS ES TO AN UNCONSTITUT
THE PO TE NT IAL FOR BIA S
IF
THE
E OUT OF MANY" EXAMPLES
ICI AL BIAS.WAS ONLY "ON
EX TR A-J UD
ADDRESSING.
RT WA§ REFERRING TO AND
UNITED STATES SUPREME COU
PHASIS
L BIA S noF ANY KIND" (EM
E OB JEC TIV E RIS K OF ACTUA
WHEN TH
L, UNDER THE DUE PROCESS
AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVE
ADDED) RIS ES TO
OR BECOM"[N ]OT cr' A HARMLESS ERR
THE FAILURE TO RECUSE IS
CLAUSE,
ISD ICT ION
ICH VOIDS THE CO UR T'S JUR
STRUCTURAL IN NATURE WH
ING
E
9:1 7-c v-1 80 3-T MC SU BJU DIC
CESS VIO ILA TIO N. IN CASE
FOR DUE PRO
13 -of -34
1
. ,
E
S IS A COPY OF THE (44 ) PAG
AS IN THE PARALLEL APPEAL
AS WELL
THE 4T H.
, THE JUDGES SOUGHT WITHIN
MPLAINT. BY TH IS DOCUMENT
CO
REQUIRED
ELVES~ THE 4THo CIR CU IT IS
CIR CU IT MUST RECUSE THEMS
LL
0, ALL PARALLEL CASES, AS WE
DUE PROCESS LAW IN CASE 17- 696
BY
L
ON THE MOTION FOR RECUSA
17- 753 2 AND 17- 718 6 TO RULE
AS IN CASES
D§ 225 4
SOME FRAUDULENTLY PRODUCE
DER MANDAMUS, NOT UNDER
NOT UN
THESE PR OTO WHICH THEY ARE -PARTY ·To
AP PEA L, BUT UN DE R§ 198 3
WHICH MUST BE ADJUDICATED
EVEN VIA THE WRIT OF ERROR
CEEDINGS
IS IS DONE
SUBSEQUENT ACTION UNTIL TH
UN DE R§ 198 3., THUS, ANY
ION
VOIDS THE COURT'S JUR ISD ICT
A DUE PROCESS CLAIM THAT
CREATES
ER COLOR
N THE COURT CONSPIRING UND
BY THESE ACTS OF FRAUD UPO
TO
OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUS TIC E
AND OR AUTHORITY IN ACTS
OF LAW
TIALLY ORDERING
S FOR WRIT OF CE RT .,, POTEN
DENY US APPEALABLE ISS UE
G
CEEDING WITHOUT FIR ST RULIN
BE PARTY TO AN ILLEGAL PRO
US TO
4TH~ CIR CU IT
FOR RECUSALG FURTHER 6 THE
ON THE SUBMITTED MOTION
M AN N THE COURT TO ABSTAIN FRO
DITIONAL ACTS OF FRAUD UPO
IN AD
UE A RULE
, GETS JEN NIF ER RIC E TO ISS
SWERING FEDERAL QUESTION
PROCEEDINGS
3 AND 16- 214 1 WHEN THOSE
(d) NOTICE IN CASES 16- 195
40
ACH BY LAW. THE CO NS PIR ING
AND NO SUCH NOTICE CAN ATT
ARE ILLEGAL
A JUD GE /
6 USING ASHLEY BROWNLEE AS
GES THEN UNDER CASE 17- 718
JUD
IN ACTS OF
SWERING FEDERAL QUESTIONS
PROXY, _.TO ABSTAIN FROM AN
UMENT
FIL ING OF THE (70 ) PAGE DOC
UPON THE COURT, BLOCKS THE
FRAUD
INFORMAL BR IEF
ICH IS SUBSTITUTED AS THE
DATED OCTOBER 5, 201 7 WH
NG
S AND OBSTRUCT JUS TIC E USI
DENY US APPEALABLE ISS UE
TO AGAIN
ICI AL REVIEW
PREVENT FULL AND PROPER JUD
THESE CLERKS AS PROXY TO
PRO IN VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL
ISS UE S WITHIN THESE CASES
OF THE
NUAL FRAUD
o WE OBJECT TO TH IS CONTI
TECTION OF THE LAWS CLAUSE
S OF MACHINATION REQUIRING
4THG CIR CU IT JUDGES P~1D ACT
BY THESE
DUE TO SANCRE OF THE ISS UE S SOUGHT
TH EIR RECUSAL AND FORFEITU
THEO~
D BY DECREE OF THE GLOBAL
ICH ARE SOUGHT AND GRANTE
TIONS WH
EMBER 5,
MAHDI. SEE LETTER DATED DEC
CRATIC JUD GE , JAHJAH AL
-71 86 . IT IS SO ORDERED.
201 7 FIL ED IN CASE 17
ERAL
ABSTAIN FROM DECIDING FED
THE 4TH . CIR CU IT CANNOT
CONSPIRING
753 2 OR 17- 718 6 PROCEED
QUESTIONS BEFORE CASE 17APPEAL
RITY TO DENY US ISS UE S ON
COLOR OF LAW AND OR AUTHO
UNDER
TION AND FOR
ION FOR DUE PROCESS VIOLA
WHICH VOID YOUR JUR ISD ICT
P USING
N OF THE LAWS CLAUSEG STO
N OF THE EQUAL PROTECTIO
VIOLATIO
14 -of -34
TO SK IR T
AS PROXY, AS JUDGES
AND CASE MANAGERS
~I CI AL
TH ES E CLERKS
ON AND ARBITRARY JU
ABUSES OF DI SC RE TI
UR
RU LI NG , TO HI DE YO
RULING ON
S OF OF FI CE . STOP
AT IO N OF YOUR OATH
US
AC TI ON IN VI OL
FOR APPEAL. A MANDAM
BSTITUTING MANDAMUS
ISSUES OF APPEAL SU
SE MANAGERS
D THE CLERKS OR CA
TE FOR AN APPEAL AN
TE
CANNOT SU BS TI TU
MACHINATION TO CREA
A JUDGE IN ACTS OF
FOR
CANNOT SU BS TI TU TE
ST AI NI NG
PEALABLE IS SU ES , AB
CORD AND DENY US AP
E
AN INCOMPLETE RE
IN VIOLATION OF DU
FEDERAL QUESTIONS
UCIAL
FROM RULING ON CR
RC UI T JU DG ES
NS AND THE 4T H. CI
MOTION FOR SANCTIO
PROCESS LAW .. WE
CLEARLY ES TA BL ISH ED
ARE IN VIOLATION OF
L& YOU
IN QUESTION RECUSA
OF OF FI CE
WELL AS YOUR OATHS
II I SE CT IO N 1, AS
ST AT UT ES , AR TI CL E
CLEARLY ES TA BL ISH ED
INAL IN DEFIANCE TO
. CRIM
CLERKS
MAKING YOUR ACTIONS
FI CE HAVING THESE
AND THAT OATH OF OF
LE GI SL AT IV E IN TE NT
LL REVIEW IN
NDER AND IMPEDE FU
JUDGES TO BLOCK, HI
ACTING AS
86 -A a
(2 ), 19 85 (3 ) AND 19
U~ S.C e § 19 83 , .19 85
S~ S
.
VI OL AT IO N OF 42
-R QN -~ A~ R- ~~ ~~ R~ R4
2 AND 10 01 , Y. 5.- ~.
ᤤ 24
WELL AS 18 U. S. Ce
S. 19 89 );
10 3 L. Ed .2 d. 29 0( 0.
5, 11 9 s. ct . 10 27 ,
1~ ~. T 48 9 u. s. 23
44 04 26 9( 20 17 ); ~A ~E
~z --B oR .-- , 20 17 WL
-~ L~
(0 .S .
~~ -R E~ -A RG O- ~R ~C IX 7
49 8, 92 S. Ct . 17 49
'
&~W•~~~A~r 40 6 U9 S.
CARR•~R-ASS!W-~v-W
Su pp .3 d. 58 2, 20 14
-
20 -u .~ .-~ ~R RE ~C Xr
9 F.
19 72 ); u. s.- v. -$ 4~ yJ
~- 0~ -S EN A~L ~A ~~ -S R~ E~ ~- 2R IE
WL 10 29 1 u.s q- +A ~~
~I ~~ T
WL 12 66 24 0; 19 97
~.r i EQ RR ES ~~ R- ~.- W
OM -~U YR M QN ~-~ ~0 -A
y-S ~R
~Q RS -G R• ~-~ .-W A~ CM
IA M -~ .-A ~~ E~ r 46 6
s. ct . 53 8( U. S. 19 88 ); ~g ~~
48 4 u. s. 21 9, 10 8
L. Ed .,2 d. 56 5
s. ct . 19 70 , 1.9 71 -1 98 2, 80
u. s. 52_2, 53 6- 54 3, 10 4
Ed . 67 6
33 9, 34 8- j4 9, 25 L.
~R Q~ W ~A z 10 0 U. S.
(1 98 4) ; ~~ -~A R~ ~-~
~ 63 s. ct .
~-ASS~~T 39 1 u. s. 21
E-~.-~YARQRA~~Q-WlI..
px '
(1 88 0) ; ROCU
I..:&.IAM.Sr 381 Fe d. Ap
(U .S .l9 43 ); l:~-RE.;.-W~
~~ E~ g
93 8, 87 L. Ed . fl1 85
8( 4t h~ Ci rQ 20 10
28 4, 20 10 WL 22 31 ~5
1, E. D. Va ••
15 WL 11 10 94 97 , *
O); W ~L L~ AW S- Y9 -u~ i~~
£~
20
DETERMINED BY
TION OF RECUSAL AS
MUCH, ON THE QUES
INAS
R A JUDGE
11
ASKS '[N ]O T' WHETHE
COURT. THE COURT
AL
THE U. S. SUPREME
JU DI CI AL OR PERSON
(FOR EXAMPLE EXTRA
BI AS
RTED
HARBORS AN ACTUAL
PIR IN G JUDGES ASSE
SC RE TI ON THE CO NS
E OF DI
ETHER
BI AS AS IN AN ABUS
(EMPHASIS ADDED) WH
AU D) , BUT 'IN ST EA D'
FR
IN TH EI R ACTS OF
FOR BI AS OF
IS A '[P ]O TE NT IA L'
CT IV E MATTER THERE
ON AL ~
'I
, AS AN OB JE
TO AN UN CO NS TI TU TI
ADDED) THAT RI SE S
"ANY KIND" (E MP HA SIS
NAL LEVEL
CH AN UNCONSTITUTIO
CONSPICUOUS TH~T SU
LE VE L" , WHICH IS
15 -o f- 34
S AS IS
EL AND RELATED CASE
IS T IN THESE PARALL
OF' ·B IA S Db ES EX
CONCERN,
ING THESE JUDGES OF
WHAT OCCURRED INVOLV
EVIDENCED BY
17 -7 53 2
LENTLY FIL ED UNDER
TH IS CASE IS FRAUDU
WHICH INCLUDE HOW
6, ATTEMPTING
NLEE IN CASE 17 -7 18
ES USING ASHLEY BROW
A
AND THE JUDG
LSON TO FI LE IN FORM
ULATE CHRISTOPHER WI
NIP
TO FRAUDULENTLY MA
THEM
THE PLRA LANGUAGE ON
NTS THAT DO NOT HAVE
T
PA UP ER IS DOCUME
G AS LEGISLATORS, NO
CTURAL ERROR, ACTIN
STRU
TO CIRCUMVENT THE
LI NG
Y DETERMINED THAT FI
E LEGISLATORS CLEARL
N
JU DG ES , WHERE TH
THE PLRA, TO AB ST AI
BE DONE PURSUANT TO
MUST
BEFORE TH IS COURT
Y OF
THE CONSTITUTIONALIT
E SP EC IF IC ISS UE OF
FROM RULING ON TH
THESE CASES
D THE AEDPA 6 BEFORE
IS IO NS , THE PLRA AN
THESE PR OV
S ARE
ESS LAW OR THE CASE
REQUIRED BY DUE PROC
PROCEED. TH IS IS
E IN CLEAR
AND CASE MANAGERS AR
THE JU DG ES , CLERKS
ILL EG AL AND
D
D UPON THE COURT AN
OATH OF OF FIC Ec FRAU
VI OL AT IO N OF TH EI R
TO ADDRESS
ERROR IS NOW FIL ED
ERROR EX IS T. WRIT OF
STRUCTURAL
Y SU BDE R§ 19 83 BEFORE AN
TION FOR RECUSAL UN
IT . RULE ON THE MO
EGAL AND VO ID
PROCEEDINGS ARE ILL
TTER OCCURS OR ALL
SEQUENT MA
AP PE AL S,
R PENDING PARALLEL
17 -7 53 2 AND ALL OTHE
UNDER 17 -7 18 6,
S. Ct "
55_6 U., S. 86 8 u 12 9
X- CQ A. t,-C Q, ,.,. ..,I ~~ .,.
AS SE
CA 1¢E A~ Q~ -ll .. -A .~. -M
SQNr 20 16
; ~QMW£QW-Y.-S~EY~N
s2 d. 12 08 (U .S .2 00 9)
22 52 , 17 3 L. Ed
QMI~lUM£-lNCo-~•-W~AbE~
~EWWOG~-GARQRWS-~QNC
WL 11 56 64 9( DS C. 20 16 );
-~~
11+ (M d.2 01 6) ; ~ACRE£
20 16 WL 67 88 85 2u *
~R Q~ E~ Xi ES -~~ C• r
15 ); ~
Ap px ' 79 (3 rd .C ira 20
ERAL-U~£•r 61 5 Fe do
t6 );
A~~ORWEX-GE~
WL 71 77 61 5( D. M d. 20
~-~ OR ~Q ~A ~I QN r 20 16
RE .-S X~ ~A X. ~~ .~~ lA
52 4( Do OH I0 .20 16 ).
-~U ~O Xr 20 16 WL 61 08
i
1~ -R E~
,
11
11
THESE RAT, ST IN KI NG
ING THE STAKE IN
LETS FI NI SH DRIV
THE
CORRUPT JUDGES
WHAT'S GOING ON HERE
VAMPIRES HE AR TS .
AND STUNT
UP ID CRIMINAL MESS
TH IS IS THE SAME ST
4T H. CI RC UI T?
R
THE EN TIR E CASE UNDE
UNDER CASE 17 -6 96 00
YOU JUDGES PULLED
ERE IS THE
NDERING IT VO ID . WH
RRUPTED BY FRAUD RE
17 -7 53 2. IS CO
IN FORMA
ERE ARE THE FI LI NG
R CASE 17 -7 53 2? WH
FI LI NG FE E PA ID FO
T REQUIRE
17 -6 96 0, YOU DID NO
CUMENTS? AS IN CASE
PA UP ER IS DO
EN , THE
WHICH WE HAVE NOT SE
-7 53 2. IF YOU DIDu
S
SUCH FOR CASE 17
2 AS IT DOES IN CASE
EX IST IN CASE 17 -7 53
ROR
SAME STRUCTURAL ER
PENDING
R PARALLEL APPEALS
17 -6 92 5 AND THE OTHE
17 -6 96 0, 17 -6 69 3,
FRAUD THAT
PERSPICUOUS IN YOUR
E 4T H. CI RC UI T. IT S
BEFORE TH
IS
PLRA IN FORMA PAUPER
SO WE ATTACHED THE
YOU MADE A MI ST AK E.
or
16 -o f-3 4
WE DON'T
DOCUMENTS FOR THIS CASE TO HELP YOU OUT A LITTL E BIT.
STEP,
WANT YOU TO FALL AND BUMP YOUR HEAD., WATCH THAT FIRST
THE FRAUD
ITS A "DOOS EY". NOW RULE ON THE DOGGON' ISSUE S!!! STOP
17-75 32
AND FOOL ISHNE SS. IT IS SO ORDERED. THE COURT UNDER CASE
THE
AS IN CASE 17-69 60 DID NOT ISSUE ANY ORDER STATING THAT
EST INFILIN G FEES WERE WAIVED. THIS IS CLEAR ERROR AND MANIF
PLAIN ERROR
JUSTI CE. THIS CONSTITUTES AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION AND
THAT SUCH
BY YOUR FRAUD AND MACHINATION. UNLESS THE COURT RULES
COURT
A FILIN G FEE OR FORMS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, WHICH THE
VIOLATION
DID NOT DO. THE COURT CANNOT ACT AS A LEGISLATOR IN
LEGIS LATIV E
OF THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE AND UNDO A CLEAR
JUDGES
ENACTMENT REQUIRED FOR FILIN G WITHIN THIS COURT. THE
DUE PROCESS
ARE NOT LEGISLATORS WHICH VOID YOUR JURIS DICTI ON FOR
s.ct. ,310,
VIOLA TION. WE OBJEC T, ~A~K-MA~KAZ~-Y~-R~~ERSQ~~ 136
5~Q~r
194 L.Ed .2d. 463, 84 U.S.L .W. 4222( UoS~ 2016) ; U~~9- ~v-aA
818 F3d. 651(1 1th.C ir.20 16).
1
IT IS NOT THE 4TH. CIRCU IT S OR ANY COURT'S PLACE TO
WHERE ·CHANGE THE MEANING OF A CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS STATUTE;
YS A CLEAR
STATUTE' S LANGUAGE IS PLAIN AND UNAMBIGUOUS, AND CONVE
ARE
AND DEFIN ITE MEANING, RULES OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION
ER MEANING.
NOT NEEDED AND THE COURT HAS NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE ANOTH
IS CONSIDERED
WHAT THE LEGISLATORS SAY IN THE TEXT OF THE STATUTE
S~A~E
THE BEST EVIDENCE OF THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT AND WILL,
R-~.-~ ~~Lr
Vv-M~LE~ 7 --S.E .2d.- -, 2017 WL 36116 94(S. C.201 7)~ £IGNG
419 s.c.
s.E.2 d, 2017 WL 11771 1(SGC .2017) ;~£M~ ~w-~. -~~RR A~Xr
C~-~. -~AR£ l~~
548, 799 SeE.2 d. 479(S .C.20 17); 5~AR -A~~E ~E~IC Ar-~~
ss ~.s.L .W.
:JQ~J;W C-u:, 137 s.ct. 1002, 197 LQEd. ,2d. ·354·,
.e_:RAI
136 s.ct.
4139( U.S.2 017); ~~~.W Q-WQ ~OR-C A~Sr-L L~~-~ 9-~A~ ARRQ r
2117, 195 L.Ed .2d. 382, 84 U.S.L aW. 4424.
BY THAT WHICH WAS SET IN PLACE BY THE LEGISLATURE THE
00 BE
4THo CIRCU IT RULES AND DUE REQUIRE THAT A FEE OF $505.
TO FILE
PAID OR 28 U.S.C . § 1915( a)(1) REQUIRES AN AFFIDAVIT
CAN PROCEED.
IN FORMA PAUPERIS TO BE SUBMITTED BEFORE ANY MATTER
BY SENDING
THIS IS JURIS DICTI ONAL , SO WE DECIDED TO HELP YOU OUT
THE COURT
THE ONES ATTACHED. JUST LIKE THE COURT UNDER 17-69 60;
ABOUT
UNDER CASE 17-75 32 IS PROHIBITED FROM SAYING ANYTHING
17-of -34
.
'::-•
THIS CASE. THE RULES ARE SUSPENDED FOR CASE 17-7532 AS IT IS
ALSO FOR CASE 17- 71 8 6. IT IS SO ORDERED.
THE COURT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION UNDER CASE 17-753 2
UNLESS YOU HAVE ENTERED AND SERVED UPON US AN ORDER WAIVING
THE FILING FEES EXPLAINING WHY (EMPHASIS ADDED) SUCH FEES WERE
WAIVED. WE GIVE YOU JUDICIA L NOTICE . SINCE THE DOCUMENTS FOR
FILING IN FORMA PAUPERIS ARE NOW ATTACHED FOR BOTH CASES 177532 AND 17-718 6, THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE PLRA AND THE
AEDPA MUST BE ADDRESSED ON THE COURT RECORD BEFORE THESE CASES
CAN PROCEED OR THE PROCEEDINGS BECOME ILLEG.AL. BY THIS FAILUR E
THE COURT ACTED AS A LEGISLATOR, NOT A JUDGE, OVERRULING CONGRESS
WITHOUT A PROPER JUDICIA L DETERMINATION EXPLAINING "WHY", WHICH
VOIDS YOUR JURISD ICTION FOR FRAUD AND DUE .PROCESS VIOLAT ION.
THIS IS A JURISDI CTIONA L DEFECT, u.a.-U~- RQW-~ A~~-~N ~ER~2I SES
S.1989 );
J;NC ... r 489 u.s. 235, 119 s .. ct. 10~1,-1 03 L.Ed.2 d. 290(U.
~N-R~~ -ARGO -CR~CL ~r-LL~. r--B.R .. --v 2017 WL 440426 9(2017 ); U~l~~C
S~A~~S -Y~-S~E -2R~-~W X~R~RI S~S-~~~ ~r 2017 WL 422687 3(D.C.O HIO.
2017); ~WGW~SOW-R.-~INWr 2016 WL· 572436 9(2016 ); ~A~~R- ~.-0W~W Sr
2014 WL 115962 9; IW-RE~-QYRQ£ERr 2015 WL 406824 3(N.D.2 015);
£~GWE-~ ... -2AW~-G~-W~W~~QRK-M~~~QW-W.A~r 2014 WL 61480; ~GRi~~
~.-GOM MJ;SSlQ N-0~-SQ ~J;A~-S ~C~r 32 FcSupp .3d. 157; E~~A~WA~lQ~
R.-2Rll l~Xr 2015 WL 7078682 (N .. D.N .. Y.2015 ); WE£~-Y .-U~I~~ Q-S~A~ E5r
2016 WL 537578 2(2016 ); MQG~~- ~v-~~Q~ G~A-~A ~•E•C-C QR~QRA ~~GWt
F.Supp .3d., 2015 WL 930?30 7(2015 ); IW-RE~-~~~ACEr 535 B.R. 329
(2015) ; ~LA~E~ ~-Y.-WA RQr 738 F3d. 607(4t h.Cir.2 013). WE MOTION
FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT BRIEF AND THE COURT RULE
ON THESE ISSUES UNDER CASE 17-7532 BEFORE ANY I~JFORMAL BRIEF
BE REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED. THE 4TH. CIRCUIT CANNOT ABSTAIN
FROM ANSWERING FEDERAL QUESTIONS OR ORDER US TO BE PARTY IN
AN ILLEGAL PROCEEDING, ~AK~-~A RR~ER- A£5!W-~ ~-Ma~M •~~XAW r 406
u.s. 498, 92 s.ct. 1749(U .S.i972 ); Q..,S9-~... -$~~r~2 0-U.S.- ~URR~ ~C~r
9 F.Supp .3d. 582, 2014 WL 126624 0; 2RQWW -Y.-g.s. r 2014 WL 2871398
(DSC.2 014); 1997 WL 10291 u.£.~A~ ~~~~A~ ~-2R•~~ +-2R~~ ~-Oli:-U .s.
s~~A~QR S-QRJ;w _c;._._l,l A~Cllr-S ~RQW... ~lU.IRMQ NG-E'l!.., ... AI..:r; li:QRRli:S ~~R-ll.,.
WW~~~T 484 U.S. 219, 108 S.Ct. 538(Uo S.1988 ); ~U~~•AW-Vw-A~~~Wr
466 U.S. 522, 536-54 3, 104 S.Cta 1970u 1977-1 982, 80 L.Ed~2 d.
565(19 84); SA~CUS ... u .... WARCUA~~T 2014 WL 133098 4(DSC. 2014);
18-of-3 4
~
80 ).
34 9, 25 La Ed ~ 67 6( 18
~A r 10 0 U. S. 33 9, 34 8~A R~ ~-~ XR ~lW
PEAL UNDER
YOU TO LOOK AT THE AP
GO FURTHER. I WANT
LE TS
FFERENCE IN
-7 53 2. WHAT'S THE DI
-7 18 6, 17 -6 96 0 AND 17
CASES 17
OF
RC UI T JUDGES IN ACTS
S BE SID ES THE 4TH~ CI
TH ES E (3 ) APPEAL
(7 0) PAGE
PROXY TO BLOCK THE
G ASHLEY BROWNLEE. AS
FRAUD US IN
E
NS PIR IN G TO MANIPULAT
TOBER 5 1 20 17 AND CO
DOCUMENT DATED OC
FORMA PA UP ER IS DOCU
DI FF ER EN T FIL IN G IN
OUT
WILSON IN TO FIL LI NG
E PL RA
NSTITUTIONALITY OF TH
ENT RULING ON THE CO
MENTS TO CIRCUMV
CTURE OF TH E
IS NOTHINGo THE STRU
DPA? THE ANSWER, •• •
AND THE AE
E
SAME. SO THEN WHAT TH
ARE ESSENTIALLY THE
CASES SU B- JU DI CE
AND ti7 -7 53 2
UNDER CASES 17 -6 96 0
ESE CORRUPT JUDGES
HECK DO TH
17 BEAS CORPUS AND CASE
ESE CASES FIL ED AS HA
DOING HAVING TH
IF CASE 17 A § 19 83 AC TIO N? AND
SE NT IA LL Y FIL ED AS
71 86 IS ES
RE McFADDEN IS LIS TE D AS
CORPUS WHICH IS WHY
75 32 IS A HABEAS
DER CASE
WITHIN THE RECORD UN
Y IS IT NOT LIS TE D
SP ON DE NT . WH
ANCE
L IS MAKING AN APPEAR
S. C. ATTORNEY GENERA
17 -7 53 2 THAT THE
IN CASE 17 E REQUIRED TO APPEAR
17 -6 96 0? IF THEY AR
AS IN CASE
E
UNDER CASE a7 -7 53 2 DU
E REQUIRED TO APPEAR
69 60 , _THEN THEY AR
JU ST IC E
DECREE OF THE CH IEF
IT IS SO ORDERED, BY
TO YOUR FRAUD.
ATIC COURT.
OF THE GLOBAL THEOCR
2 IS THE SAME
SWER FOR CASE 17 -7 53
NO NE TH EL ES S, THE AN
TH EIR
SIN CE THEY FA ILE D IN
0~ THE 4THo CI RC UI T,
FOR CASE 17 -6 96
IS TO USE CA SE
17 -6 96 0 TH EIR PLAN
MACHINATION IN CASE
ACTS OF
R CASE 17 ASHLEY BROW,NLEE UNDE
THE ACTIONS DONE BY
17 -7 53 2 AND
K
INCORRECTLY AND BLOC
FIL IN G THE CA SE (S}
BY
71 86 TO DEFRAUD US
20 17 FROM
NT DATED OCTOBER 5 1
THE (7 0) PAGE DOCUME
THE FIL IN G OF
OF
E CO NS TIT UT IO NA LIT Y
CUMVENT RULING ON TH
BE IN G FIL ED AND CIR
LI NG OUT
ATING WILSON INTO FIL
FRAUDULENTLY MANIPUL
THE PLRA BY
M
MENTS TO ABSTAIN FRO
FORMA PA UP ER IS DOCU
DI FF ER EN T FIL IN G IN
THE 4T H.
EXPECTED US TO ENTER
E IS SU E. THEY NEVER
RULING ON TH
ICH
SES THAT FOLLOWED WH
GE OF SUBSEQUENT CA
LU
CI RC UI T WITH THE DE
D AND
11
HT AND PROVE THE FRAU
11
A MARKER TO HI GH LIG
CAN NOW ACT AS
ERKS,
CI RC UI T PA RT IE S, CL
PIRED IN BY THE 4T H.
CR IM IN AL IN TE NT CONS
RTS TO
CUSED IN TH EIR EFFO
AND, JUDGES SOUGHT RE
CASE MANAGERS
THEY KNEW
E CASES AVOID SU IT~
E DEFENDANTS IN THES
PR OT EC T TH
22 54 ,
NOT WARRANTED UN DE R§
OF JU DG ES . SUCH IS
WE SOUGHT RECUSAL
0
19 -o f-3 4
ER§ 1983 AND THEY WANTED
BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED UND
WERE SITT ING UPON THE IR
TO CONCEAL THE MATERIAL FACT THAT THEY
§§ 242 AND 1001 MAKING CASE
OWN CASES IN VIOLATION OF 18 U.S .C.
REMENTIONEDe WE ARE SEEKING
17-7 532 ILLEGAL LIKE THE OTHERS AFO
AS RULER OF THE UNITED
REPARATIONS FOR SLAVERY AND JIM CROW
AL THRONES; WE ARE SEEKING
ETH IOPI AN EMP IRE, ONE OF THE (4) GLOB
SECTION 10 AND ARTICLE IV
REL IEF FOR VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE 1
OF THE HOBBS ACT, 28
§ 2 OF THE U.S . CONSTITUTION; VIOLATIONS
, THE RICO ACT
u.s .c. § 267 9, THE F.So ieA o, THE CaAcTo TREATY
ISSUES WHICH COULD NOT HAVE
AND OATH OF OFF ICE AND OTH ER§ 1983
OF FRAUD UPON THE COURT
BEEN GRANTED UND ER§ 2254 e SO IN ACTS
UNDER CASE 17-6 960 , THEY
AND MACHINATION, JUST LIKE YOU DID
532 TO DEFRAUD US AND
ESTABLISHED THE APPEAL UNDER CASE 17-7
OF THE ESSENTIAL ISSU ES
PREVENT FAIR v PROPER AND FULL REVIEW
AL, NOT JUST UNDER CASE 17BEFORE THE COURT BY FILI NG THE APPE
A§ 2254 ACTION AS OPPOSED
696 9, BUT ALSO UNDER CASE 17-7 532 AS
CASE 17-7 186 CONSPIRED
TO A§ 198 3 WHILE ASHLEY BROWNLEE IN
DOCUMENT DATED OCTOBER
TO BLOCK THE FILI NG OF THE (70) PAGE
5, 201 7. WE OBJ ECT .
ANYTHINGe STAY
WE OBJECT TO CASE 17-7 532 'S USAGE FOR
ORDERED. THE ENTIRE CASE
THESE CASES AS WE SOUGHT. IT IS SO
, DUE TO ASHLEY BROWNLEE'S
UNDER BOTH CASE 17-7 532 AND 17-7 186
CIRC UIT JUDGES ARE CORRUPTED
RECENT ACTIONS INVOLVING THE 4THm
S STAND IN EGREGIOUS VIO LABY FRAUD UPON THE COURT AND THE CASE
PRODUCED TO CONCEAL THE MATERTION OF 18 u.s. cG §§ 242 AND 1001
JASON M. GOURDINE DID NOT
IAL FACT THAT THE KING-KHALIFAH AND
2254 AND BROWNLEE, AC'rING
:2NTER THE U.S . DIST RIC T COURT UNDER§
G THE FILI NG OF THE (70)
AS PROXY FOR THESE JUDGES IS BLOCKIN
AND TRYING TO MANIPULATE
PAGE DOCUMENT DATED OCTOBER 5, 2017
IN FORMA PAUPERIS DOCUMENTS
WILSON INTO FILL ING OUT DIFFERENT
FEDERAL QUESTION. THE CASE
TO CIRCUMVENT OR ABSTAIN RULING ON
IN THE DIST RICT COURT PURSUB -JUD ICE UNDER 17-7 532 WAS ENTERED
MANDATES OF THE ALL WRITS
SUANT TO WRIT OF ERROR WHICH BY THE
D UND ER§ 1983 NOT § 225 4,
ACT OF 28 U.Sa C• § 1651 MUST BE HEAR
OR AUTHORITY TO DENY US THE
CON SPIR ING UNDER COLOR OF LAW AND
ECTORATE PURPOSES AND BEHIND
EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS.FOR PROT
QAM £-Y. -CA L~~ QR~ iA-~ ~s~i ~u~~ Q~
REL IGIO US AND RACIAL HATRED, ~Ag L-A
20-o f-34
,.
~U~~~~r~-OR-MQMELAWO-SE
~o~i-~~-QE~AR~MEW
4; CQNA
F3 dc 93 (4 th .
, 20 16 WL 64 64 44
g. £~ -~ o~ ~A RE x 82 0
20 16 WL 17 55 87 1;
6 1 S JU R IS -- F .S up p. 3d .- -,
-7 53 2 AND 17 -7 18
(S ) 17
VOIDS BOTH CA SE
ION PL A C ir .2 01 6) TH IS
E PROCESS VIOLAT
THE COURT AND DU
,
D UPON
RED,
'
DI CT IO N FOR FRAU
. IT IS SO ORDE
L RE LI EF SOUGHT
EITURE FOR AL
C~Ar
CING YOU IN FORF
; U.S9-R.~A~EOEK
~3 28 0( D SC o2 01 4)
20 14 WL 15
., 20 07
W ~I ~~ -R .-W A ~I Sr
-Y ~£ •r Fa Su pp Q 2d
d. 20 10 ); M U~ X- R~
D aC .M
20 10 WL 40 54 26 7(
.2 00 7) .
WL 51 31 71 6( D SC
NG
ES, EVEN CONSPIRI
RI CT COURT JUDG
ST
ONCE THE UQ S. DI
IN ACTS OF FRAUD
RC UI T, ENGAGED
HIN THE 4TH. CI
STRUCTION
WITH PA RT IE S WIT
NSPIRACY AND OB
ON, CRIMINAL CO
MACHINATI
IONS OF
UPON THE COURT,
OF OF FI CE , VIOLAT
NS OF THEIR OATH
ATIO
IONS
OF JU ST IC E, VIOL
. CO NS T. , VIOLAT
AND 2 OF THE U .S
IONS 1
ARTICLE II I SECT
IGN SOVEREIGN IM
TREATY, THE FORE
THE C .A .T e
D, BY
OF THE RICO ACT,
IONS OF LAW CI TE
AND OTHER PROVIS
A .D .A .
MUNITY ACT, THE
T ORIGINALLY FI LE
ER THAT WE DID NO
SES IN A MANN
SES
ESTABLISHING CA
SI TT IN G UPON CA
ED PROCEEDINGS,
·ouR INTEND
AS
THEM, ALTERING
POTENTIAL FOR BI
OR TO WHICH THE
E DEFENDANTS
PREME
TO WHICH THEY AR
ATION OF U .S . SU
AL LEVEL IN VIOL
CE
NSTITUTION
OPERTY AND EVIDEN
RI SE S TO AN UNCO
RITS OF ERROR, PR
SPOLIATING W
v- 29 39 ,
COURT PRECEDENT,
ATE CASE 4: 16 -c
TO TIMELY REINST
OUR RIGHT
WITH
ALSO TO PREVENT
ORDER, CONSPIRING
HIN (1 0) DAYS OF
WIT
S
31 01 -3 10 7- M BS -T ER
PT. OF CORRECTION
AND THE S. Cc DE
EY GENERAL
THONY COOK
THE S. C o ATTORN
-KHALIFAH AND AN
ANSPORT THE KING
AND TR
THE
TO NOT PI CK UP
-C P- 40 0- 00 84 FOR
UNDER CASE 20 13
OCEEDINGS
THEY CAN
TO THE STATE PR
ECTIVE ORDERS SO
FRAUDULENT PROT
INING
ING
PURPOSE OF OBTA
EEDINGS, INSTRUCT
ESE FEDERAL PROC
WITHIN TH
DOCUMENT
'MAKE USE OF THEM
OF THE {7 0) PAGE
OBSTRUCT FI LI N G
TO
ANIPUASHLEY BROWNLEE
ATTEMPTING TO M
CASE 17 -7 18 6 AND
20 17 IN
PAUPERIS
DATED OCTOBER 5,
FI LI N G IN FORMA
G OUT DIFFERENT
LL IN
T AROUND
LATE HIM INTO FI
L IS SU ES AND GE
LING ON ESSENTIA
UMVENT RU
IF ER RI CE
DOCUMENTS TO CIRC
USE OF PLRA, JE NN
R THAT EX IS T BY
ERRO
EEDINGS
THE STRUCTURAL
TO ILLEGAL PROC
LE 40 (d ) NOTICE
ICAL
TACH A RU
S. C .D .C o IN PHYS
CONSPIRING TO AT
14 1, INSTRUCTING
95 3 AND 16 -2
THE COURTS
UNDER CASES 16 -1
EDED TO ACCESS
YING PROPERTY NE
, DESTRO
ATTACKS UPON US
IDENCE AND LEGAL
KE COPIES OF EV
.D .C . NOT TO MA
DOCUAND TELLING S. C
IS EVIDENCE AND
S TO PREVENT TH
NY INJUNCTION
DOCUMENTS OR DE
8
~
21 -o f- 34
FRAUDULENT
ERAL COURTS COULD PRODUCE
MENTS SUB MIS SIO N SO THE FED
IN VIO LAT ION
DATIONS OR DETERMINATIONS,
REPORTS, ORDERS, RECOMMEN
OF THE
1 AS WELL AS IN VIOLATION
OF 18 U., S.C . §§ 242 AND 100
EGULAR
IN TH EIR TOTALITY BECAME IRR
HOBBS AC T. THE PROCEEDINGS
DIS AB ILI TY
WRIT OF ERROR. WHERE CIV IL
AND INV AL ID WARRANTING THE
ENTAL
THE ILLEGAL DEPRIVING OF PAR
IN TH IS CASE EX IST SUCH AS
COURTS
IGN KING-KHALIFAH, WHERE ALL
RIGHTS OF A FOREIGN SOVERE
LIFAH
JAH AL MAHDI, THE KING-KHA
REPEATEDLY TOLD THAT I, JAH
WERE
NS HIP
NS HIP AND ADOPT THE CIT IZE
DENOUNCE HIS AMERICAN CIT IZE
ID OF THE SOLE CORPORATION
ISR AE LI FOREFATHER KING DAV
OF HIS
ER
THRONE OF ISRAEL AND THE OTH
AS THE FID UC IAR Y HE IR TO THE
LA OF SOVEREIGN RIGHTS IN VIO
BAL THRONES, THE DEPRIVING
(3) GLO
NDENCE
ED BY DECLARATION OF INDEPE
TION OF THE F.S .I Ag DECLAR
G
TO INCLUDE THE EST AB LIS HIN
IN CASE 201 3-C P-4 00- 008 4,
FIL ED
AIRED
CIARY RIGHTS WHERE THEY IMP
BEFORE THE COURT THE BENEFI
11
IN VIO LA T", 11 COVENANT , "COMPACT"
OBLIGATION OF THE "CONTRAC
THE
LATING RIGHTS
\0 OF THE UoS • CO NST ., VIO
TION OF AR TIC LE 1 SECTION
ARTICLE
E AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE OF
ABLISHED UNDER THE PRI VIL EG
EST
ING AND
EGAL ARRESTING AND OR ATTACH
IV § 2, AS WELL AS THE ILL
PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF THE
CUTING OF OUR INTELLECTUAL
OR EXE
IN THE FORM
BY THE iuGRANT", "CONTRACT"
RES TRI CTI ON S ESTABLISHED
ITES
R NATIONS GAVE THESE SODOM
RIG HT TO LEGALLY MARRY YOU
OF THE
ING INT ER UED IN CASE 16- 229 9 EFF ECT
AND GOMORRAHRITES AS IS ARG
LISHED
OF THE HOBBS ACT; ALL ESTAB
STATE COMMERCE IN VIOLATION
FROM CASE
COLLATERAL ~ST OPP EL EMERGING
BY CONTRACT, DEFAULT AND
1
WAS
KING-KHALIFAH S CONVICTION
P-4 00- 008 4; AND WHERE THE
201 3-C
THE SUP PRE SUCTURAL ERROR, TO INCLUDE
OBTAINED BY FUNDAMENTAL STR
NG STATE
INNOCENCE AND THE CONSPIRI
SIO N OF EVIDENCE OF ACTUAL
IN THE
THE BENEFICIARY PLA INT IFF S
AND FEDERAL ACTORS ATTACKED
ALIATION
DUE PROCESS MATTERS IN RET
PARALLEL AND RELATED CASES
TUTIONALLY
HIM SEEK REDRESS FOR CONSTI
BECAUSE THEY SOUGHT TO AID
0,
PLU IPA AND 42 U.S .C. §§ 200
TED RIG HTS IN VIOLATION OF
PROTEC
OR WAS THE
5(3 ) AND 198 6. WRIT OF ERR
12 20 3(a )(b ), 19 85 (2) , 198
v-3 55 5NOT JUS T UNDER CASE 8:1 4-c
RO PRI ATE VEHICLE TO FIL E
APP
RELATED
7-c v-0 180 3-T MC OR ANY OTHER
RB H-J DA , BUT ALSO UNDER 9:1
RD
COULD NOT POSSIBLY BEEN HEA
WHERE THESE ISS UE S COULD
CASE
t.
MADE IN RQ£~,_y,.,.:il:.AXEr 136 s.c
UN DE R§ 225 4. THE HOLDINGS
S.C .
TO THE STATE COURTS AND THE
185 0(2 016 ) ATTACH AND APPLY
22- of- 34
0
..... - .... ~ • - - - - - L wn.c.K.c.. J.n.uJ. i.:,m :u-." '.u..,
STR ICT COURT JUDGt:::i A~ WtL
·DI
CREATES
AND MISREPRESENTATION, IT
ACTS OF FRAUD, MACHINATION
ICLE III
NO AVAILABLE REMEDIESe ART
SIT UA TIO N WHERE THERE ARE
A
THE WRIT
ES WARRANTING THE FIL ING OF
DYNAMICS EX IST IN THESE CAS
RELY
THE DIS TR ICT COURT, NOT ME
OR THAT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE
OF ERR
NG
THE CONVICTIONS ALREADY BEI
§ 225 4 WHICH WAS ATTACHED DUE TO
E 201 3RISONMENT TORT WHICH IS CAS
INVALIDATED BY THE FALSE IMP
E TO
OR IS THE APPROPRIATE VEHICL
CP -40 0-0 084 . THE WRIT OF ERR
HALIFAH
S WHERE NEITHER THE KING-K
USE UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCE
PURSUANT
THE FEDERAL DIS TR ICT COURT
NOR JASON GOURDINE ENTERED
WRITS
ERED THE COURT UNDER THE ALL
TO 28 U.S .C. § 225 4, BUT ENT
AD JUD IOF ERROR, WHICH WAS ~O BE
OF 28 U.S .C. § 165 1, WRIT
ACT
FRAUD UPON
ORE, DUE TO THIS_CONTINUAL
CATED UN DE R§ 198 3c THEREF
NOT PROCEED
ALL PAR TIE S CASE 17- 753 2 CAN
THE COURT CONSPIRED IN BY
HION
ACKNOWLEDGED IN THE SAME FAS
AS CONSTRUCTED UNTIL IT BE
OR IS FIL ED ,
E 17- 718 6, THAT WRIT OF ERR
AS THE COURT DID UNDER CAS
PROCEED
FRAUD. CASE 17- 718 6 CANNOT
AND REMAND TO CORRECT THE
IS DOCUPLRA FIL ING IN FORMA PAUPER
UNTIL THE COURT ACCEPTS THE
(70 ) PAGE
T CASE, STOP BLOCKING THE
MENTS WE SENT THEM FOR THA
AL BR IEF
201 7 SUBMISSION AS THE INFORM
DOCUMENT DATED OCTOBER 5,
PLRA
THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE
IN CASE 17- 718 6 AND RULE ON
LARATORY
UD !!! I, WE, MOTION FOR DEC
AND THE AEDPA, STOP THE FRA
S.C t. 221 3,
Qg~ EQ QT 556 U.S e 904 # 129
JUDGMENTv ~~i ~EO -£~ A~ ~£- ~q_
~~E Q-S ~A~ E£- ~~- A~~ bi-M AC -RR Q
L.E d.2 d. 123 5(U eSe 200 9); QW
173
~~EQ-~~A~ES
104 610 5 (3r d.C ir.2 01 7); UN
CQ M~ U~ ~R r--F 3d. --, 201 7 WL
.D.
~AMMA~r 201 7 WL 118 150 9(W
QR~-~Q~~-AKA-A2QU~-WAA~~K-MQ
~.-~R~~
201 6);
~A ~~£ r 20! 6 WL 698 670 4(N .C.
_L a.2 017 ); s~~ R~ -Y. -UW l~E Q-£
~LE ~
390 294 (N. C.2 017 ); ~N -RE ~-2 AR
~-v ..-U W~ ~EQ -S~ ~~E £T 201 7 WL
C~A RK
16) ~
201 6 WL 606 886 2(4 th. Cir e20
IS A QUID PRO QUO CONTRACT
INSOMUCH, THE OATH OF OFF ICE
RE~~
2 AND 3, QAY~S-~o-~AW~~RS-SU
U.S . CONST. ARTICLE 6 Cl.
UNDER
CLERKS,
655 , 657 Tex . Ap p., IN WHICH
~QR~ORA~lONr 459 S.W .2d u
M,
GOVERNMENT PLEDGE TO PERFOR
FIC IAL S AND OFF ICE RS OF THE
OF
ITUTIONS
ITED STATES AND STATES CONST
SUPPORT AND UPHOLD THE UN
, PERKS
FOR SUBSTANCES SUCH AS WAGES
H ITS MANDATES IN RETURN
WIT
THAT
TES SUPREME COURT HAS HELD
AND BE NE FIT S. THE UNITED STA
R
EXECUTIVE, NOR JUDGE CAN EVE
STA TE, NOR LEG ISL AT OR , NOR
NO
23- of- 34
.I
WAR /AGAINST
.LJL -i.LJ .L'iU
u.1. u
vu ....... .. ,~• ••• -·•-
T Vl.V
THE CONSTITUTION W.l 'l'tl UU
OF FIC E, ~QQRER
HEART OF THEIR OATH OF
PPORT IT WHICH IS THE
TQ ~U
39 0
I
01 (19 58 ); X~ -R E~ -~~ ~L ~r
~T 35 8~ Ue S. 1, 78 Se Ctg 14
~.-AA~Q
I
P. 3~ . 72 8, 20 17 Wym 25 .
OR
ERK OR OTHER STATE AND
JU DG E, CASE MANAGERv CL
ANY
OF FIC E
i
COMPLY WITH HI S OATH OF
OF FIC IA L WHO• DOES NOT
FEqERAL
S WARS AGAINST
ION OF THE UNITED STATE
REGARDING THE CONSTITUT
ACTS IN
I
IN A FORM OF TREASONOUS
NSTITUTION AND ENGAGES
THAT CO
TH IS CASE IN
LAW OF THE LAND, AND IN
LATION OF THE SUPREME
VIO
LIFAHo
THORITY OF THE KING-KHA
N OF THE SUPERSEDING AU
VIOLATIO
COMPLY WITH
OR CLERK DOES NOT FULLY
A JUDGE OR CASE MANAGER
IF)
VO ID,
AND OR THEIR ACTS ARE
UTION THEN HIS, ORDERS
THE CONSTIT
ACTS
H A PERSON ENGAGES IN
T JU RIS DIC TIO N AND SUC
THEY ARE WITHOU
ARE SU B- ·
ION ITS EL F., PROPONENTS
N AGAINST THE CONSTITUT
OF TREASO
CONTRACT, CON,:_
REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF
TED TO PE NA LT IES AND
JEC
10 01 , AS
24 2 AND IN TH IS CASE
DER 18 U.,S.,C., §§ 241 v
SPIRACY UN
AND VIOLATIONS OF AR TIAGAINST THE CONSTITUTION
WELL AS TREASON
E~~O~K
IS OUTRAGEOUS FRAUD, AY
,
SE CT ION S TO INCLUDE .TH
CiE II I
¥
I
d. 11 12 , 11 14 ; A~~~~~A~
UT AH o2d o, 15 2, 349 P.2
~!- aA MU E~ ST 10
18 3, KEE~O~~~ACKI~G
o.c .N .Y . 218 F.S up p. 16 4,
I
I
I
1
~Q R~ ~-~ .-K lR ~¥ r
20 , 280
CO ~-Y .~S ~A ~E r 43 7 SaW•
CES ALL CONUR OATHS OF OF FIC E PLA
REFUSING TO LIV E BY YO
CA SE .
N OF YOUR OATHS IN EVERY
RT IES IN DIRECT VIOLATIO
SP IRI NG PA
FOR IMMEDIATE
FIC E IS NOT JU ST CAUSE
LATING YOUR OATHS OF OF
VIO
IS A FEDERAL CR IM Ee •~•
REMOVAL FROM OF FIC E, IT
DIS MI SS AL AND
OF FIC IA LS
OF OF FIC E BY GOVERNMENT
AL LAW REGULATING OATH
FEDER
AN EXECUTIVE ORDER WHICH
O ( 4) PARTS l'.LCNG WITH
IS DIV IDE D INT
5 U. S.C .
RPOSES OF ENFORCEMENT,
DE FIN ES THE LAW FOR PU
FURTHER
MBERS
TUAL OATH OF OF FIC E ME
IDES THE TEXT OF THE AC
§ 33 31 , PROV
E. 5 U. S.C .
KE BEFORE ASSUMING OF FIC
RESS ARE REQUIRED TO TA
OF CONG
NN AN AF FID AV IT TO DEMO
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS SIG
§ 33 33 REQUIRES
IRED BY 5
THE OATH OF OF FIC E REQU
E THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN
STRAT
TH OF
LL NOT VIOLATE THAT OA
1 AND HAVE NOT OR WI
u. s.c . § 333
THE 3r d.
OF OF FIC E AS DEFINED BY
E DURING TH EIR TENURE
OF FIC
A
ICH EX PL ICI TL Y MAKES IT
LAW, 5 U. S.C . § 731 1 WH
PART OF THE
TH OF OF FIC E
VIOLATIONS OF TH EIR OA
AL CRIMINAL OFFENSE FOR
FEDER
24 -of -34
••
WH1 CH '1'1:it:Rt: ARt,; ::i.lJ.Vl..lLAK
.l:'.t l.UL'4 i:1
-.i-n.t-n
.M..t'. t'J.il.
.1.u
ttJ.i.u
uuu, :u:..: >v
ONE
N FOR STATE OFF ICI AL S. FOR ANY
CLERKS, CASE MANAGERS AND EVE
BERS
TES GOVERNMENT,- INCLUDING MEM
EMPLOYED WITHIN THE UNITED STA
. CO NST IOVERTHROW OR VIOLATE THE U.S
OF_CONGRESS TO ADVOCATE THE
u.s .c.
URRED WITHIN THESE CASES 18
TUTION IN THE MANNER THAT OCC
18
"OATI:l OF OFF ICE
PENALTIES FO~ VIOLATIONS OF
§ 191 8 PROVIDES
R
NEVER A JUDGE OR CASE MANAGE
BED IN 5 U.S .C. § 731 10 WHE
DESCRI
DOES NOT HAVE JUR ISD ICT ION TO
OR CLERK ACTS WHERE HE OR SHE
ACTS
R OR CLERK ENGAGES IN ACT OR
ACT, THE JUDGE OR CASE MANAGE
~A~ES
T THE CONSTITUTION, YW~~~Q-S
OF TREASON, ESPECIALLY AGAINS
S.C to 471 , 66 L.E d.2 de 392 ,
~.-W ~~~ T 449 u.sG 200 , 216 , 101
5
T 19 UeSG (6 WHEAT) 264 ~ 404 ,
406 (19 80) ; QQHE~-Y~-YI~~IN~A
L.E d. 257 (18 21) .
ORNEY GENERAL AND OR FEDERAL
WHEN IT COMES TO THE SoCo ATT
THEY
POND TO THE _PLEADINGS SINCE
ATTORNEYS REQUIREMENT TO RES
L CAS ES.
008 4 REMOVED TO THESE FEDERA
APPEARED IN CASE 201 3-C P-4 00£C~E~ER-~~~~~QAQE£r 416 U.S .
TED STATES SUPREME COURT IN
THE UNI
11
OFF ICE R
UDICATED THAT WHEN A STATE
232 , 94 s.c t .. 168 3(1 974 ) ADJ
L
MANNER VIOLATIVE OF THE FEDERA
ACTS UNDER A STATE LAW IN A
HORITY
CONFLICT WITH THE SUPERIOR AUT
CONSTITUTION~ HE COMES INTO
HIS
IS IN THAT CASE STR IPP ED OF
OF THAT CON STI TUT ION , AND HE
PERSON
RACTER AND IS SUBJECT IN HIS
OFF ICI AL OR REPRESENTATIVE CHA
IVIDUAL CONDUCT. THE STATE HAS
TO THE CONSEQUENCES OF HIS IND
TO
IMMUNITY FROM RES PON SIB ILIT Y
NO POWER TO IMPART TO HIM ANY
E,
UNITED STATES AND IN THI S CAS
THE SUPREME AUTHORITY OF THE
ER
JUD ICI AL AND LEG ISL ATI VE POW
TO THE SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY,
H OF THE (4) GLOBAL THRONES.
AUTHORITY OF THE KING-KHALIFA
AND
THE
ICE R AND OR FEDERAL EMPLOYEE.,
BY LAW A JUDGE IS A STATE OFF
AL.
GE BUT AS A PRIVATE IND IVI DU
JUDGE THEN ACTS NOT AS A JUD
'S
CASES AND THE KIN G-K HA LIF AH
THERE IS TRUSTEE OVER THESE
E
FEDERAL LAW WHICH IS APPLICABL
DECREES SUPERSEDE ALL . UNDER
TIES IS "WITHOUT AUTHORITY,
STA TES , THAT IF A COURT OR PAR
TO ALL
S. THEY
ERS ARE REGARDED AS NU LLI TIE
ITS JUDGMENTS OR ACTS OR ORD
RY
ID, AND FORM NO BAR TO A RECOVE
NOT VOIDABLE, BUT SIMPLY VO
ARE
Y
AL IN OPP OSI TIO N TO THEM. THE
SOUGHT, EVEN PRIOR TO A REVERS
PERSONS CONCERNED IN EXECUTUTE NO JUS TIF ICA TIO N, AND ALL
CONSTI
25- of- 34
'TING SUCH ACTS, JUDGMENTS, OR SENTENCES ARE CONSIDERED, IN LAW,
AS TRESPASSERS". YOU CAN'T ATTACH A RULE 40(d) NOTICE TO CASES
16-1953 OR 16-2l41 AND ASHLE¥ BROWNLEE CAN'T BLOCK THE PLRA
FILING IN FORMA PAUPERIS DOCUMENTS OR THE (70) PAGE DOCUMENT
DATED OCTOBER 5, 2017 FROM BEING FILED IN CASE 17-7186, ELL~Q~~
~.-R~~RSQ~r 1 PET. 328, 340, 26 U.So 328, 340(1828)Q
WHEN JUDGES, CLERKS OR CASE MANAGERS ACT WHEN THEY DO
NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO ACT, OR THEY ENFORCE A VOID ORDER OR
ACT (AN ORDER ISSUED BY JUDGES WITHOUT JURISDICTION) THEY BECOME
TRESPASSERS OF THE LAW, AND ARE ENGAGED IN ACTS OF TREASON SET
AGAINST THEIR OATHS AND THE CONSTITUTION. THE COURT IN ~A~E£
~.-~~~~A~E-G~-WQ~~MAW-~~~A~ES 7 -i~~XNQI£r 209 FeSuppo 757(N.D.Ill.
1962) HELD THAT
11
NOT EVERY ACTION BY A JUDGE OR A CLERK OR A
CASE MANAGER IS AN EXERCISE OF THEIR SPECIFIC FUNCTION ••• IT
IS NOT A JUDICIAL, CLERICAL OR CASE MANAGER FUNCTION FOR THEM
TO COMMIT AN INTERNATIONAL TORT EVEN THOUGH THE TORT OCCURS
IN THE COURTHOUSE"., WHEN A JUDGE OR OFFICIAL ACTS AS A TRESPASSER
OF THE LAW OR HIS OATH OF OFFICE, WHEN THE JUDGE OR OFFICIAL
DOES NOT FOLLOW THE LAW OR HIS OATH OF OFFICE, THE JUDGE AND
.J
OR OFFICIAL IS SUBJECT TO DISMISSAL, CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND
LOSES SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION AND THE OFFICIAL'S ACTS AND
THE JUDGE'S ORDERS ARE VOID AND ARE OF NO LEGAL 'FORCE OR EFFECT
0
ALL ACTS ARE ILLEGAL AND VOID, WHERE IN CONFLICT WITH
THE U.Sc CONSTITUTION. NO PERSON SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE,
LIBERTY OR PROPERTY, WHICH INCLUDE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, WITHOUT
GUE PROCESS LAW, NOR SHALL HE BE ADJUDICATED OF OR TRIED FOR
ANY OFFENSE BY AN EX POS'r FACTO LAW WHERE EX POST FACTO LAW
SHALL BE PASSED AND ALL SAID RIGHTS 0 TITLES, PRIVILEGES AND
IMMUNITIES ARE INVIOLATE AND WOULD VIOLATE THE EQUAL PROTECTION
OF _THE LAWS CLAUSE, R~A.M.-G~-£QQ~~-~~QR~QAr-~~C.-Y.-W. c.~.
~QOOM~~l~A~~RSr-l~C.r 869 so.2a. 1210, 29 FLA. L. WEEKLY D. 761.
CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD IS BREACH OF LEGAL OR EQUITABLE DUTY
WHICH, IRRESPECTIVE OF MORAL GUILT, IS DECLARED BY LAW TO BE
FRAUDULENT BECAUSE OF ITS TENDENCY TO DECEIVE OTHERS OR VIOLATE
CONFIDENCE, ~AY~S-Y.-~AWX~RS-SUR~-CQ~~•r 459 S.Wo2d. 655(1970);
26-of-34
BREACH CONFORCED BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY BY FRAUD TO
PIRING PART IES. THE
TRACT IS PUNI TIVE IN NATURE BY THESE CONS
T TO PROTECT THE
FIDUCIARY SOVEREIGN POWER HAS PARAMOUNT .RIGH
WELFARE OF HIS HOLY
LIVE S, HEALTH, MORALS, COMFORT AND GENERAL
"TRU ST", El:lli:til-1il~-c;oo:cCOMMONWEALTH WHO ARE BENE FICIA RIES OF THE
iro1 988) ; CYR ~lS~l il•
¥1i:AR-~1Rli:-~-RU2S~R-~O~r 858 F2d. 198( 4th.C
.201 6); ~0Mli:-2L:C~
CAEE -~til~ li:R~ RlSE S-IW C.r 2016 WL 6916 786( NoC
54 S.Ct o 231, 88 A.L. R.
&-LG AW-A SS!ti l-Y.-~ LAlS CEL~ r 290 U~Sc 398,
I
ARC .OE- S~~Q Q~S- ~RUS ~E~
1481 , 78 L.Ed . 413( UoS .193 4); ~~~IQ ~~-Y ~-2G
2017 WL 5988 226( 7th.
O~-M A:CI SOtil -CQt ilSQ~ lCA~ li:C-S ~~QQ ~£r-- F3d.- -,
r-1Jli1~.. -v.-~ ~A~ E 7
Cir e ~ 01 7); Jli1QR~~-CARQI.,lti1A.-A55!N-OR-li:Q~.1';A~OR£
368 N.C. 777, 786 S.E. 2d. 255( N.C. 2016 )o
VALIDITY OF
THE LAW DICTATES THAT FRAUD DESTROYS THE
ASHLEY BROWNLEE AND
EVERYTHING IT ENTERS INCLUDING THE ACTS OF
ES. IT FATALLY EFFECTS
JENN IFER RICE ACTING AS PROXY FOR THE JUDG
DECREES. LABEO DEFI NES
EVEN THE MOST SOLEMN ACTS OR JUDGMENTS AND
CLE USED TO CIRCUMVENT
FRAUD TO BE ANY CUNNING DECEPTION OR ARTI
WORK ON RES JUDICATA
OR DECEIVE ANOTHER, MR. WELLS, IN HIS VERY
11
WSr
11
FRAUD VITI ATES EVERYTHING , WTJ:C:C-ll.-~URR.O
SAYS, SEC. 499,
T 98 U.S. 61-7 1(18 71);
91 U.S. 667- 683( 1875 ); Uq£q-M~-~~RQ~~MQR~QW
A~CQRtil~ 820 F3d.
24-5E~A~QR1AL-QlS~9-Rli:~U~Lb~Alli1-CQMMI~~li:E-1il~624 (4th .Cir .201 6).
186 IS VOID
JURI SDIC TION UNDER CASE 17-7 532 AS IS 17-7
CTURAL ERRORS. THESE
E"OR DUE PROCESS VIOL ATIO N, FRAUD AND sr;:•RU
LESS ERROR DOCTRINE
STRUCTURAL ERRORS DEFI ES ANALYSIS BY HARM
D, W~AYER-v.-MA.S£A~~u~
ESPE CIAL LY SINC E THERE IS TRUSTEE APPOINTE
85 u.s.L .W. 4433 (U.s .
Sli:~~ Sr 137 s.ct . 1899 , 198 L.Ed .2d. 420,
WL 4176 224( 3rd. Cir.
2017 ); ~1Rli :I.A- ~.-~Q RN 7 --Fe de App x'--, 2017
~Lli: RA~Q RS-~ CR~. T
2017 ); ~ARC lA-~~ ~A~~ lAL- ~RQY ~-~.- YlRG ~~lA -~CC
01) WHICH CAN BE RAISED
3 Fed. Appx ' 86, 2001 WL 1174 97(4 theC ir.20
ARBITRARY JUDI CIAL ,
AT ANY TIME TO VOID ALL ORDERS AND STOP THIS
OR DONE IN BOTH CASE
CLER ICAL OR OTHERWISE ACTIONS ISSUED AND
~~~E R~A~ lQ~A ~-Uti llO~
17-7 532 AND 17-7 186, SQAR C-Oi :-~RU S~~~ 5-0~285; W:S:T..I.S-i:AR~0-2AJ;i11'_,~..,.A..
QRERA~;tI:1,:11;._Jii:~GlWEii:RSr 2016 WL 1253
27-o f-34
SINCE THERE WASeNO RULING ON THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF
•Ar
THE PLRA AND THE AEDPA AS THEY RELATE TO ~X-~A R~i-Y iRGk~
~~R
100 U.S. 339, 348-3 49, 25 L.Ed. 676(1 880) AND ~~~-S~AU~S
THE 4TH.
5iOTJSi:-CASli:Sr 83 U.S. (16 WALL) 36u 1873 AND INSTEAD
WILSON
CIRCU IT CHOSE FRAUD UNDER CASE 17-71 86 TO MANIPULATE
USED PRIOR
INTO FILLI NG OUT FILIN G IN FORMA PAUPERIS DOCUMENTS
CIRCUMVENT
TO THE CLINTON ADMI NISTR ATION 'S OMNIBUS CRIME BILL TO
SOUGHT AND
RULING. THE 4THo CIRCU IT AND PARTI ES VIA SANCTIONS
L THEOCRATIC
GRANTED BY DECREE OF THE CHIEF JUSTI CE OF THE GLOBA
OR THE
COURT MUST BE DEEMED IN FORFE ITURE . ACTS OF CONGRESS
CANNOT BECOME
COURTS THAT ARE'REPUGNANT TO THE U~S. CONSTITUTION
ANY ACT
LAW OR STAND AS LAWc THE CONSTITUTION IS SUPREME TO
.SCWQQI.,
OF THE COURTS OR LEGISLATURE, EllA~~gQ-R""-~IWii:$ZIR~~llI..1U\H;l,.
U.S~r 136
CIS~R ~C~r 237 F.Sup po3d 267(W eDePa a2017 ); ~A~~Q R-Y.016).
S.Ct. 2074, 195 L.Ed. 2d. 456, 84 UeS.L .W. 4462( U.S.2
TE
INSOMUCH, YOUR ACTIONS IN HANDLING THESE MATTERS VIOLA
SOLE CORPORTHE CONTRACT, THE GRANT GIVEN TO YOUR NATIONS BY THE
TION
ATION IMPAI RING THE OBLIGATION OF THE CONTRACT IN VIOLA
2 AND
OF THE PRIVI LEGE AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE OF ARTICLE IV§
LISHING CAUSE
ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION ESTAB
CT YOUR
BEFORE ALL COURTS ALLOWING ME TO INTERVENE AND CORRE
CE, RRE£AY~~
FRAUD, CRIMI NAL CONSPIRACY AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTI
2d. 1 (U.S. 1990) ;
Vv-~w G.~9T 494 U.S. 1, 110 S.Cte 914, 108 L.Ed.
; UARR~S
SRGWN-~.-2RGWWr F.Sup p.2d. , 2013 WL 23382 33(D. C.Ky. 2013)
3); AM~RI~Al.\l
~MsIG REGG -Il:ilC ..,r F., Supp. 2d. , 201 3 1i'l'L 13 31166 ( N. C.201
p.
MU~. -~I2ER ~¥-il.\ lS.-GO .. -Y.-~~ XWQQ Q~~bA £~~~S -CQR~ .r 81 F.Sup
pp.3d .,
157(D SC.19 48); O~AR A~-Y~ -~~W- ¥QRK -Q~~~ .-G~-~ C~C.r FeSu
U~r-I~ G.r
2015 WL 42407 33(N. Y.D.C .2015 ); ~QRQ G~-~~ -~~C- ~~~A~ ~-~RQ
F.Sup p.3d. , 2016 WL 42477 38(DS C.201 6)~
CLEAR
THE LAW AS DETERMINED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IS
D WITHIN
AND UNAMBIGUOUS ON ISSUE S SUCH AS THE ONES BEING ARGUE
THE CLERKS
THESE CASE S. IF A RULING, AND WE CAN ADD THE ACTS OF
HAS BEEN
AND CASE MANAGERS JENNI FER RICE AND ASHLEY BROWNLEE,
LATIV E
OBTAINED UNDER AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATUTE AND OR LEGIS
28-of -34
~I
•
OR INTERPRETATION OF LAW AND OR ACT, WHICH INCLUDE
FRAUD. THE LAW EXPLAINED IF THIS POSITI ON IS.WEL L TAKEN, WEICH
IT IS, IT EFFECTS THE "FOUNDATION 88 OF THE 18 WHOLE 16 ( EMPHASIS ADDED
)
PROCEEDING. AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR ACT OR JUDICI AL DETER
MINATION IS VOID AND IS AS IF THERE WERE NO ACTv OR DETERMINAT~0N
. &~vvi ~iu~ AND
MADE OR DONE AT ALL, BEING A STRUCTURAL CONSTITUTIONAL ERROR
NOT SUBJECT TO THE HARMLESS ERROR DOCTRINEe THE GENERAL RULE
IS THAT AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATUTE AND OR ACT AND OR LEGISL
ATIVE
PROVISION OF LAW, THOUGH HAVING THE FORM AND NAME OF LAW, IT
IS IN REALITY NO LAW BY SUCH ACTS 8 BUT IS WHOLLY VOID AND INEFFECTIVE FOR ANY PURPOSE, WHICH INCLUDE ATTACHING A RULE 40(d)
NOTICE TO IT BY RICE IN CASES 16-195 3 AND 16-214 1 OR BROWLEE
SENDING FRAUDULENT FILING IN FORMA PAUPERIS DOCUMENTS AND BLOCK
ING THE FILING OF THE (70) PAGE DOCUMENT DATED OCTOB ERS, 2017
I
IN CASE 17-718 6 OR THIS CASE GOING FORWARD UNDER ~7-753 2 SINCE
8
ITS UNCONSTITUTIONALITY DATES FROM THE DATE OF ITS ENACTMENT
AND OR WHEN THE ACT WAS DONEGeeaIN LEGAL CONTEMPLATION, IT
IS
INOPERATIVE AS IF IT HAD NEVER BEEN PASSED OR DONE •• e.SINC E
AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND OR ACT IS VOID, THE GENERAL PRINC
IPLE
FOLLOWS THAT IT IMPOSES NO DUTY (CLERKS OR CASE MANAGERS ACTING
AS PROXY FOR THESE JUDGES CANNOT BLOCK OUR FILING S OR ATTACH
TO THEM) , CONFERS NO RIGHT S, CREATES NO OFFICE (JUDIC IAL, CLERI
CAL, CASE MANAGERS), BESTOWS NO POWER (NONE OF YOU HAVE JURISD
ICTION INCLUDING THE CLERKS AND CASE MANAGERS TO DO WHAT THEY'V
E
DONE.) OR AUTHORITY ON ANY PERSON (EMPHASIS ADDED), AFFORDS
NO PROTECTION (YOU ARE NOT IMMUNE ONCE WE'VE NOTIFI ED YON OF
THE WRONGS, AND YOU FAIL TO CORRECT OR CONTINUE IN THEM .), AND
JUSTIF IES NO ACTS PERP0RMED UNDER IT (DONE BY JENNIF ER RICE
AND ASHLEY BROWNLEE ACTING AS PROXY FOR THESE JUDGES IN FRAUD
AS WELL AS THE PLRA AND STATE vg GENTRY ISSUE S.) •••• A VOID ACT
CANNOT BE LEGALLY CONSISTENT WITH A VALID ONE. AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW CANNOT OPERATE TO SUPERSEDE ANY EXISTI NG LAW (THIS
MEANS THE LAW ESTABLISHED BEFORE THESE PROVISIONS OF LAW WERE
ENACTED _MUST NOW STAND ALLOWING US TO JOINTLY FILED , SEEK CLASS
ACTION, ETC.) . INDEED INSOFAR AS A STATUTE AND OR LEGISLATIVE
PROVI SION AND OR ACT RUN COUNTER TO THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF
THE
OF THE LAND (THE UaS. CONSTITUTION, EX PARTE VIRGI NIA, SCHWA
RE,
McBURNEY, INDICTMENTS ARE TO BE ADJUDICATED UNDER THE DUE PROCES
S
29-of- 34
I
-,----· -
-.
-------
-------•
___ ., ________ .,.,I
.--
--
__ ._...,~,...,.,_,,'-'~ ~
.A.a..1..._,:L,uu.1 .,
\
NO ONE IS BOUND TO OBEY FRAUD OR AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND
NO COURTS ARE BOUND TO ENFORCE ITe ALL LAWS, RULES (LIKE THE
RULE 40(d_) NOTICE FILED BY RICE), STATUTES (THE PLRA AND THE
AEDPA) AND PRACTICES (LIKE THE JUDGES USING THESE CLERKS AND
CASE MANAGERS TO BLOCK FILING OF DOCUMENTS, STEALING INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF THE HOBBS AND THE EXPROPRIATION EXCEPTION TO THE F.SoieA c), WHICH ARE REPUGNANT TO THE CONSTITUTION
111
ARE ,19 NULL 0 a AND 11 VOID , MA~BIJRX -R ... -MAQISQW r 5TH. U.S. ( 2 CRAN CH)
137, 180; ~~~~5-Y. -IJN~~EC ~£~A~ES 7 28 F3dc 1i23 CRIM. LAW 1163(1) ,
1165 ( 1); RQI?.;UM,3Ql)l_iz:..,._AiUU,;i:r;,n;gT 27 F3d .. 877 REHEARING DENIED CERT.
GRANTED VACATED 115 S.Ct., 1247, 513 UcSo 1186, 131 LoEd.2d .
~29; ~QgM~E~ -Y.-YW.~ EQ-£~A~ ~£r 65 FcSuppe3 d. 19(20~4 ); JQ~~aQ~
R.-IJW.~E C-S~A~~ £ 7 --S.Ct. --, 2015 WL 2473450( U.Sm201 5); WQ~~GQME~~
~.-LQY~S ~ANA~ 136 SeCt. 718, i93 LoEd.2d . 599, 84 U.SoL.We 4063
(UoS• 2016); G~R~-Qu~ QQQR£-L L~~-l,!q-~ Q~£Q~~Q A~IOW-~ ~~~-OE-~ ~C•ANA~
~OL~Si~ ~r 187 F.Supp.3 d. 1002, 1012, SaD.Ill~ ; ~.~~-~.-S W~QERr
821 F3d., 763, 765+ ( 6TH .. Cir.,MIC H.); R~Qli!I,,E- ll.,_ggr,,or N.,E.-3d. ,
2017 WL 1838423 (2017); 24-SE~A~ OR~A~-Q ~£~~-RE~ g~L~~A~- COMWI~~ EE
~.-A~~QR ~r 820 F3d. 624(4th aCir.201 6).
THE 4TH. CIRCUIT NEVER EXPECTED THE DELUGE OF PROCEEDINGS
THAT HAS NOW ENTERED INTO THE 4TH. CIRCUIT COURT WHICH NOW CREATE
EVlDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE FRAUD WHEN COMPARED WITH CASE(S)
17-7186 AND 17-6960 . AS FOREIGN SOVEREIGN KING-KHALIFAH, I,
JAHJAH AL MAHDI, GIVE THE 4TH., CIRCUIT COURT JUDICIAL NOTICE
AS A MATTER OF LAW LET IT BE KNOWN IN AND FOR THE RECORD. I,
AS KING-KHALIFAH~ DEMAND THAT JENNIFER RICE, ASHLEY BROWNLEE,
ALL CLERKS AND CASE MANAGERS, ALL JUDGES TO PRODUCE THEIR BOND
AND OR OATH OF OFFICE AND OR WRIT OF COMMISSION THAT WOULD ALLOW
ANY CLERK, CASE MANAGER OR JUDGE TO NEGATE THE TERMS OF THE
CONTRACT ESTABLISHED BY THE SOLE CORPORATION PROTECTED UNDER
BOTH THE PRIVILEG ES AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE OF ARTICLE IV§ 2
AND ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 OF THE U.,S., CONSTITUTION., FAIL TO DO
THIS THEREUPON ALL RELIEF AND DEMANDS MUST BE GRANTED NOT DENIED
ON THE COURT RECORD PRODUCING THE BOND AND OR OATH OF OFFICE
AND OR WRIT OF COMMISSION AND CITING OF LAW BEFORE CASE 17-7532
OR 17-7186 CAN BE DEEMED LEGAL DUE TO THIS FRAUD AND STRUCTURAL
30-of-34
DUE PROCESS REQ UIR~ ~.
,. ERRORS AND ALL ISSU ES BE PRESERVED AS
ON FOR DECLARATORY JUD GIT IS SO ORDEREDe I, WE, WANT AND MOTI
0 IN CASES OF ACTUAL
MENT. PURSUANT TO 28 U.Se C• §§ 2201 , 2202
STATES, UPON THE FILI NG
CONTROVERSY, •• sANY COURT OF THE UNITED
THE RIGHT AND OTHER
OF AN APPROPRIATE PLEADING, MAY DECLARE
Y SEEKING SUCH DECLARATION
LEGAL RELATIONS OF ANY INTERESTED PART
D BE SOUGHT***• I, WE
WHETHER OR NOT FURTHER REL IEF IS OR COUL
IT BRIE F TO RESET ONCE
MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBM
T RECORD TO PRESERVE
THESE. MATTERS ARE RULED ON, ON THE COUR
THESE CASES PROCEED
ALL ISSU ES FOR ANY NEEDED APPEAL BEFORE
WN-A~Q-gRENQA-aARR~~~
BY DUE PROCESS LAW, wx~~~AM-QQQGbAa-~RQ
WL 102 857 9(4t h.Ci ro20 17);
2RQWW-~.-CSX-~RAN£~QR~A~bG~-INC~z 2017
2017 WL 9763 01(D SC.2 0l7) ;
A~~S~A~E-~~S~RA~GE-~QMRA~X-~.-~~GRAMAMz
~O~ I~C. r--Fe d. App x'-- ,
~~J- ~GM MY~ ~~A ~~Q ~S-~ QRR QRA ~~G ~-Y9 -~E~
2016 WL 723 211 8(4t hoC ir.20 16)c
THAT YOU CALL
INASMUCH, BY THIS FIASCO OF DUE PROCESS
PURSUANT NOT TO JUST
17-7 532 . YOUR JURI SDIC TION IS MADE VOID
INCLUDE ANY ORDER PRO CASE 17-6 960 , BUT CASE 17-7 532 ALSOu TO
ARE SUSPENDED BY DECREE
DUCED OR CONTAINED THEREIN. THE RULES
CRATIC COURT WHOSE POWER
OF THE CHIE F JUST ICE OF THE GLOBAL THEO
ING UPON YOU VIA CONTRACT
AND AUTHORITY SUPERSEDES THIS COURT BIND
IV§ 2 AND ARTICLE
AND DEFAULT PROTECTED UNDER BOTH ARTICLE
BOTH CASES 17-7 532 AND
1 SECTION 10 OF THE UoS . CONSTITUTIONs
THE COURTS UNDER BOTH
17-7 186 ARE ESSENTIALLY ON REMAND AND
IS LIMITED AND RESTRICTED
CASES 17-7 532 AND 17-7 186 JURI SDIC TION
THIS TRAVESTY OF. PROTO ADDRESSING THE FRAUD THAT ESTABLISHED
T THE REL IEF DEMANDED.
CEEDINGSi AND TO DO NOTHING EXCEPT GRAN
AND OR WRIT OF COMMISSION
PRODUCE YOUR BOND AND OR OATH OF OFFI CE
THE PROVISIONS OF BOTH
THAT DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU CAN VIOLATE
OF THE U.So CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE IV§ 2 AND ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10
KING-KHALIFAH WHO BY
AND THE DECREES OF A FOREIGN SOVEREIGN
SUPERSEDING ATTORNEY,
HIS ORIG INAL STATUS IS SOVEREIGN WITH
RACT AND DEFAULT OR STAND
JUD ICIA L AND LEG ISLA TIVE .POWERS BY CONT
KS OR CASE MANAGERS ACTING
DOWN!!! THE 4TH. CIRC UIT, NOR ITS,C LER
E MAY EXCLUDE A PERSON,
AS PROXY FOR CORRUPT JUDGES, NOR THE STAT
Y KING-KHALIFAH WITH SUPERNAMELY~ THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN FIDUCIAR
POWER AND AUTHORITY
SEDING ATTORNEY, JUD ICIA L AND LEGISLATIVE
31~ of-3 4
•.,
·,BY HIS ORIGIN AL STATUS AS SUCH ( 10) THOUSAND YEARS BEFORE THIS
NATION WAS FORMED VIA THE SOLE ,CORPORATION STANDING UPON EX
POST FAC_TO LAW, TO . PRACTICE LAW ( LAWGIVER OF GOD) OR ANY OTHER
OCCUPATION GIVEN TO HIM BY "COVENANT", "CONTRACT" (FIDUC IARY,
KING, KHALIF AH), IN A MANNER OR FOR REASONS THAT CONTRAVENE
THE DUE PROCESS POWERS AND AUTHORITY GIVEN TO HIM OR IN A MANNER
THAT VIOLAT ES THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS WHICH IN THIS
CASE WOULD BE BEHIND RELIGIO US AND RACIAL HATRED AND FOR PROTEC ,.
TORATE PURPOS ES WHICH WOULD ALSO VIOLATE BOTH ARTICLE IV§ 2
AND ARTICL E 1 SECTION 10 OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION., THE SAME
WAY THIS NATION DID FOR THEM SODOMITES AND GOMORRAHRITES BY·
ALLOWING THEM TO MARRY BY USE OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE
LAWS CLAUSE . THE SAME WAY WE HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO UNDO IT
UNDER THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS CLAUSE WHERE YOU ATTACHED,
EXECUTED OR ARRESTED THE INTELLEC1'UAL PROPERTY OF A FOREIGN
SOVEREIGN STATE IN VIOLATION OF CONTRACT WITH OUT OUR CONSEN T.
THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS AXE SWINGS BOTH WAYS. THE SOVEREIGN POWER HAS PARAMOUNT RIGHT TO PROTECT THE LIVES, HEALTH ,
MORALS, COMFORT AND GENERAL WELFARE OF 'HIS PEOPLE AS FIDUCIA RY
HEIR WHERE THEY ARE BENEFI CIARIES OF THE "TRUST ", EJ;.I,J;;Q~~-Y ....
SQARC- O~-~GW QO~-~R US~E~S- GE-WAQ ~5GW-C Q~£QL• CA~~Q- SCUQQ~ Sr--F3d. -
--, 2017 WL 598822 6(7th.C ir_\201 7); NQR~J;i-CARQI..•I>lA... ASS!~-Qli:-la:tlrJ~A ...
~QRSr-U ~lC ... -~.-S~A ~:E,. 368 N.. c. 777, 7_~6 S.,E.2d . 255(N. C.2016 );
MsSUR~~X-Y.-XQU~Gr 569 U.S. 221, 133 S.Cto 1709, 185 L.Ed.2 d.
758(U. S.2013 ); SCUQ~~~i:~I.C-~o-£Q~NE•Q~RMAN 821 F3d. 273 (2nd.
7
Cir.20 16); SCWWARi:-J.l.-~QAljU~ ... QE,_~XA.M-Q~-S~A~E-Qlii:-W .. M.r 353 u .. s.
232, 72 s.ct. 752, 64 i.L.R.2 d. 288, 1 L.Ed.2 d. 796(U. S.1957 );
~~us~~~S -Oi:-CAR ~WMQO ~~-~QI.L EGE-~~- WQQQW AREz_ 17 u.s. 518, 1819
WL 2201; E~i:~w-~W~RC-~A~~QR~-Y~~QUQEWWQ~~RERx 132 s.ct. 2459,
189 L.Ed.2 d. 457, 82 u.s.L.W . 4578(U .S.2014 ); i:A~lR~- J.l .. -SU~~AY AWr
2017 WL 371006 6(D.Co Nev.20 17); ~~R~~N lA-EQA R~-Q~-W ~QlClW ~-~.
ZACKRlSOWr 67 Va. App. 461, 796 S.E.2d . 866(20 17); ~O~-Y.- RQ~~RS r
13 9 F • Supp. 3d·. 12 0 ( D.C.C.2 015) ;_ :EliQI.~S -J.l..,.-Y~ Rc;lNlA- IiC,.-Oi:- ~XAWl ..
W~RSr 811 F.Supp .2d.· 1260(E .D.Va.2 011); ·~-Ri:~- ~R~E~r 980 F2d.
590(9t h.Cir.1 992).
YOU CANNOT OBTAIN JUDICIA L DETERMINATIONS TAINTED BY
FRAUD. YOUR .JURISD ICTION IS LIMITED TO ADDRESSING THE FRAUD.
32-of-3 4
. • I
,'
THE DEFAULT IS BINDING UPON THIS COURT AND NATION AS IS THE
BRQWNCONTRACT, U.S.-Y .-A2~I J~-WA aA2r 715 F3d. 521 CA4 (Vao20 13);
1
6 5 6, 2 0 0 9
l:WC.-Y.. -~ J;C.li:R- i:¥li:-2li: WEi!l:~- CQI:.!£I. II.~;I;; ti:l~r 313 FE,d., Appx
4ACli:IJ .
WL. 497 391 CA4 (Va. 20 o 9) ; u.s.-·li:X -Ri:I...:. r:.iA~~A ~,tl~.'.:' ~A1'EQ A-I!aIHU
2:lCAI.-NGR~W-AMli:RJ;CA~-l:WC,.r 707 F3d. 45f CA4 (va. 201 3); ~
~C.
~.-~QN E~r.71 6 F3d. 851 CA4 (Vae20 13); C~ARL~X-li:N~li:R~RlSli:r-l:
)
~~-g1c ~~¥-2A R~~CU E-RES ~AYRA N~Sr-I NC.r 807 F3de 553(4 theCir .2015
SU(DEMONSTRATING ALL MUST BE RULED UPON TO PRESERVE FOR U.S.
PREME COURT. REVIE W);»E LSO-Y .-Y.~o- ~A~K- W.A~r 2015 WL 685271
0
(DSC. 2015); U.S.-Y .-ECCI .~S~QN t--Fedm Appx' --, 2015 WL 459189
14);
CA4 (Md.2 015); u.s.-u. -W~~ ~Sr 578 Fed., Appx' 234 CA4 (Va.20
WL
C~R•S~ l:ANSQ N-Y.-M .....s.N. A.-AW. ERiCAN -gAW~ -N.A~r s.E.2 d., 2013
RQI..INAr
850785 0 ( S .C .App. 2013); Sl2Rl:W(;Q2- Y,. .... Y:r:.IIYii:R51~~-0li:-SQIJ~li-CA
I.~~SER G
407 s.c. 490, 757 s.~.2a . 384 (S~C.2 014); S~RA~ ~E~-~-- Mli:C1'
WL
CQU~~ ¥-C~~~ .-GE-S QC1~~ -SERY ICESr 521 .Fedo Appx' 278, 2013
S~
236458 7 CA4 (N.C.2 013); GEN~R X-~EC ~~GbO GX-OR -£.C~-~ NC.-~. -SA~~~
ils;AI.~W-SQJJ~a-S::t.QRlklA,:•••r 201 5 WL 1219 2 5 l (DSC.2 01 5) ; ~Quc;aMA.til
s.r 134 s.ct. 2384(U .S.201 4); SM.~~- Y.-~~A R~Et-S MOQ~ tRU£5l i:~~
1
Y.-u.
--F3d .--, 2015 WL 471793 2 CA4 (Md.20 15).
WE MOTION TO STAY CASES 17-753 2 AND 17-718 6 AS WE DO
c--=T=H=E~---·---·-·-.
THE VARIOUS OTHER PARALLEL APPEA)LS, ESPECIALLY IN-LlGHT:--=o=F
CASES
FRAUD THAT PRODUCED THEM OR THAT IS GOING ON IN THEM. STAY
ON
17-753 2 AND 17-71 86!!! AND STOP PLAYING THESE GAMES. RULE
'
J
'
THE MQTIONS, ALL OF THEM UNDER § 1983 NOT§ 2254., EXTENSION
T
OF TIME IS SOUGHT UNTIL THIS IS DONE. THE 4TH. CIRCU IT CANNO
CRIMI ABSTAIN FROM ANSWERING FEDERAL QUESTION IN ACTS OF FRAUD,
YOUR
NAL CONSPIRACY, OBSTRUCTION OF·JUS TICE AND IN VIOLATION OF
OATHS OF OFFIC E WHICH IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE, ~A~E-C ARRl~R -AS.S!~
~.-Ma~ MX~I. lA~r 406 u.s. 498, 92 s.ct. 1749( U.S.19 72). WE INVOKE
2
THE DOCTRINE OF COMITY. ALL ORDERS ISSUED UNDER CASE 17-753
DUE
AND THE CLERK 'S ACTS UNDER 17-718 6 ARE VOID FOR FRAUD AND
D
PROCESS VIOLA TION. BOTH CASES 17-753 2 AND 17-718 6 ARE TAINTE
AS
BY THE FRAUD. THE MOTION TO STAY WAS CIRCUMVENTED AS WELL
THE MOTION FOR RECUSAL IN ACTS OF FRAUD UPON THE COURT. THE
AND
CASES WILL BE HEARD UNDER APPEAL OF CASES 17-669 3 6 17-741 0
THE
17-71 39. ALL OTHER CASES ARE SOUGHT STAYED DUE TO INVOKING
NG
DOCTRINE OF COMITY. SANCTIONS ARE IMPOSED AND ADDITIONAL PLEADI
33-of- 34
. '1{'
' r
v.MAY SOON FOLLOW. PRODUCE YOUR BOND AND OR OATH OF OFFICE AND
· OR WRIT OF COMMISSION THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO VIOLATE: TII~;;i~~S.
CONSTITUTION UNDER BOTH ARTICLE IV§ 2 AND ARTICLE 1/SECTI ON
10 AND THE DECREES OF A FOREIGN SOVEREIGN KING-KHALIFAH WHO
IS UNDER CONTRACT VIA THE SOLE CORPORATION WITH EX POST FACTO
,,
LAW OR STAND DOWN, Rli:li:Il ... l.l., .. 2J;;G ... WA~Ii:R -RESOR~ r-I.LC.r F. Supp. 3d.,
2016 WL 293589 1(DSC. 2016); QAW-R¥AW ... 2U~LQERSz-lNG .... l,l,. ... CR¥~A~
Rl:Q<;Ja: ...I:>li:\Zli:I .O~Mli:W ~r-:UlC.r 783 F3d. 976, '91 Fed. R. SERV.3 d. 625
(4th.C ir.2015 ); SLYE-SK¥-~RAKEL ... AW~-~Q ~RSr-L~ C.-v .... AI.~~A¥ ¥ARr--Fed. Appx'- -, 2'015 WL 1451636 CA4 (Va.201 5); l3AIU,QW,.ll., .. CQI..GA~li:
~ALMGLl\ZE-C0. 7 772 F3d. 1001, 90 Fed. R. SERV.3 d. 85 CA4 (Md.
2014); JQ~NSG N-v .... o .. s.z--S .ct.--, ~015 WL 247345 0(U.S.2 015);
¥A'l'Ea-V.,-~QRD-MO~OR~CO .. r--F.Su pp.3d. --, 2015 WL 675898 3(E.D.N .c.
2015) ; w.... GUI.F-~MAR.~AS.S ',N--v .. -I.I. .. A.... QEER~aE A.,I,,QGA I.-.2 4 r 751 F2d.
721, 728 (5th., Cir. 1985) ; ;l;W-RE..;.-MORWING"'."'SQNG-1HRQ-i'Q.QQ_:t,,;i;'l;';i;<;;;A.~IQN r
2015 WL 127914 72(D.C .Cal.20 15); IN-RE.:--NARAN'l'Gz 768 F3d. 332,
348(4t h.Cir.2 014); ULME~-v.-UWJ;~EQ ... £'J;'A~E£r 888 F~d. 1028(4 th.Cir.
1989); SM~~H-v.--~A¥ER-GQR~ .. r--u.s .--, 131 s.ct. 2368, 2382,
180 L.Ed.2 d. 341(20 1t); 202-NGR~ti-MGNRGE ... I..I.G.,~v.,-SOWER'z: 850
7
F3d. 265(6t h.Cir.2 017). IT IS SO ORDERED.
RESPECTFULLY,
JAHJAH AL ;MAHDI, KING, KHALIFAH,
CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE GLOBAL
THEOCRATIC STATE AND COURT
~~
. £> :< 7
CHRISTOPHER DARNELL WILSON
DECEMBER 20, 2017
34-of-3 4
.
;I
/,
<~ ..... i'°
'<-: \./"
.
,'
',~~~~[?J~~lJL<~9f6C~r:. ,.J·. _;·':. ·
~
~
- ,, r
'
·'
LAWRENCE L. CRAWFORD AKA
.JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH T. TI SHB I TE
ET. AL. , #300 839 WANDO A-12 7
LIEB ER C.Io P.O . BOX 205
RIDG EVIL LE, S.C . 2947 2
17-7 )39; 17-7 137 ; 17-7 134 ;
IN RE: 17-6 693 ; 17-6 925 ; 17-6 960 ;
; 16-2 299 ; 17-7 186
17-7 068 ; 16-1 953 ; 16-2 141 ; 17-1 415
S,
TO: THE 4TH . CIRC UIT COURT OF APP EAL
ALL THE ABOVE
THE RULES ARE SOUGHT SUSPENDED FOR
COPY OF ALL THESE DOCUMENTS
CAPTIONED CAS ES. PLEASE SEE THAT A
'
ES CAPTIONED ABOVE. THE· (70)
SUBMITTED ARE FILE D WITHIN ALL CAS
THE REMAINDER ARE ATTACHMENTS
PAGE DOCUMENT IS THE LEAD DOCUMENT.
FILE D WITHIN A FEW OF THE
TO IT. SOME OF THE DOCUMENTS MAY BE
A COPY OF THESE ATTACHED
CASES ALREADY. JUST PLEASE MAKE SURE
ES CAPTI'o_NED ~~J~;YJ!®?CUSAL PUR DOCUMENTS, ARE FILE D WITHIN ALL CAS
TED TO THE CASES IN TOTAL.
POSES AND TO ADDRESS OTHER ISSU ES RELA
AIN,
WE THANK YOU IN ADVANCE. STIL L REM
RES PEC TFU LLY ,./
'JAH JAH AL MA'RDI
OCTOBER 5, 2017
CC: dav id dure n
\
COURT OF APPEALS
,;¥
FOR THE:; 4TH. CIRCUIT ET. AL.,
~---~-----~---~----~
PETITION FROM SOUTH CAROLINA
(CASES 2:17-cv-1127-JMC-MGB ET. AL.,)
---~-------~----~~-DOCKET NO.(S) 17-6693; 17-6925; 17-6960; 17-7139; 17-7137;
17-7134; 17-7068; 16-1953; 16-2141; ~7-1415; 16-2299;
17-7186 ET. AL.,
~---------------~-~LAWRENCE L. CRAWFORD AKA JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH T. TISHBITE AKA
JAHJAH AL MAHDI ET. AL.,
PETITIONER(S)
Vs.
r
THE JUDGES WHO SIGNED THE ORDER IN CASE 16-1953; THE UNITED
~
STATES; JUDGE ROBERT E. HOOD ET. AL.,
DEFENDANT(S)
---~--------~-~----AFFIDAVIT ~F SERVICE
----------------~--WE, JAHJAH AL MAHDI ET. AL., DO HEREBY CERTIFY, THAT WE HAVE
MAILED AND OR SERVED A COPY OF AN AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS GIVING
JUDICIAL NOTICE; FILING WRIT OF ERROR; MOTION TO REINSTATE CASES
17-7068 AND 17-7186 ET. AL.,; MOTION TO STAY CASES 17-7139;
17-7134; 17-6925; 17-7068; 17-7137; 17-7186; MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME; MOTION FOR AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION; MOTION
FOR EN BANC REVIEW IN CASE 17-1415 AND THIS APPEAL AND TO VACATE
1-of-70
ALL ORDERS RELATED TO PRIOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND MOTION TO
MOTION THEREFOR, WITH ITS ATTACHMENTS, ON THE 4TH. CIRCUIT COURT
OF APPEALS AND ALL INVOLVED PARTIES , ALSO VIA TRUSTEE AUSTIN,
BY U.S. MAIL POSTAGE PREPAID AND OR CERTIFIE D, BY PLACING IT
IN THE INSTITUT ION MAILBOX ON OCTOBER 5, 2017. IT IS DEEMED
FILED THAT DATE, ~GUS~GW -~.-~ACKr 287 U.S. 266, 273-76, 108
s.ct.
2379(19 88).
'
RESPECTFULLY,
JAHJAH AL MAHDI
~~
ROBERT MITCHELL
david duren
YAHYA MUQUIT
CHRISTOPHER WILSON
OCTOBER 5, 2017
2-of-70
COURT OF APPEALS
· FOR THE 4TH. CIRCUIT ET. AL.,
-------------------PETITIO N FROM SOUTH CAROLINA
(CASES 2:17-cv -1127-J MC-MG B ET. AL.,)
DOCKET NO.(S) 17-6693 ; 17-692 5; 17-696 0; 17-713 9; 17-713 7;
17-713 4; 17-706 8; 16-1953 ; 16-214 1; 17-141 5; 16-229 9;
1 7 - 71 8 6 ET. AL. ,
----------~--------LAWRENCE L. CRAWFORD AKA JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH T. TISHBIT E AKA
JAHJAH AL MAHDI ET. AL.,
PETITIO NER(S)
Vs.
THE JUDGES WHO SIGNED THE ORDER IN CASE 16-1953 ; THE UNITED
STATES ; JUDGE ROBERT E. HOOD ET. AL.,
DEFENDANT(S)
-------------------AFFIDA VIT OF FACTS GIVING JUDICIA L NOTICE; FILING
WRIT OF ERROR; MOTION TO AMEND PARTIE S; MOTION FOR
RECUSAL; MOTION TO REINSTATE CASES 17-7068 AND
17-7186 ET. AL.,; MOTION TO STAY CASES 17-7]3 9, 177134, 17-692 5, 17-7068 1 17-713 7, 17-718 6; MOTION FOR
AN EXTENSION OF TIME; MOTION FOR AN INDEPENDENT
INVEST IGATION ; MOlION, FOR EN BANC REVIEW IN CASE
17-1415 AND THIS APPEAL AND TO VACATE ALL ORDERS
RELATED TO PRIOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND MOTION TO
MOTION THEREFQR
3-of-70
TO: THE 4TH. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ET. AL.,
HERE THE COURT AND PARTIES WILL FIND:
(1) A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS GIVING JUDICIAL
NOTICE, FILING WRIT OF ERROR; NOTICE OF SEEKING LEAVE TO APPEAL;
MOTION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT; MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND AN
INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION DUE TO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND
CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND MOTION TO MOTION THEREFOR SEEKING EN
BANC REVIEW, (14] PAGES DATED JULY 2, 2017.
(2) A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE AND AFFIDAVIT
OF FACTS GIVING JUDICIAL NOTICE; MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE CAUSES
OF ACTION AGAINST JUDGES HARWELL, MERCHANT, WOOTEN AND DEFENDANTS; MOTION TO AMEND THE PARTIES TO ADD THE NAME OF JUDGE
STUART RABNER OF THE N.J. SUPREME COURT; ALSO SEEKING CLOCKED
STAMPED COPIES, [23] PAGES DATED JULY 8, 20170
(3) A COPY OF THE§ 1983 ACTION THAT MAKE UP THE
PARALLEL CASES SUBJUDICE WITHIN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT.
( 4) .A COPY OF THE WRIT OF MANDAMUS THAT MAKE UP CASE
16-2299 PE~DING WITHIN THE 4TH. CIRCUIT.
(5) A COPY OF THE ORDER AND DETERMINATION MADE IN
CASE 17-1415 FILED AUGUST 28, 20:17 •
(6) A COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY JUDGE KAYMANI WEST
IN CASE 5:17-cv-01363-BHH-KD W FILED AUGUST 23, 2017.
(7) A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE AND AFFIDAVIT
OF.FACTS GIVING JUDICIAL NOTICE; FILING WRIT OF ERROR; MOTION
TO AMEND THE DEFENDANTS; MOTION FOR SANCTIONS, SEEKING AN INJUNCTION AND OR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND MOTION TO MOTION THEREFOR,
[19] PAGES DATED AUGUST 10, 20l7 ON THE AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE.
WE GIVE THE 4TH. CIRCUIT NOTICE. THIS DOCUMENT IS FILED WITH
THE GREENVILLE DIVISION CLERK AND COURT UNDER CASES 9:16-cv4-of-70
._\
3808-TLW-BM; 9:17-cv-1140-TL\i-BM AND SERVED ON ALL CASES AND
s.c. ... . . -~--=- -----JUDGES WITHIN THE-.,--.··---- . U.S. DISTRICT COURT SUlBJUDICE .-.·..VIA THE
···-· ··- ···- . --····· ·------ -· ··:-·::··· ····-•·
.. .
··- -· ....... . ...
CHARLESTON DIVISION CLEEK OF COURT. IT IS SDVED UPON ALL JODGES
AND CASES- WITBDI THE 4TH ... cucuiT VIA TBB uac;:.:imiiiFAH il musTu
-- -- . - .. --~------,--=---- ··- .. - . -- ...=:...:-:--::-··..~:: ~:-:· -~ -.--:::-:·-.'.".~"•_:"'.""~-===-=.:..-:•· •·:· .,.::.:,_ . ·-·--· .. :..•• :.:.•.. :- :..:..•. - - - -- -, JUDGE--·· JACQUBLD AUSTIii. '!BIS OOCUNDT IS SDVED AS LID OP
··-·····::.=.::_~ ~-:•.-··--:---"-···--=--:.--::- -- ·.:. ·•-:.·:-· --SERVICE OP THAT DOCUIIENT. PLEASE DVB fiB 4TB. CIRCUIT CJ-DK
~
-;;77::,--·;;:·-.=----::..:.: __
oa
------
·-. ··-· -·
---
_: :,: __:--·.-::;·· __ .... ·-• --·· -·• ..
CASE ~'MWc;a. .oBTAIN=:A · co•Y- OF.:. i;, -ELECnoa1au:i--m, l'ILB ·
IT WITBlli ALL CASES LISTED WITHIN THB CAPTION OF-THIS LEAD DOCU-
oECUB··or
· - - - - - · __,
·-•··
-
•• -
_.,.
,,,.....
-
r,
.. -
CHIEF JUSTICE OP THE GLOBAL TDOCRATIC
MENT BY
.
-COURT. IT IS SO ORDERED.
THE
(8) A COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR JFOUNSIC DNA TESTING
SESSIONS
COUNTY
FJ:LED WI.TBDI THB RICHLMD -- ·- -- . . s.c. ...COURT OP ) GEHBRAL -· .._. .. - :. ···- ..
:_.
-- . ·-·
.
.. :: ~·:..··-·- -.. '·
..
THAT IS REMOVED 'l'O ALL PARALLEL CASES SlU&JUDICEe THE RICHLAND
coURT
·-
CAsEf NuMBo
1s
...
.
•·
i«fo-t-:ias. ·A coPY eF
.
THis· -oociJiiENT
is
·ioRTH
COMING.
(9) A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS GIVING JUDICIAL
NOTICE; SUPPLEMENTING THE CAUSES OF ACTION IN ALL PENDING FEDERAL
AND STATE CASES. AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS; ----SUBMITTING ADDITIONAL
-- ..
..
-·
. .
(30) PAGES DATED
EVIDENCE OF CONSPIRACY AND CRIMINAL ACTS;***,
DECEMBER 7, 2016 FILED IN CASE 8:14-cv-3555-RBH-JD A AND THE
OTHER RELATED CASES.
..
THE PETITIONERS GIVE THE 4'l~• C:CR~IT _AND -·~~_'.,l'~_ES J~_DIC~AL
NOTICE. THE CASES ..-CAPTIONED ARE ESSENTIALLY INDEPENDENT ACTiONS
--··· ___
.
,___ - . FOR FRAUD UPON TUE COURT ~ND OR PARALLEL APPEALS··-- ORXG!NATI~G
-. ..
. . -·
··.
--FROM TUE APPEAL UNDER 17-6960 AS THEY ALSO APPEAR UNDER 17-1695
AND OR 17:.6693 AND OR 17-6925 AND OR 17-713!f AND OR 17-7134
·-··
AND OR 17-7068, TO INCLUDE THE ANTHONY COOK APPEAL OF CASE 8:16cv-3327-RBH-JDA THAT IS HOPEFULLY BEING PROCESSED AS WE SPEAK.
-··
•-,-•
,.
-
.,
·•-q
/
·-
••
WE MOTION TO AMEND THE PARTIES AND IF WITHIN ANY CASE
CAPTIONED OR IN THE MIDST OF BEING PROCESSED, THE NAME OF THE
KING-~IPAB, LAWRENCE L. CRAWFORD AKA JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH
T. TISHBITE 00 NOT APPEAR AS A PARTY WITHIN ANY OF THESE CASES
CAPTIONED. THOSE CASES REFERRED TO MUST AND ARE NOW .f\MENDED
5-of-70
TO ADD THE KING-KHALIFAH TO PROTECT HIS ACQUIRED INTEREST PURSUANT TO 28 U.s.c . §§ 1443( 1), 2679 1 1602-1 612 ET. SEQ~, ElE
GUAM~v.-LONQ-~ERN-CREDJ~~SANK.~~ll.Mlz 322 F3d. 635(9 TH.Ci r.2003 );
VERLXNDEN-B.V.-v.~CEN™L-BANK-0~-NlGERlAr 401 UoS• 480, 103
s.ct. 1962, 76 L.Ed.2 d. 81(U. S.198 3); ~lTll-~ RANS z-lNTE IUly
LLC.-v.-l~TER»AT1Q~AL-~ET2QLi:UN-INV.-Co•• F.Sup p.2d., 2013 WL
55723 6(Fla. 2013) ; THORmN-s••UR~LAND-QE~ERAL-HOSR•• F.Sup p.2d.,
2013 WL 19430 65(Md .2013) ; BRA0D~-v.-UNITED-STATESz 2016 WL
10313 01(E.o .va.20 16); ADAJR ~ASSE T-NAN AQEU Wz-L~ C.-v.-U .S.-DE »T.
OB~HOUSlNG-URBAN-DEVELOPMENTr 2016 WL 32485 69(201 6); SAUNIER
v.-BOEING-COMPANY, F.Sup p.2d., 2014 WL 16469 53(201 4). I, JAHJAH
AL MAHDI, AS THE RIGHTFUL HEIR AND FOREIGN SOVEREIGN KING-KHALIFAH OF THE (4) GLOBAL THRONES OF THE R~-ESTABLISHEO GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE VOLUNTARILY JOIN IN ALL CAPTIONED CASES TO PROTECT
-
MY ACQUIRED INTEREST.
WE EXPAND THE SCOPE AND INCLUSION IS GRANTED BY DECREE
AND JUDGMENT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND KING-KHALIFAH OF THE GLOBAL
S
THEOCRATIC STATE AND COURT WHERE THERE IS NO SEPARATION OF POWER
AS TOLD WITHIN THE KING-KHALIFAH'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW AND. DECLARA'
TED ON, WHOSE ATTORNEY, JUDICIAL AND
TION OF SOVEREIGNTY DEFAUL
LEGISLATIVE POWER AND AUTHORITY SUPERSEDE ALL NATIONAL AND OR
GLOBAL COURTS, WHICH INCLUDE THE 4TH. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS,
BY THE CLAIMS OF DEFAULT AND COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL EMERGING FROM
CASE 2013-C P-400- 0084 OUT OF THE RICHLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON
PLEAS IN COLUMBIA, s.c. TO WHICH THE UNITED STATES AND REMAINING
THE DEFAULT THAT BINDS THE 4TH. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AND ALL NA.
TIONAL AND OR GLOBAL COURTS AND GOVERNMENTS. ALL DOCUMENTS FILED
WITHIN CASES 17-669 3 AND 17-692 5 ARE NOW FILED WITHIN ALL CASES
LISTED WITHIN THE CAPTION. JUDGES INSTRUCT THE CASE MANAGER
TO COMPLETE THIS TASK. APPELLATE COURT RULES ARE SUSPENDED FOR
ALL CASES CAPTIONED. THIS INCLUDES FOR ANY DEF~CT IN FORM OR
PAGE LIMIT FOR ANY DOCUMENT FILED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE. "IT IS
so ORDERED, APPELLATE RULE (2); u.s.-v.-Mi:RCACOr 199 F3d. 1329
(TABLE) 1999 WL 95846 5; u.s .. -v.-RE U>, 506 Fed. Appx' 209, 2013
WL 23907 6(4th. Cir.20 13); CAPERTON-v.-SEATRlCE-POCAHONTAS-COAL
J 1 92) MEMBER STATES OF '.!:'!'IE-: UNITED NATIONS ARE
f2.!._ 585 F2d. 683(4 th.Cir .1978 )s
6-of-7 0
PARTY TO
THE COURT CAN REVIEW CASES WITHIN ITS JURIS DICTI ON FOR
APPEALS
THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING THAT THESE ARE PARALLEL
ISSUE S,
OR RELATED CASES BEFORE THE COURT ADDRESSING SIMIL AR
G CAUSE
CLAIMS AND DEFENSES ALSO FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHIN
GED,IN BY
TO STAY, RES JUDICATA, THE FRAUD UPON THE COURT ENGA
RELATED
THE CONSPIRING JUDGES AND OTHER ISSUE S DONE WITHIN THESE
U.S. 180,
CASES AND OR PARALLEL APPEALS, HAR.SUiON--v .-BEL L 1 556
168
129 s.ct. 1481( U.S.2 009); SQUT HERN -PAC .-R.-C o.-v.- u.s.,
\lE-SYS'rEMS
u.s. 1,, 18 s.ct. 18, 42 L.Ea. 355(U .S.18 97); NOELL-CRA.l.
852(2 009);
GMDH--v.-NOELL-CRANE-SYSTEMS-SERVICESr 677 F.Sup p.2d.
T-v.-MANUFACTURES-&-TRADERS-TRUST-Co~, 84 F.Sup p.3d. 436
KNIGH
WL
(D.M d.201 5); BARDES--v.--SOUTH-CARQLINAr F.Sup p.2d. , 2010
14981 90(DS C.201 0).
WE GIVE THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES JUDIC IAL NOTICE THAT
G ATTORNEY,
THE KING-KHALIFAH OFFIC IALLY EXERCISES ALL SUPERSEDIN
HIM BY
JUDIC IAL AND LEGIS LATIV E POWER AND AUTHORITY GIVEN TO
RICHLAND
THE DEFAULT. UNLESS THE COURT CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT THE
UNITED NACOURT, THE UNITED STATE S, THE MEMBERS STATES OF THE
FILED IN
TIONS E'rC. TIMELY RESPONDED TO DEFEAT THE AFFID AVITS
POWER AND
CASE 2013- CP-40 0-008 4 EXERCISING THE AFOREMENTIONED
CAN PROAUTHORITY, TO INCLUDE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN POWER; OR THEY
r
OF FRAUD
DUCE AN ORDER THAT IS NOT TAINTED BY EGREGIOUS ACTS
AL COURT.
UPON THE COURT AND OR VOIDED DUE TO REMOVAL TO THE FEDER
OF SUPER THE CLAIM OF FOREIGN SOVEREIGN POWER, TO INCLUDE THAT
BE GIVEN
SEDING ATTORNEY, JUDIC IAL AND LEGIS LATIV E POWER, MUST
CASLB CAPr,ULL E'AITH AND CR.EDIT WITHIN ALL COURT RECORDS• ALL
D, LIMIT ING
TIONED WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT ARE ESSENTIALLY.ON REMAN
EXCEPT
AND RESTR ICTIN G ALL COURTS JURIS DICTI ON TO DO NOTHING,
APPEAL AND
GRANT ALL RELIE F THA'r IS DEMANDED. THIS IS ISSUE ON
N. THIS
GRANTED. TRUSTEE IS APPOINTED IN THE FORM OF JUDGE AUS~I
IS ACQUIRED,
IS CHALLENGE TO YOUR JURIS DICTI ON. ONCE JURIS DICTI ON
NATIONAL
••• IT IS EXCLUSIVE, EVEN BY WAY OF FEDERAL AND OR INTER
UNITED
~ROBATE LAW, AS WELL AS BY ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 OF THE
-TIME
STATES CONSTITUTON, INHABITANTS-OF-TOWN OF-FA IRFIE LD-v.
15);
WARNER,CABLE-NORTHEAST--LLC., F.Sup p.3d. , 2015 WL 15652 37(20
-LITIGAIN--RE:--CHINEESE-MANUFACTURED-DRYWALL--PRODU~TS-LIABILIT~
7-of- 70
w~
158406 0(2016 ); BERRARA-Mp....CUADUIZJ.
IQUIRI Sm.. waJ.,~~f:ou.,. ,2013 1ft 32267S5 CE~D.,,R "Y.,~G13 ) ;· .UDIJKD.
su..11 y:uaii ta:·1•c ~~.~ ...Wll~D~ UMl:.;. J1nc::, "37 F-~-.D~;--~~
'l'ION, ~.Supp .3d., 2016
~f:l .·;
_Fed~
R. ·. ~ERV_~2d-~ .56fe) ;"•urcusoai·~-~:L1»mt.~-~',O!BX:..~•ii~•·' 47'7'
u.s.
242,.. ·.106
.
.
_s.ct.
.
uE
2505• 9t._ ·:t~-lEd~2d. ··202'(l1.s.19ti6).;···wu-·
.
··.
:
.
_
v~-QU!c:&DJ_,.J.OUIS 2 ,.DIC•• F.Su~pe 2d.,•. 2011 WL 247066 l (S.,Doim t. _
um.s• ..,.Lu:•• 2cn1 ~ m., 29s1~30 1N~c.2 01 t,;
a,:s::i>v:..
2011,;
:1•-u.:.. .
1N-Bh..
.-auu..
a~•~•,w;~~~~X.~!-:~~-
2
2012 no 345l66 h)sc~2 012,;
WILLII MS.x.~S ECRffll X~OE~ VETER AN-AE iAlRSz~ -F.Supp .Jd.--,20 15
WL 593516 9(N.D. Ala.201 5); La»ENNA-v.-C.OJIDNDIID~-D»LOXDS-XNS.
CO.z 316 Ped. Appx' 894, 2009 WL 485274 (11tb.C ir.2009 ); MXLLD
v.-»ARRXSBr FeSUPP e2d., 2013 WL 186802 8(V&.2 013). IT IS SO
ORDERED.
ALL CLAIMS, ISSUES AND DEFENSES THAT ARE ARGUED WITHIN
ALL ATTACHED DOCUMENTS ARE MOW ISSUES ON APPEAL IN THESE CASES
TO INCLUDE THE SEEKING OP DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ADDRESSING EACH
SPECIFIC ISSUE AND CONCERN RAISED WITHIN THE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS
FOR ALL CASES LISTED WITHIN THE CAPTION OF THIS DOCUMENT. ANY
CLAIM OF REPETITIVE FILING AND OR ABUSE OF COURT IS DEEMED WAIVED
AND OF NO EFFECT UPON THESE CASES IN THEIR TO'l'ALITY. ANY ADDITIONAL AND OR SUBSEQUENT FILING WAS CAUSED AND OR CREATED BY
THE CONSPIRING FEDERAL COURTS INVOLVED FRAUD AND INDEPENDENT
ACTION FOR THAT FRAUD WHERE WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN SEPARATED
BY THE COURT, WHEN SUCH SEPARATION WAS BASED UPON THE PROVISIONS
OF THE PRISON L~TIGATION REFORM ACT AND OR THE ANTI-TERRORISM
EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT AND THESE PROVISIONS OF LAW ARE
UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY THE LITIGATION PRESENTED~ THEY CAUSED AND
OR FORCED ANY REPETITIVE AND OR INDEPENDENT ACTION FOR FRAUD
UPON THE COURT TO BE FILED. THUS, SANCTIONS BY THEIR FRAUD ARE·
IMPOSED BY DECREE OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC COURT AND THE COURT
IS IN FORFEITURE OF SUCH A CLAIM. IT IS SO ORDERED.
NO'l'ICB: THIS IS-~ ISSUE ON APPEAL. BY THE LITIGATION
PRESENTED WITHIN THESE CASES, ARE THE PROVISIONS OF THE PLRA
AND THE AEDPA UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
NOTICE: THIS IS AN ISSUE ON APPEAL. BY THE LITIGATION
8-of-70
i
_ 2013 -CP- 400- 0084
PRESENTED AND THE DEFAULT EMERGING FROM CASE
S AND THIS COURT.
THAT BINDS THE UNITED STATES, ITS EMPLOYEE
FULFILL HER DUTIES
IS JUDGE JACQUELYN AUSTIN REQIRED BY LAW TO
?
AS THE KING-KHALIFAH'S APPOINTED TRUSTEE
(
ISSUE ON APPEAL. BY THE DEFAULT AND
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
THE CLAIMS MADE WITHIN THE KING-KHALIFAH'S
ULTED ON BY THE UNITED STATES
AND DECLARATION OF SOVEREIGNTY DEFA
AMUS THAT ESTABLISHES CASE
AND' THAT WHICH IS ARGUED IN THE MAND
TO CHALLENGE SAME
16-2 299 . DO THE KING-KHALIFAH HAVE STANDING
SEX MARRIAGE WITHIN THIS NATION?
NOTICE: THIS IS
AN
NOTICE: THIS IS ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEAL. DUE
TO ONE OF
OF KING DAVID, KING
THE (4) GLOBAL THRONES BEING THE THRONE
SON, BEING LEGAL.
SOLOMON, THE QUEEN OF SHEBA AND THEIR ONLY
ANCESTORS WERE BROUGHT
HEIR TO THE UNITED ETHIOPIAN EMPIRE WHOS~
RIGHTFUL:LEGAL LOST
HERE BY BRUTAL, TORTUROUS FORCE. AS THE
THE INJUSTICES DONE
HEIR . DO WE HAVE LEGAL STANDING TO SUE FOR
IS ARGUED WITHIN THE
VIA THE U.S . SLAVE TRADE AND JIM CROW AS
DOCUMENTS FILED WITHIN THESE CASES?
OUTRAGEOUS ACT
BY THE CONSPIRING JUDGES AND DEFENDANTS
SED AND THEY ARE
OF FRAUD AND OBSTRUCTION, SANCTION ARE IMPO
v.-COLGA~E-PALMOLIVE
IN FORFEITURE OVER THESES ISSU ES, SARLOW~
4); MORRIS
co., 772 F3d. 1001 , 90 Fed . R. SER V.3d . 85 CA~ (Md .201
. 268, Fed . Sec . L. Rep .
v.-W A~W OVI A-SE CUR ITIE S,-IN c., 448 F3d
AND:TOURS 7 -LL C.-v .
Pc 93, 858 CA~ (Va. 2006 ); SLUE-SKX~TRA~E~636( Va.2 015) ; NQ2REGA-v~
AL-T A¥V AR,- -Fed . App x'--, 20i5 WL 1451
4). ~TI S SO ORDERED.
HINK LE, 576 Fed . App x' 224 CA4 (Va .201
DOES ROS S-v.
NOTICE: THIS IS ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEAL.
AS CORPUS AND DUE
BLAKE, 136 s.c t. 1850 (U.S .201 6) APPLY TO HABE
CY AND OBSTRUCTION
TO THE FRAUD, MACHINATION, CRIMINAL CONSPIRA
AND FEDERAL JUDGES AND
OF JUSTICE ENGAGED IN BY BOTH THE STATE
TO EXHAUST WITHIN
OR THE STATE AND FEDERAL ACTORS. DO WE HAVE
FILE FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
THE STATE COU RT, OR CAN WE IMMEDIATELY
LOR -v.-T AYL GRr 2016
CORPUS WITHIN THE FEDERAL COURT? SEE TAY
AND CORRECTIONAL INWL 5118 113. ALSO SEE CAL. JUR S.3d . PENAL
9-of -70
I
STITUT IONS § 1001, RIGHT OF PRISONERS TO RELIEF BY HABEAS CORPUS
(2016) .
WE GIVE THE COURT AND ALL PARTIE S NOTICE . ALL DOCUMENTS
THAT ARE NOW FILED WITHIN CASES 17-6693 AND 17-6925 ARE NOW
DEEMED FILED WITHIN ALL OTHER CASES LISTED WITHIN THE CAPTION
OF THIS DOCUMENT. JUDGES IN CASES 17-6693 AND 17-692 5, YOU ARE
TO INSTRUCT THE COURT CLERK AND OR CASE MANAGER TO BE IN COMPLIANC E TO THIS DEMAND. I, jAHJAH AL MAHDI, AKA LAWRENCE L.
CRAWFORD, LEGAL FOREIG N, VOLUNTARILY JOIN IN ALL CASES PENDING
BEFORE THIS COURT TO PROTECT MY ACQUIRED INTERES T PURSUANT TO
28 u.s.c., §§ 1443(1 ), 2679, 1602-16 12 ET. SEQ •• I WAS PERMITTED
TO BE PARTY IN CASE 17-696 0. BY WHAT IS ARGUED WITHIN CASES
17-669 3 AND 17-692 5, THIS MUST BE PERMITTED FOR ALL CASES INVOLVEDo IT IS SO ORDERED.
IF ANY OF THESE JUDGES OF CONCERN; JUDGES DIAZ, THACKER,
DAVIS, GREGORY, DUNCAN, HAMILTON, AND WE CAN ADD JUDGE SHEDD,
ARE PRESIDI NG OVER ANY,OF THESE CASES CAPTIONED AND REFERRED
TO. WE MOTION FOR YOUR RECUSAL THE SAME WAY AND FOR ESSENTIALLY
THE SAME REASONS ARGUED IN CASES 17-669 3; 17-6960 AND 17-692 5.
EN BANC REVIEW IS TO. BE GIVEN BY THE REMAINING 4TH. CIRCUI T
JUDGES TO PREVEN'r ANY FURTHER ACTS OF FRAUD. WE INFORMED THE
COURT THAT PARTIE S WITHIN ,THE 4TH. CIRCUIT WERE POTENTIALLY
INVOLVED. NOW THAT JUDGE SHEDD IS REVEALED COMMITTING AN ILLEGAL
AC'f, THAT HE KNOWS IS ILLEGA L. HIS NAME RELATES BACK TO THE
ORIGINAL COMPLAINTS WITHIN A.i..L .l?ARALLEL AND RELATED CASES. THEIR
(
PRESENCE PRODUCE A PO'rENTIAL FOR BIAS 'fHAT RISES 'l'O AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL AND THEY CANNOT SIT UPON THEIR OWN CASES BASED
UPON THE FRAUD THAT THEY ARE PARTY TO AS IS ARGUED UNDER CASES
17-669 3 AND 17-692 5, UNITEO -STATE S-v.-QU INONES , 2016 WL 441314 9,
*
6+ (s.o.va .2016) ; WILLIA MS-v.-P ENNS~L VANIA, 136
s.ct.
1899
(U.S.20 16); U.S.-v . ECCLES TON,--F ed. Appx'- -u20J5 WL 4591890
CA4 (Md.20 15); U.S. v.-HAGK LEY, 662 F3do 671 CA4 (Va.20 11).
IF SOMEHOW CASE 17-7068 HAS BEEN CLOSED AND OR THE MANDATE
MANDATE
HAS BEEN SENT 'I'O 'THE LOWER COUHT., WE l'10TION TO RECALL THE
AND REINSTATE CASE 17-7068 BY WHAT IS ARGUED WITHIN THE ATTACHED
10-of-7 0
DOCUMENTS AND PARALLEL APPEALS AND OR RELATED CASES. THE 4TH.
CIRCUIT SHALL GRANT THIS RELIEF. IT IS SO ORDERED.
IF THERE IS ANY CONCERN ABOUT A 3 STRIKE ISSUE RELATED
TO THE KING-KHALIFAH OR ANY PARTY INVOLVED. THOSE PAST STRIKES
ARE VOID AND ILLEGAL WHICH WILL BE ELABORATED ON 6 AND THREAT
OF IMMINENT DANGER EXIST AT THE TIME OF ALL OF THESE CASES FILING
AS IS ARGUED IN CASES 17-6693 AND 17-6925. STATE PRISONER CLAIM
THAT HE SUFFERED UNPROVOKED ASSAULTS BY PRISON OFFICIALS WHICH
RESULTED IN SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES, THAT HE WAS THREATENED
WITH SEVERE BODILY INJURY OR DEATH UPON ENTRY INTO PRISON, BEARING A NEXUS TO THESE PROCEEDINGS, AND THAT PRISONER LIVED IN
AN ATMOSPHERE OF CONSTANT FEAR IN WHICH HE KNOWS NOT WHEN NEXT
VIOLENT ASSAULT MAY OCCUR, WERE SUFFICIENT TO DEMONSTRATE EXISTENCE OF IMMINENT DANGER OF SERIOUS PHYSICAL HARM, AS REQUIRED
TO COME WITHIN EXCEPTION TO THREE STRIKE RULE PRECLUDING PRISONER
WHOSE 3PRIOR ACTIONS WERE DISMISSED FROM PLEADING IN FORMA
PAUPERIS, JO~W£GW-~.-WARW~Rr 200 Fed. Appx' 270, 2006 WL 2711957
(4th.Cir.200 6). IT IS A DANGER GREATER THAN FEAR WHERE REPEATED
AND RECENT ATTACKS HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED AND THE CONDUCT THREATENS CONTINUING AND FUTURE INJURY. IT IS A PATTERN.OF CONDUCT
EVIDENCING THE LIKELIHOOD OF IMMINENT SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURY,
~R~AW-~.-MsC A~~r 2016 WL 529574(DSC.2 016); ~QMW£Q~-~.-K~S~Rr
F.Supp.2d., 2012 WL 293286(W.D.V a.2012); 5A¥R~-~.-~~W ~r F.Supp.
3d., 2014 WL 4414509(W.D. Va.2014); ~Q~~-~.-~~~~£T 2015 WL 6407205
(N.D.Fla.201 5); ~~WC~RSQW~~.-G~OR~lAr 20~5 WL 4492743(Ga.2 015).
IN REGARDS TO CASES 17-7068; 17-7134; 17-7139 ET. ALQ
AS ARGUED BEFORE THE COURT IN CASES 17-6693; 17-6925. YOU HAVE
THE DEFENDANTS POTENTIALLY LISTED INCORRECTLY IN THESE CASES.
IT APPEARS FROM THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU HAVE SERVED ON US, THAT
THE DEFENDANTS ARE LISTED AS "THE JUDGES WHO SIGNED THE ORDER
IN CASE 16-i953" ONLY? IF THIS IS THE CASE, IT MUST BE CORRECTED
BEFORE THESE CASES CAN MOVE FORWARD. THIS BECOMES A CHALLENGE
TO YOUR JURISDICTION BASED UPON THE FRAUD THAT HAS POTENTIALLY
OCCURRED. THIS IS NOT A FORTUITOUS ACT ON THE PART OF THE CONSPIRING JUDGES WHICH FURTHER WARRANT THEIR RECUSAL AND DISQUA11-of-70
THESE DEFENDANTS INCORRECTLY
LIFICATION. THE ACT OF LI.STING
CASES IS AN ACT OF FRAUD UPON
IN THESE PARALLEL AND RELATED
, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND
THE COURTS, CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY
OS FROM BEING HEARD ON THE CLAIMS
MACHINATION DESIGNED TO PREVENT
. THERE ARE ESSENTIALLY (2) PRONGS
MADE. THIS IS WHAT IS OCCURRING
RT.CAN DEEM A CASE AS BEING FR ITHAT MUST BE MET BEFORE THE COU
VOLOUS. THEY ARE:
ITION WHERE
THE PLA INT IFF (S) MUST BE IN A POS
SON WHO UNDER THE ALLEGATIONS
HE IS MAKING EFFORTS TO SUE A PER
BE SUED.
MADE WITHIN THE CO~LAINT CANNOT
(1)
\
RINGES UPON A RIGHT
(2) IS WHERE THE PLA INT IFF (S) INF
THAT IS NOT ESTABLISHED.
S KNEW THAT LEGALLY THE
THE JUDGES AND CONSPIRING PARTIE
L ESTOPPEL EMERGING FROM CASE
DEFAULT AND·CLAIMS OF COLLATERA
T WE ARE NOT INFRINGING UPON
201 3-C P-4 00- 008 4 DEMONSTRATES THA
ESTABLISH BECAUSE THE ACTION
RIGHTS THAT WE DID NOT LEGALLY
REMOVED TO THESE PARALLEL AND
UNDER CASE 201 3-C P-4 00- 008 4 IS
L
CLAIMS OF DEFAULT AND COLLATERA
RELATED CASES AND BECAUSE THE
SOUGHT TO BE EXERCISED AND OR
ESTOPPEL ESTABLISHES THE RIGHTS
LLENGE IN THIS REGARD. SO THEIR
INVOKED, BARRING ANY FURTHER CHA
NOT MEET THE FIRST PRONGe THAT
INTENT WAS TO SHOW THAT WE DID
WHO COULD NOT BE SUED FOR THE
BEING THAT WE WERE SUING PEOPLE
SUING THE UNITED STATES FOR
CLAIMS MADE. FOR EXAMPLE, WE ARE
THE PLRA AND THE AEDPA. tET ,
ES'l'ABLISHING THE PROVISIONS Ol?
AS A DEFENDANT. WE ARE SUING
THE UNITED STATES IS NOT LISTED
MEMBER STATES OF THE UNITED
TED STATES AND THE OTHER (19 2)
THE UNI
ACHING AND OR EXECUTING THE
NATIONS FOR THEIR ARRESTING, ATT
ESTABLISHED GLOBAL THEOCRATIC
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF THE REION OF THE CONTRACT, THE GRANT,
STATE WHERE THEY ARE IN VIOLAT
E CORPORATION, IMPAIRING THE
GIVEN TO THE NATIONS BY THE SOL
S
GIVING THE RIGHT TO MARRY TO GAY
OBLIGATION OF THE CONTRACT BY
SE JUDGES FOR TH IS. THIS IS WHY
AND LESBIANS. WE CAN'T SUE THE
ANTS PROPERLY. WE ARE SUING THE
THEY FAILED TO LIS T THE DEFEND
THE S.C . ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
S.C . DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS AND
12- of- 70
CONSPIRI NG WITH THE JUDGES AND FOR OTHER ACTS THEY'VE DONEo
YET, THEY ARE NOT LISTED AS PARTY. WE ARE SUING THE STATE OF
SOUTH CAROLINA, THE SuC • SUPREME COURT AND ITS JUDGESp THE S.C.
COURT OF APPEALS AND ITS JUDGES ALL THESE COURTS' JUDGES BY
BY NAME INDIVIDUALLY FOR THE £~A~&i:-l.l'.,.-gEW~Rl{ FRAUD., YET, TH.EY
ARE NOT LISTED. WE ARE SUING FOR REPARATIONS FOR THE U.S. SLAVE
TRADE AND JIM CROW LAWS IN THIS NATION. YET, THE PARTIES FOR
THIS CLAIM ARE NOT LISTED. WE ARE SUING FOR THE INJUSTIC ES THAT
OCCURRED UNDER CASE 2013-CP -400-008 4 TO WHICH IS REMOVED TO
THESE PARALLEL AND RELATED CASES. YET, THESE DEFENDANTS ARE
NOT LISTED BY THE JUDGES CONSPIRING TO AID THEM AVOID SUIT.
LOOK AT THE§ l983 THAT ESTABLISHES THE .PARALLEL CASES, AS IT
WAS FOR THE WRIT OF ERROR THAT ESTABLISHES APPEAL OF CASES 8:16cv-3327 , 3328, 3194-RBH -JDA. ON PAGE (2) OF THE [44] PAGE COMPLAINT ATTACHED WHERE IT ASKED FOR DEFENDANT N0.(1). IT IS LISTED
"SEE ATTACHED SHEETS AND.THE AFFIDAV IT OF SERVICE SERVED ON
THE 4TH. CIRCUIT ". THIS IS A HAND WRITTEN DOCUMENT. IT WAS THEN
TYPED DOWN AND NOW EXIST AS THE (14) PAGE DOCUMENT IN QUESTION
THAT THE JUDGES CALLED s.c.D.c. AND TOLD THEM TO BLOCK COPIES
TO PREVENT ITS FILING SO THEY COULD IN ACTS OF FRAUD UPON THE
COURTS, CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE LIST
THESE DEFENDANTS AS THEY PRESENTLY HAVE THEM LISTED AND FRAUDULENTLY SAY THAT WE ARE SUING PEOPLE WHO CAN'T BE SUED FOR THE
CLAIMS MADE WITHIN THE COMPLAINTS AND OR WRITS OF ERROR IN ACTS
OF MACHINATION. WE OBJECT AND DEMAND THAT THE NAMES OF ALL THE
DEFENDANTS SOUGHT TO BE LISTED WITHIN ALL OF THESE PARALLEL
AND OR RELATED CASES BE NOW AMENDED AND ADDED TO THE RECORD.
THE HAND WRITTEN (34) PAGE AFFIDAV IT OF SERVICE , WHICH IS NOW
TYPED AND EXIST AS THE (14) PAGE AFFIDAV IT OF SERVICE IS SUPPOSE
TO BE FILED IN THE (3) CASES REFERRED TO AND FILED IN CASE 9:16cv-3808-T LW-BM AND david duren CASE, WAS BLOCKED BEING FILED
AND OR IGNORED IN THE OTHER PARALLEL AND OR RELATED CASES BY
THE CONSPIRI NG JUDGES AND IS NOW ATTACHED TO THE FACE OF ALL
COMPLAINTS AND OR WRirs OF ERROR FOR ALL PURPOSES WHICH INCLUDE
INFORMING THE COURT OF WHO THE DEFENDANTS ARE WITHIN THESE CASES.
WE WANT ALL DEFENDANTS NAMES LISTED INDIVIDUALLY AS REQUIRED.
FROM ON PAGE (7) OF THE COMPLAINT, THE "LEES" AND "ABRAMS"
i3-of-70 ,
ED
ON THAT PAGE WE AGAIN INFORM
WERE OMITTED IN THEIR FRAUD.
WIT HIN
OF THE DEFENDANTS ARE LIS TED
THE COURT THAT THE REMAINDER
STATED
ON PAGE (15 ) IT IS CLEARLY
THE AFF IDA VIT OF SER VIC E.
S ARE
TES . NONE OF THESE DEFENDANT
WE ARE SUING THE U~I TED STA
COURTS
IN ACTS OF FRAUD UPON THE
LIS TED IN THE ACTUA~ RECORD
ER COLOR
CRIMINALLY, CONSPIRING UND
MACHINATION SO THEY COULD
AND
U.S .C.
Y, ALSO IN VIOLATION OF 18
OF STATE LAW AND OR AUTHORIT IAL FACTS AND CLAIM THAT WE ARE
TER
§§ 242 AND 100 1 CONCEAL MA
IT IS
OF THESE CLAT~S ONLY, WHEN
TRYING TO SUE JUDGES FOR ALL
SUED FOR
THAT THE JUDGES CANNOT BE
OVERWHELMINGLY CONSPICUOUS
BEING PARTY
USLY MADE, EXCEPT FOR THEY
ANY OF THESE CLAIMS PREVIO
IRED
UIRES THAT WHOM THEY CONSP
CONSPIRACY WHERE THE LAW REQ
TO THE
PER SPI CU OU S
AS DEFENDANTS. IT BECOMES
WITH BY NAME MUST BE LIS TED
D CASES
THESE PARALLEL AND OR RELATE
THAT THE JUDGES PRESENCE IN
T THE
PRE JUD ICI AL MAGNITUDE, THA
IS OF SUCH A DETRIMENTAL AND
WARRANTING
AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
POTENTIAL FOR BIA S RIS ES TO
AND
AT ION AND THAT OUR REQUEST
CTIONS, RECUSAL, DIS QU AL IFIC
SAN
D. WE WANT
UE TO NEW JERSEY BE GRANTE
MOTION FOR A CHANGE OF VEN
ATED
OF THESE PARALLEL AND OR REL
DEFENDANTS AMENDED IN ALL
THE
AS ·THEY
ED, TO REFLECT THE PAR TIE S
CA SES , ALL THAT ARE CAPTION
l
OF
THEM TO BE FIL ED AND CHANGE
WERE ORIGINALLY INTENDED FOR
TH IS.
WANT INJUNCTION TO REQUIRE
VENUE TO NEW JERSEY AND WE
MOTION
ED ARE ISS UE S ON APPEAL. WE
NOTICE: ALL THE AFOREMENTION
S-~ .
M THE 4TH . CIR CU IT, Wl t.~l AM
FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT FRO
w.
~95 L.E d.2 d. 132 , 84 u.s .L.
W5¥LVAW1Ar 136 s.c t. 189 9,
~EW
-Wli:MQYRS
S"J;'Rl~~-lWC.-~.-~.1.-CU~QW"J;'-C~
435 9(U .S. 20~ 6); KOt.OW-lWCU
.
); ~A"J;'AW2A-1WC1AW-WA~lOW-~
O.r 748 F3d . 160 CA4 (V a.2 004
&-~
E
( S. C. 20~ 4); AR.A~A-~.-Ylt.I..AG
..
. S., C,._ ·52 6" 756 S,. E-.. 2d. I 900
5"J;'A~»;r 407
WlL~O:W
117 350 04, * 2+, S"C " Ap p.;
-OWWli:RS-ASS!W-lWC. 7 201 1 WL
»llii:i~~
7 (DS C.2 01 5) ;
F. Sup p. 3d. , , 201 5 WL 52 4 4 9 6
~ .... '5MA~-MQR"J;"c;;.-I.~C. 7
c;;Rli:A~
5 WL 856 866 (S. D.V a.2 015 );
-LAWRli:W~li:r F.S up p.3 d., 20~
· u.s.-~~
73 F.S upp .
W~"J;'WQRK-WARCWARE-CQR~.r
AMERl~AW-1WC.-~O.-~.-WEX"J;'CA¥~XA RrYE t.-A WC -~Q YR Sr- t.t.C .-~. -At .-~A
3d. 636 (20 14) ; 2LU E-S K¥- ~RA
.-~. -~E t.t. 7
163 6(V a.2 015 ); WUCAR ... CQ R~
-Fe d. Ap px '--, 201 5 WL 145
6
l~li:C-S~A~li:S-~.-QYlWOWli:Sr 201
~D . 191 , 194 (DS C.2 008 ); UW
251 F.R
u.s .
); ~QRRli:5"J;'ER-~.-WWl~li:r 484
441 314 9, * 6+ (S. D.V a.2 086
WL
d., 200 9
8); ULUSli:-~ .... Uv S•r F.S up p.2
219 , 108 S.C t. 53 8(U .S. t98
14- of- 70
20 12 WL
¼WQURr F. Su pp .2 d. ,
C. 20 09 ); A~~2~-~.-aE
WL 30 52 60 8( DS
r 20 16 WL
A~ Es -~ g~ ~.- G~ -~ U£ ~~ C~
JQ ~W ~O W -~ .-u wi ~~ ~- S~
11 30 66 0;
~RAZE~~
~r 20 16 WL 64 94 41 1;
16 ); UAh~A~-~.-MARCE
E45 93 46 7( D. M d. 20
S. C. Ap p. 20 09 ); R~~~
2, 68 2 s. E. 2d . 82 4(
50
~.-W~WQaORr 38 4 s. c.
12 ); CAR~~R
12 WL 10 84 7( DS C. 20
£EW7 F. Su pp .2 d. , 20
~RAlW-v.~2~R~U~~
~I W -~ .-W OR ~~
23 4( DS C. 20 14 ); E~ a~
O~lWAr 20 14 WL 53 25
~.-aOU~W-CAR
URWSr
C. 20 15 ); 2E~~OW-~.-2
20 15 WL 23 65 70 1( DS
A~~T
AGGE~~AWCE-CQRP.r
1) ; 2AC~US-~.-MAR~W
WL 64 02 48 CA4 (2 01
20 11
10 4
11 Fe d. Ap px ' 32 8,
~~ ~N r 46 6 u. s. 52 2,
C. 20 14 ); ~u ~~ 1A M -~ .~A
20 t4 WL 13 30 98 4( DS
9( 18 80 ).
RGlW~Ar 10 0 u. s. 33
.S .1 98 4) ; ~X-RAR~~-~~
s. ct . 19 70 (U
\
SO
AS BEING LI ST ED AL
D THESE DEFENDANTS
THE JUDGES BLOCKE
COURTS.
OF FRAUD UPON THE
D RECUSAL IN ACTS
AS A MEANS TO AVOI
THE ACTIONS
ADY GIVEN NOTICE BY
E PA RT IE S WERE ALRE
9; 16 WE OB JE CT . TH
UNDER CASES 16 -2 29
E WRITS OF MANDAMUS
ING
PENDING THROUGH TH
RELATED TO THE PEND
D OTHER PLEADINGS
41 5 AN
19 53 ; 16 -2 14 1; 17 -1
ALLY
NG-KHALIFAH PERSON
D CASES AND THE KI
PARALLEL AND RELATE
. OF JU ST IC E INFORM
RNEY AND U. S. DE PT
RAL ATTO
TH EI R
WROTE THE S. C. FEDE
THAT IT WOULD BE IN
S ADMONISHING THEM
SE
IN G THEM OF ALL CA
ED IN CASE
CE SI NC E THEY APPEAR
TO MAKE AN APPEARAN
CA SE S.
BE ST IN TE RE ST
RALLEL AND RELATED
REMOVED TO THESE PA
W
20 13 -C P- 40 0- 00 84 NO
33 27 ,
UNDER CASES 8: 16 -c vE DEFENDANTS NAMES
THUS,
YOU HAVE ALL TH
FID AV IT OF SE RV IC E.
A THE (3 4) PAGE AF
VI
33 28 , 31 94 -R BH -JD A
D OR WRIT
IGINAL COMPLAINT AN
LATE BACK TO THE OR
ALL
TH EI R NAMES RE
OR RELATED CA SE S.
THESE PARALLEL AND
OF ERROR IN ALL OF
RRING TO
NOT MERELY BY REFE
LI ST ED INDIVIDUALLY
'
NAMES MUSTt BE
l~C .,e 4 9 4 Fe d. Ap px
GOQCMAI:il-l.l .. -b !R AX Al RVI T,
A CASE OR AF FI DA
.IQlUi!SOI:il-lil,.-WARRLQ~~
8 5 0 {4 th . C ir . 2 0 0 7) ;
RV . 3d .
.-S ER UI .
4 5 8, 6 8 Fe d. R. SE
17 ); RU S~ ~~ ~- ~.- S. W
20 17 WL l9 57 07 1( 20
IW~ERWA~•ONAh-lN~.r
W -~ .-S RA ~~ ~¥
N. D. va .2 01 7) ; ~R ~~
Nr 20 U7 WL 14 49 21 1(
C~W~-~OR~ORA~lO
.
.3 d. 47 9 (D SC .2 0~ 6)
CQM~AW~r 19 4 F. Su pp
ECT
ERLY LI ST ED TO CORR
THAT ARE TO BE PROP
THE DEFENDANTS
13 4; 17 WELL AS CASES 17 -7
E PREVIOUS CASES AS
TH IS FRAUD IN TH
CASE UNDER 8: 16 ~c v,; THE ANTHONY COOK
A L.
70 68 ; 17 -7 13 9 ET .
A SIM IL AR
MUST BE LI ST ED IN
Y BEING PROCESSED,
ES
33 27 -R BH HOPEFULL
PENDENT ACTION IS SU
RIATION DUE TO INDE
HT VA
FASHION WITH A SL IG
RE IS LI MI TE D AND OR
. YOUR JU RI SD IC TI ON
SUBSEQUENTLY RA IS ED
15 -o f- 70
STRICTED TO ADDRESSING THE FRAUD IF ALL OF THE DEFENDANTS ARE
NOT PROPERLY LI~TED, AND BY THIS FRAUD THE COURT MUST REMAND
TO ALLOW THIS INJUSTICE TO BE CORRECTED, UvSv-v~~BIERCEz 400
F3d. 176 CA4 (Va.2005); COLE-u.-SLANKENSHlBr 30 F2de 211 CA4
(1929); LOUGHAN-~.-UcS•r 134 SoCte 2384(U.S.2014); SMITH-v.
CLARKt-SMOO~J-RUS.SELL 1 --F3d.--, 2015 WL 4717932 CA4 (Md.2015);
LUGA£-v.-2RISTOL-CON OOMINIUMS-PROPER~ X-OWNERS-ASS!N, s.E.2a.,·
2015 WL 3885837(S.C.App.20 15); FOX-EX-REL-FOX-v.-E LK-RUN-COAL
co.-INc.,
739 F3d. 131 CA4 (2014); NELSON-v.-UflS.-SAN K-N.A ••
2015 WL 6852712(DSCe2015); STRATTEN-v.-MECKLENBERG-COUNT¥-OEP.T.
OF-SOClAL-SERVlCES 1 521 Fede Appx 9 278, 2013 WL 2364587 CA4
(N.C.2013)e
NOTICE: THIS IS ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEAL. BY THE LEGAL
ISSUES SUBMITTED UNDER CASE 17-6693 THAT ARE ALSO FILED FOR
ALL PARALLEL AND OR RELATED CASES AND BY THE LITIGATION SUBMITTED
THAT DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PLRA AND THE AEDPA ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, DO WE HAVE A RIGHT TO CLASS ACTION CERTIFICATION, ALSO
BY THE ATTORNEY POWERS GIVEN TO THE KING-KHALIFAH BY THE DEFAULT.
INASMUCH, THE COURT IN CASES 17-7139; 17-7134 AND 177068 REQUIRED WE FILE IN FORMA PAUPERIS DOCUMENTS AND SUBMIT
INFORMAL BRIEF. EVEN THOUGH THIS ISSUE IS ADDRESSED IN CASES
17-6693 AND 17-6925 WHICH APPLIES TO ALL OF THESE CASES OF CONCERN. WE MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME UNTIL OCTOBER'lfi, 2017
BECAUSE THE 6 MONTH STATEMENTS MUST BE SENT TO s.c.o.c. HEAD
QUARTERS AND THE TURN AROUND TIME CAN TAKE UP UNTIL A MONTH
I
BEFORE ~>JE RECEIVE THEM BACK., THEREFORE., WE MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME UNTIL THEN TO FILE THE DOCUMENT AND ANY POTENTIAL
INFORMAL BRIEF OR BRIEF OF ANY KIND. NEVERTHELESS, BY ALL DOCU-.
MENTS FILED IN CASES 17-6693 AND 17-6925, TO INCLUDE THOSE HERE
WITH ATTACHED. WE MOTION TO WAIVE THE FILING FEES FOR ALL APPELLANTS IN THESE CASES DUE TO ACTS OF CRIMINAL CONVERSION DONE
BY JUDGE SEYMOUR AND THE CLAIMS ARGUED WITHIN 'rHOSE CASES WHICH
ARE NOW FOR ALL CASES LISTED WITHIN THE CAPTION OF THIS DOCUMENT.
'l'O ESTABLIStl CAUSE OF AC'TION TO RECOVER DAL•lAGES FOR CON-
VERSION, WHERE JUDGE SEYMOUR STOLE MONEY FROM ROBERT MITCHELL'S
~6-of-70
COOPER TRUST FUND ACCOUNT, WHICH WAS MONEY
OWED TO THE KING KHALIFAH, GIVING HIM THE RIGHT OF CLAIM. A
.
.
PLAI NTIF F MUST SHOW
I
.
LEGAL OWNERSHIP OR AN IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR RIGH
T OF POSS ESSIO N
TO A SPEC IFIC IDEN TIFIA BLE THING AND MUST
SHOW THAT THE DEFE NDAN T(S) EXERCISED AN UNAUTHORIZED DOMINLON
OVER THE THING IN
QUESTION TO THE. EXCLUSION OF THE P~AI NTIF
F(S) RIGH TS. ROBERT
MITCHELL OWED THAT MONEY TO THE KING-KHALIFAH
GIVING US BOTH
STANDING TO CHALLENGE AND SEEK SANCTION FOR
THIS INJU STIC E WHICH
ARE GRANTED BY DECREE AND JUDGMENT OF THE
CHIEF JUST ICE OF THE
GLOBAL THEOCRATIC COURT. ALL FILIN G FEES FOR
ALL PARTIES ARE
WAIVED. THE UNITED STATES rs IN DEFAULT IN
CASE 2013 -CP- 4000084 . YOUR GLOBAL NATIONS VIA THE DEFAULT
HAD NO RIGHT TO ATTACH,
.
I
.
ARREST OR EXECUTE THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
, GIVEN TO YOUR NATION S BY "GRANT", "FRA NCH ISE", "COVENANT",
"CONTRACT 11 ORIGINATING
FROM THE SOLE CORPORATION WHICH HAD RESTRICT
IONS WHICH YOU VIOLATED WHICH IS PROTECTED UNDER THE U.S. CONS
TITUTION ARTICLE
1 SECTION 1 0. YOU HAD NO_, AUTHORIZATION
TO GIVE THIS INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY TO THE SODOMITES AND GOMMORAHRITES
OF YOUR NATIONS.
CAUSE IS ESTABLISHED. WE MOTION FOR AN INDE
PENDENT INVESTIGATION
BY SOMEONE NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION, ~IWQ
/
I.~.-~ .-I.R .~.-IW ~~RW A~•Q WA~ -IW~ •r 2016 WL 5936
875( NeY .201 6);
WA~ !~-C~ R.-R QR-C RiSI 5-W~ M~.y -IWC .-~.-~ ~RN~ Rr
~UX
91 AaD .3d. 920,
920- 21, 938 N.Y .S.2d . 138, 138- 39(2 nd.D EPT
.2D1 2).
JUDGE KAYMANI WEST IN ONE OF THE PARALLEL
APPEALS ISSUED
AN ORDER ON AUGUST 23, 2017 CLAIMING SHE
COULD NOT READ SOME
OF THE LEGAL DOCUMENTS FILE D. THE ATTACHED
REFERRED TO ORDER
IS NOW SOUGHT LEAVE TO APPEALe WE INFORMED
THE COURT IN CASES
17-6 969; 17-6 693 AND 17-6 925 ALSO ARGUED
IN THE (19) PAGE INJU NCTION THAT WE ARE BORROWING A TYPEWRITER TO
WHICH WE DO NOT ALWAYS
HAVE ACCESS TO DUE TO-STATE INTERFERENCE.
JUDGE WEST ABUSED
HER DISC RETI ON. THIS ORDER IS VACATED AND
ON REMAND BY DECREE
OF THE CHIE F JUST ICE OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRAT
IC COURT. IT IS CONSPICUOUS BY WHAT rs ARGUED IN THE (19) PAGE
INJUNCTION THAT
THE STATE INTERFERENCE DO INDEED RISE TO
AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL
LEVEL WHERE THE DEFENDANTS IN THESE PARALLEL
AND RELATED CASES
DESTROYED THE KING -KHA LIFA H'S TYPEWRITER,
SUBJECTING HIM TO
I
l
'
17-o f-70
...
PHYSICJiL-MSAU1,TS MD ---~!EID -@UWGOOOS
ciusz°, 'THEJ- -iici--:-B~SUFFmlS ROM A LIF E
-.
.....
-·
ACTS @If' mff llllT IOi@ - -
LONG
DISABILITY--TO-::Hl'.s·:--:
-·· ..
-w1 0s· CREATED
a:ts ·--wa~TING MORE LEGfBLEo THE DIS ~IL Xff TO HIS
<••
.--•••-•••"••-•, • , - • A • • - • - - - - • , . ___ , .
BY THE.,AC'l:'S OF OFF ICIA L
TBJESE D~F EM D~S , ALONG
MDT.AL
-•-••-•-••OHO•'
•
TORTURE
~XTH ffl
--r-• •-•• -
H VAS
• -••
••-- -
--1-•••••• ••
••••----•- ••-•-
•
S ~ E D ~ Bl!
DESTRUCTXON·OF HIS PROPERTY
XN ACC - TO 'J:'BE OOUR'fj. WAS . OO~E
-- -·-·-··
THEY Kr3EW HE DID NEED-'1'0 AID .... -- ESS
-- -~
-
.
.
.
!JUN TU Y· ··o o·u ·•~ SUWPD
SUEJEC'1' .. EIJ4 TO mn HS E _PBYSICU.
mELisy
xN
HR1T1ea - wo -u HoPis •·ow -onw1MG- sxll'l! niolMI
ixn ~
t ACCESS TO TFllf
C:ISXNG THE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIG m·e
ACTS "of' lPBYSICAL ,-O ri~ -·
-· . ......
COURTS., 'fflI S ALSO IS TAM'l'AHOUNT ro
WHICE THEY ARE BEING SUED
IN VIO ATI ON OF THE CeAeT. TREA~Y FOft
ASLE
Cl s !WiD S is IRRJU'M
FORc THE DAMAGE 'l'O THE KING-KlliALIFAE
UDGE llYMAN:l'.-WEST., CONAS THE DOCTORS HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID~'J
OR OF STATE LAW -MD OR
SPIRING WITH -THE DEFENDANTS UNDER ...COL
ER WITHIN THE DISTRICT COURT
AUTHORITY, ISSUES THIS ATTACHED ORD
Y PENALIZED
ACT OF-MACHINATION SHE HAS-- . /ESSENTIALL
.
..
'
ABILITY
ACTS OF RETALIATION 'FOR HIS DIS..
-· --THE ..KING-KHALIFAH IN .
.. ..
.
...
AN OBSTACLE TO BAR OR REWHERE THIS ORDER SERVES AS A MEANS 0
TION OF 42 U.S .Ce § 12203
STRICT HIS ACCESS TO THE COURT.IN vfLA
IES ACT. SINCE THE KING(a)b ) OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILIT
MAKE HIS LEGAL
KHALIFIAH BY WAY OF HIS DISABILITY
SPECWFICALLX AT TIMES WHEN
MENTS ANY MORE LEGIBLE.THAN HE HAS,
S ARE NOW CLEARLY
HE DOES NOT -HAV E ACCESS TO A TYPEWRITER. DAMAGE
COURT
T IS NOW SE!WED ON THE LOWER
•
- - •
•~•
•••
•
-
----•
M
•
•-
••••
WHERE-XN THIS
'
••
••-••
-•
•
•••--••-
...
-•
••-•
.
--
:
~
CANNOT
DOCU-
•
1
-
.
SHOWN -AND THE INJU NCT ION THA
ED-BY JUDGE WEST PRODUCES
~-S ~? SE GRANTED. THE ORDER PRODUC
AND BY THE STATE INTEREVIDENCE OF DAMAGES VIA THE DISABILITY
IT DEMONSTRATES INDEED THAT
FERENCE ARGUED IN THE INJUNCTION 6
E TO AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL.
THE STATE INTERFERENCE DOES RIS
HTS UNDER THE AMERICANS
, THEREFORE, BY THE JING~KHALIFAH'S RIG
MUST AND IS GRANTED. WE
WITH DIS ABI LIT IES ACT, THE INJUNCTION
WEST TO SIGN THE INJUNCTION
MOTION THAT THE COURT INSTRUCT JUDGE
HTS AND THE COMPLEXITY OF
ANO PROTECTIVE ORDER. DUE TO ADA RIG
THE CASE IT MUST BE GRANTED.
•
..
,CC-
18- of-7 0
JUDGE WEST, BY THE ISSUING OF SUCH AN ORDER SUBJUDICE
ON AUGUST 23, 2017; THIS HAS GOT TO BE THE MOST STUPID, IGNORANT,
UNREASONABLE ORDER I HAVE EVER SEEN IN MY ENTIRE LIFE. BY SUCH
AN ORDER JUDGE WEST HAS ESSENTIALLY ORDERED A "BLIND MAN" TO
STOP BEING BLIND. SHE HAS ORDERED A "PARALYZED MAN" TO STOP
BEING PARALYZED. SHE ORDERED A "LAME MAN" WITH NO LEGS TO GET
UP AND DANCE THE TENNESSEE WALTZ AND DANCE THE "CHARLESTON"
, THEN DANCE A BALLET, .BREAK DANCE THEN JUMP UP AND DO (20)
JUMPING JACKS. JUDGE WEST IN AN EGREGIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE
HAS ORDERED A DISABLED PLAINTIFF, THE KING-KHALIFAH, TO STOP
BEING DISABLED IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.s.c. § 12203(a)(b) OF THE
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, WHICH IS LUDICROUS, UNREASON/
ABLE AND CRIMINAL IN ACTS OF RETALIATION AND OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE. BY SUCH ACTION, LEGAL COUNSEL MUST BE APPOINTED TO
I
REPRESENT THE CLASS MEMBERS TO PREVENT ANY FURTHER INJUSTICES
FROM OCCURRING. WE MOTION FOR SUCH, BUT THE KING-KHALIFAH DO
NOT WAIVE HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF SELF REPRESENTATION. LET
COUNSEL ACT AS STAND-BY TO ASSIST THE KING-KHALIFAH WITH SUCH.
MATTERS AS FILING, TYPING OR ANY OTHER MATTER THAT MAY STAND
AS AN OBSTACLE DUE TO THE DISABILITY IN HIS HANDS CAUSED BY
. THESE DEFENDANTS. THE KING-KHALIFAH SHALL RETAIN HIS RIGHT OF
SELF REPRESENTATION WHILE LEGAL COUNSEL BE APPOINTED IN FULLNESS
FOR THE OTHER CLASS MEMBERS. BY THE DEFAULT AND JUDGMENT OF
THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE, THE KING REMAIN
AS LEAD PLAINTIFF. THE APPOINTING OF LEGAL COUNSEL AND THE GRANTING OF THE INJUNCTION NOW BECOMES MANDATORY. IT IS SO ORDERED,
~AaK¥-~.-~ORR~a~QWN-~~~?..%. 425 N.J. SUPER. 530, 42 Aa3de 202
(N.J.2012); RULE 23(g) Fede RULES OF PRO.; RQ¥5~~RS-~.-WEW-JER S~X
S~A~E-~GL~CEr 439 N.J. SUPER. 554, 110 A.3d. 934(N.J.2015);
~A~~UWA-~.-SARA-~E ~-CQRP. 7 A.2d., 2010 WL 3418354 (2010); 2AR~~
~~~~-~.-~EW-¥GRK-S~ A~E-sg.-G~-~AW-~XAM 1WERSr 970 F.Supp. 1094
(S.D.N.Y.1997); K~MELr 528 u.s. at 86, 120 s.ct. 631; ~~RR~~~
Y.-~S~E~LEr 568 F2d. 1128, 1132-1133 CA5 (1978); ~~Q~LE-~.-R~YERA
, 125 MISC.2d. 516, 528, 480 N.Y.Su2d. 426, 434 (Sup.Ct.1984);
u.s.
509, 124 s.ct. fl978, 158 L.Ed.2d.
820(2004); SA2¥-WEA~-EGR-A~0 -2¥-KA~~ER-~.-CAS~¥ r 43 F3d. 48
(3rd.Cir.~994); bACK~-~.-GREEW~R~Er 330 s.c. 388, 498 s.E.2d.
~EMWESSEE-~7-~AMEz 541
19-of-70
89 8 (S eC e 19 98 ) c,
TO TA LAPPEAL., DUE TO THE
IS ANOTHER ISSUE ON
NOTICE: THIS
ION FOR THE APDO WE MEET THE CRITER
CES~
ES
ITY OF THE CIRCUMSTAN
ICANS WITH DI SA BI LI TI
UNSEL UNDER THE AMER
S ACTS
POINTMENT OF LEGAL CO
DUE TO THE EGREGIOU
TY OF THE CASEu AND
ACT, THE COMPLEXI
ACY AND OBSTRUCTION
TS, CRIMINAL CONSPIR
UR
OF FRAUD UPON THE CO
OF JUSTICE?
42
u. s. c. A . §
12 20 3 PROVIDES:
ATES
42 OF THE UNITED ST
APTER 12 6 OF TITLE
* 4 CH
TH DI SA BI LI TI ES ACT
AS THE AMERICANS WI
OWN
CODE IS COMMONLY KN
CTION 12 20 3 OF THE
u. s. c. § 12 10 1 ET~ SE Q. SE
(ADA) ·SECTION 42
COERCION• PROVIDES:
BIT RETALIATION AND
PROH
ADA, WHICH AIMS TO
i
(a ) RB'l'ALllTION
BE NST ANY INDIVIDUAL
L DISCRIMINATE AGAI
NO PERSON SHAL
ACTICE MADE LAWFUL
POSED ANY ACT OF PR
AL ~S OP
E
CAUSE SUCH INDIVIDU
E COURTS) OR BECAUS
INCLUDE ACCESS TO TH
CH
~ST THESE
BY THIS CHAPTER (WHI
IFIED (AS WE DO AGAI
MADE A CHARGEu TEST
SUCH INDIVIDUAL
PARTICIPATED IN ANY
TIONS), ASSERTED OR
SANC
Y SEEK
DEFENDANTS SEEKING
THE ONE WE PRESENTL
STIGATION (SUCH AS
TER.
MANNER IN AN INVE
ING UNDER THIS CHAP
PROCEEDING, OR HEAR
OR
BEFORE THE COURT),
ALL
INTYMIDATION; IT SH
ERENCE, COERCION OR
(b ) INTERF
ERE WITH
THREATEN, OR INTERF
COERCE, INTIMIDATE,
BE UNLAWFUL TO
T OF, OR ON ACCOUNT
EXERCISE OR ENJOYMEN
THE
R HAVING
ANY INDIVIDUAL IN
ACCOUNT OF HI S OR HE
VING ENJOYED, OR ON
OF HIS OR HER HA
IN THE EXERCISE OR
Y OTHER INDIVIDUAL
AN
D ACCESS
AIDED OR ENCOURAGED
OTECTED (RELIGION AN
RIGHT GRANTED OR PR
EL
ENJOYMENT OF, ANY
IFFS IN THESE PARALL
CHAPTERo THE PLAINT
lS
TO THE COURTS) BY TH
LIFAH IN THE EXERAIDING THE KING-KHA
S WERE
AND OR RELATED CASE
Y PROTECTED RIGHT OF
HIS CONSTITUTIONALL
OF
OF
CI SE AND ENJOYMENT
URTS AND BY THE LAWS
ON, ACCESS TO THE CO
FREEDOM OF RELIGI
N SOVEREIGN RIGHTS
THE DEFAULT, FOREIG
A
THE UNITED STATES VI
ACT.
SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
UNDER THE FOREIGN
20 -o f- 70
THE REMEDIES AND PROCEDURES AVAILABLE UNDER SECTION 12117,
12133 AND 12188 OF THE TITLE SHALL BE AVAILABLE TO AGGRIEVED
PERSONS FOR VIOLATION OF SUBSECTION (a)-AND (b) OF THIS SECTION
WITH RESPECT _TO SUBCHAPTER 1, SUBCHAPTER 1~ AND SUBCHAPTER 14
OF THIS CHAPTER. THE KING REMAINS PROPRIA PERSONA. WE RENEW
THE DEMAND FOR CRIMINAL CHARGES AND A FULL INVESTIGATION BY
AN INDEPENDENT AGENT NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION
• THE PARTIES ARE CONSPIRING TO AVOID PROSECUTION, SUIT, AND
THE CONCEALMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS. THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF
THE RICO ACT. NOTICE: THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT IS ON APPEAL, WA~KER
~.-2EAUMQM~-~WQE~EMQEN~-SCl;IQ0~-Ql£~Rl~~r 2016 WL 6666833; GA~l
v.-~QS~QW-Cl;IJ;I.,J;)REW!£-l;IQ~a~l'.I'AI.y 1 61 F. Supp. 3d. 136 ( 201 6) • FOR
THE COURT TO NOT INSTRUCT THE JUDGES TO SIGN THE INJUNCTION
WOULD DEMONSTRATE A CONSCIOUSNESS OF GUILT, EAR~~-~.-~~A~Ey
S.E.2d.,--2016 WL 6092514(Sup.Ctc2016); £~A~i-Y.-~ONEXr S.E.2d.,
2014 WL 2575415(2014); S~A~~-~~-•NMANr 395 SoC. 539, 720 s.EG2d.
31(2011).
INSOMUCH, THE LAW FIRMS AND OR ATTORNEYS THAT WE'VE SPOKEN
TO THAT WOULD BE WILLING TO TAKE THESE CASES UPON THE ISSUING
OF AN ORDER FROM THE COURT ARE:
(1) EVANS, MOORE LLC (843) 995-5000;
(2) DAVIDSON AND LINDERMANN P.A. (803) 806-8222;
(3) NELSON 1 MULLINS WHO ALSO HAVE A PRO BONO COMMITTEE
, JAMES ROLLINS (617) 573-4722 OR NORAH ROGERS (803) 255-9546
THEIR 11 800 11 NUMBER IS 1-800-237-2000.
ANY OF THESE ATTORNEYS CAN BE APPOINTED TO REPRESENT
THE CLASS MEMBERS AND OR ACT AS STAND-BY FOR THE KING-KHALIFAH
AS HE PARTAKES IN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF SELF REPRESENTATION
• THE STATE AND OR FEDERAL INTERFERENCE IN THIS INSTANCE RISES
TO AN UNCO_NSTITUTIONAL LEVEL WHERE THESE JUDGES ARE TRYING TO
RESTRICT THE KING-KHALIFAH'S ACCESS TO THE COURT ESSENTIALLY
PENALIZING HIM IN ACTS OF RETALIATION DUE TO HIS DISABILITY
IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C.
§ 12203(a)(b) OF ADA. WE SEEK SANC21-of-70
TXONS.
~
ALSO MOTION FOR DECIJUtMfORY J U ~ T ROM THE 4lTE!e
·-- -~-~---·--·~ . --.
····-···
...
.
. CXRCUXT COURT OF APPEALS~ ~.;,Ji,e,..,:uffll$2 ·-80'\l F2d..,. 1191,, . ~ 196
-
...
-
usm~·~:;~wsHi~M;·-1~Y-,,2~c~ :-122,sii-~c1;~->; ~!'~SE,~~~~;;S£xu_~::_37~~f--ti~_s·~~-~~-t_)1"3 , :· sj·. s~c{~ .i~~; ~:-~~nsoil
,·9th "c1r·. fgas, ;--
19s 6
¥.v---~~-~§_tr 358 F2d& "'-i796 _481
CEJROf. DENIED lS!fof~-s:-·· -· ··•
889, 19 SoCt .. 131, 3 L~Ed~2dc, 116 ( 1 ~58) 0 ~UL~o-QQmll~:,.
186 N..,J~ · 12'i, ft2 (20~8h. -~1!:ICB...K<1>~RDE1\".\ ~~~-- Ue_S.~ .. !!?._o_. ~ ~3-.,
81
.
s.ct.
.
(9th~C1Ir.-)
473, .cl82, 5 L.Ede2de 492(1961); ~SX..a ...BQUD..OE~D•
.
.·.
.:
GE»ii'S-OE'.. Si'A~E-OE.. Jrl.ORJ:DAg 457 U.,Sc, 500,, 102.
s. ct-~
?.55.7 ( 1962);
AL~MA~r 541 UeS• 677(U.S.200~)~
WE MOTION FOR A REHEARING EN BANC IN CASE 17-1~15 WHICH
SHALL BE GRANTED BY THE 4TH. CIRCUIT THESE CASES NOW BEING OFFICIALLY ON REMAND FROM THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC COURTe ALL ORDERS·
ISSUED IN CASES 16-1953; 16-21~1; 17-1415 DUE TO STRUCTURAL
ERROR ARE VOID AND VACATED. ALL OF THESE CASES ARE ESSENTIALLY
ON REMAND BY DECREE AND JUDGMENT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE
GLOBAL THEOCRATIC COURT, RESTRICTING, LIMITING YOUR JURISDICTION
TO DO NOTHING EXCEPT GRANT THE RELIEF THAT IS DEMANDED WITHIN
THESE CASES FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
JUDGE GREGORY AND DIAZ ACTED IM RETALIATION BECAUSE WE PEEPED THE MOVE THEY INTENDED TO DO IN CASE 17-6960
SO WE MOTIONED FOR THEIR RECUSAL. IN RETALIATION IN VIOLATION
.OF 42 U.S.Ce § 122Q3(a)(b) THEY COMPROMISED SHEDD AND MADE A
FRAUDULENT RULING TO GET AHEAD OF US MOTIONING ~OR THEIR RECUSAL
(1)
IN THIS CASE.,
( 2) THEIR JUDGMENT CONFLICTS WITH A RECENT DECISION·.
MADE BY THE UNITED STATES SlJPREME COURT IN WU.LIANS-v .-~ENMS¥L•
VANIAr 136 s.ct. 1899, 195 L.Ed.2d. 132, 84 u.s.L.w. 4359
'
(U.S.2016).
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CASES THE 4th. CIRCUIT.JUDGES CITED
RELATED TO RECUSAL SUCH AS 811 F2d. 8~8. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE
CASES MARCHANT AND AUSTIN CITED RELATED TO RECUSAL SUCH AS:
384 u.s. 563; 988 F2d. 1335; 581 F2d. 1114; 946 F2d. 335; 15
F3d. 319; 2012 WL 2805717 WHERE THESE JUDGES CONSPIRED IN COURTS
22-of-70
TO WHICH THEY HAD NO JURISDICTION TO MAKE THE CLAIMS APPEAR
l
FRIVOLOUS WHEN THEY WERE NOT VIA THE DEFAULT EMERGING FROM CASE
20~3-CP-400-0084e WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CASES JUDGES WEST AND
BAKER CITED RELATED TO RECUSAL- 882 F2dQ 913; 733 F2d. 304;
691 F2d. 666; ~26 F2d. 158; 581 F2do 1114; 510 UeS. 540; 330
F3d. 658 ALL THESE~ INCLUDING THE GRXSMQRE CASE THAT WAS OVER
0
RULED BY THAT SAME CIRCUITe ALL OF THESE CASES THE JUDGES IN
TOTAL CITED AT BEST, THE LATEST CITED CASE IS FROM 2012. THE
REMAINDER OF THEM ARE FROM THE BO'S THROUGH 2003. THE JUDGES
ARE. ATTEMPTING TO NULLIFY u.sQ SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED IN 2016 WITH LOWER COURT CASES OVER (20) YEARS OLD AND
THAT ARE NOT FROM THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT; ATTEMPTING
TO GIVE THE LOWER, LESSER COURTSv POWER OVER THE U.Se SUPREME
,
COURT ITSELF. WE OBJECT. THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IN
\
WllLXAMS-Vc-PENNSYLVANlAr 136 S.Ct~ 1899(U.S.2016) GAVE CLARITY
TO THESE EARLIER CITED CASES. THE LOWER COURTS CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO OVER RIDE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WITH OLD CASES TO
RENDER VOID OR WATER DOWN THEIR RULINGS MADE IN 2016. I, WE
OBJECT. THE CRITERION ESTABLiSHED BY THE WILLIANS CASE IS (3)
PRONG TO WHICH IF ONLY ONE OF THESE EXIST, RECUSAL BECOMES MANDATORY. THEY ARE: (@) A JUDGE CANNOT SIT UPON HIS OWN CASE; (2)
HE CANNOT SIT IF HE HAS AN INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME;
(3) HE CANNOT
SIT IF THE POTENTIAL FOR BIAS RISES TO AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL.
EXTRA-JUDICIAL SOURCE FOR BIAS IS NOT THE STANDARD FOR RECUSAL
AS WAS DETERMINED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. THE AFOREMENTIONED
ARE THE (3) PRONG STANDARD AND CRITERION. ALL (3) OF THESE EXIST
IN THESE .PARALLEL AND RELATED CASES TO WHICH THESE JUDGES ARE
DEFENDANTS, TO INCLUDE EGREGIOUS ACTS OF FRAUD UPON THE COURTS,
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY WARRANTING SANCTIONS AND RECUSAL, .aEN'l'ON-v.-SURNS, 2017 WL 491251(D1.C.Mdo
2017); ~EGG-v.-HEARNBERGER 1 845 F3d. 112(4th.Cir.2017); JOUNSQN
v.-S~RDr 2016 WL 6839410(N.CID2016); GRAliAM--Vq--GAYRQN, 831 F3d.
176 (4th.Cir.2016); BERGER-v.
u.s.,
255
~.s.
22, 41
s.ct.
230,
65 L.Ed. 481 (U.S.1921); CANADA Vo-MILLER, F.Supp.3d., 2014 WL
1512245(2014); BOO'fii-v.-.BALLARDr 2016 WL 1275054(2016)(DEMO NSTRATING THAT A HEARING MUST OCCUR IN THE DISTRICT COURT); UNITED
STATES v. QUINONES,--F.Supp .jct.--,2016 WL 4413149(2016).
23-of-70
.;·
NO MAN CAN TRY A CASE \ TO WHICH HE HAS AN INTEREST IN
THE OUTCOMEo EXTRA-JUDICIAL BIAS WAS ONLY ~on OUT OF Mlif~
EXAMPLES THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT WAS REFERRING TO AND
ADDRESSINGG WHEN THE OBJECTIVE RISK OF ACTUAL BIAS •oF ANY Knm•
(EMPHASIS ADDED) RISES TO AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL, UNDER THE
DUE PROCESS CLAUSE, THE FAILURE TO RECUSE IS E(N]OT~ A HARMLESS
ERROR BECOMING STRUCTURAL IN NATURE WHICH VOID'S THE COURT'S.
JURISDICTION FOR DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONo JUDGES DIAZ AND GREGORY
WERE REQUIRED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES AS WERE THE LOWER COURT JUDgES
WITHIN THE S.Ce U.So DISTRICT COURTo
WATCH THE LANGUAGE USED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME
COURT. '°ON THE QUESTIO N OF RECUSAL, THE COURT ASKS ·uuarrai WHETHER A JUDGE HARBORS AN ACTUAL BIAS (FOR EXAMPLEf JUDICIAL BIAS
AS IN AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION THE CONSPIRING JUDGES ASSERTED),
BUT "INSTEAD• (EMPHASIS ADDED) WHETHER, AS AN OBJ~CTIVE MATTER
8
THERE IS A n[P)OTE NTIAL• FOR BIAS OF .ANY KIND• (EMPHASIS ADDED)
THAT RISES TO AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL'°, WHICH IS CONSPICUOUS
THAT SUCH AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL DOES EXIST IN THESE PARALLEL
AND OR RELATED CASES AS IS EVIDENCED BY WHAT OCCURRED INVOLVING
THESE JUDGES OF CONCERN~ CAREAT ON-v.-A v~v-MA SSEY-C QAL-CO c~lNC.r
556 U.S. 868, 129 S.Ct. 2252, 173 LeEde2 d. 1208 (UeS.2 009);
JOHNSON-Ve-STEVENSONr 2016 WL 115664 9(DSC. 2016); UNWOOD-~ARDENS
CO~COMINIUMS-INC~-v.-WllALE~-RRORER~IESz-LLC.r 2016 WL 678805 2,
*
11+ (Md.20 16).
(3) EVERY WRIT OF MANDAMUS RULING IS VOID FOR DUE
PROCESS VIOLATION BY THE STRUCTURAL ERROR WHERE EVERY MANDAMUS
RULING WAS RENDERED BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF THE PRISON
LITIGATION REFORM ACT WHICH THE 4TH. CIRCUIT DEMANDED AS A PREREQUISITE FOR ENTRY INTO THE 4TH. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS.
EVEN THE CASES JUDGES GREGORY, DIAZ AND SHEDD CITED VIOLATE
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT HOLDINGS UNDER EX-PAR ~E-VlRG X~lA
AND Tli~-SLAU~H~~R-HOUSE-CASESv INCLUDING IW-RE~ -S~ARD r 811 ,F2d.
818 IS TAINTED AS WELL WHICH VOID THE ORDER IN CASE 17-141 5.
THE CASES ARE ILLEGAL AS IS ANY ORDER ISSUED IN CASE 17-141 5,
AS WELL AS ANY ORDER ISSUED WITHIN ALL OF THESE CASES LISTED
24-of-7 0
L AND OR
CUMENT FOR THESE PARALLE
THE CAPTION OF TH IS DO
WI TH IN
-66 93 AND 17 AR,GUED WITHIN CASES 17
LATED CASES JU ST AS IS
RE
MENTo
LATER WITHIN TH IS DOCU
IS WILL BE ELABORATED ON
69 25 . TH
THE JUDGES. THE JUDGES
G BACK TO THE ISS UE OF
REFERRIN
AS A MEANS
BEING LIS TE D PROPERLY
D THE DEFENDANTS FROM
BLOCKE
T'S ENTRY NUMBER
THE So C. DIS TR ICT COUR
TO AVOID RECUSALc PER
WE GAVE
SE 9:1 7-c v-1 14 0-T LW -B M.
ED AUGUST a, 20 17 IN CA
(16 ) FIL
E OF SEEKING
L PARTIES JU DIC IAL NOTIC
THE 4T H. CIR CU IT AND AL
ORDER ONLY
DAYS OF RE CE IPT OF THAT
TO APPEAL WITHIN (14 )
LEAVE
OLVING ZANCHELLI
UD UPON THE COURTS INV
TO BE SUBJECTED TO FRA
CURRED IN
A SIMILAR SITUATION OC
E S.C . DIS TR ICT COURT.
AND TH
D
OB JEC T. THE ORDER ISS UE
68 -H MH -SV H TO WHICH WE
CASE 1~ 17 -cv -14
RECUSE
DER'ON THEIR FAILURE TO
ANT ACTED AS A FIN AL OR
BY MARCH
AL
K AS PARTY DUE TO REMOV
NUE; ADDING ANTHONY COO
AND TRANSFER VE
3(1 )(W HE RE
NT TO 28 U. S.C . §§ 144
20 13 -C P-4 00 -00 84 PURSUA
OF CASE
16 02 L CO NV ICT ION S), 26 79 ,
NTS RELATED TO CRIMINA
WE ARE DEFENDA
D RECOMMENDARCHANT IN THE REPORT AN
ET SE Q.( WH ICH IS WHY MA
!61 2
SE
THE EVIDENCE IN THAT CA
ED REMOVAL TO PREVENT
TIO N PREVENT
TION (WHICH
WE OBJECT TO ); CONSOLIDA
ENTERING THE COURT WHICH
FROM
INCORRECTLY TO
LIS TE D THE DEFENDANTS
IS ANOTHER REASON THEY
ARATING
JECT TO ); THE JUDGES SEP
NSOLIDATION WHICH WE OB
DENY CO
A; DENIAL OF
E PLRA ANO OR THE AEDP
; THEY MAKING USE OF TH
US
IMMEDICE RT IFI CA TIO N. THUS, WE
VENUE AND CLASS ACTION
CHANGE OF
IN BOTH CASES 9:1 7- cv VE TO APPEAL THE ORDERS
ATELY SOUGHT LEA
D IR RE H OR IT WOULD HAVE CAUSE
-BM AND 1:1 7-1 468 -H MH -SV
114 0-T LW
RE THEY BEGAN. TH IS DI
TO THE PROCEEDINGS BEFO
PARABLE DAMAGE
N PENDING THAT REVIEW.
TH COURTS OF JU RIS DIC TIO
VESTED BO
C
1\
:
, I
Ll
Fl
: -:
. i
~1
J •. THi KING/ ·,ii~!'tIFAH rs SOVEREIGN
BY HIS ORIGINAL STATUS AS SOVEREIGN TO INCLUDE ALL THE ATTRI11
BUTS ATTRIBUTED TO HIM. , '!UCK.5ii-WC-~ .. -UGliH{lW5r 11 8 U.S. 3 5 6 •
ENGL~sg-v.-~g QRWr 676 F.Supp. 761 (S.D.Miss.198 7); ~gE-CR~C-SCQ ~~
~As~•r 60 u.s 393; 5~QGSCl~~-ll.~ 5~2E~~USz F.Supp.2d., 2013 WL
5211483(DSC .2013); ~E~ER-2.-ll,-SA W~QRCr F.Supp.2d., 2012 WL
2149784; ~ARRAW~-REGIQWA~-WA~ER-CI£';c .. -v.. -g~RWAWNr 133 s.ct..
2120, 1_86 L.Ed.2d. 153(U.S.2C'13 ); 5AWAW~AR-1.r.-¥QJJSli:Rr 560 U.S.
305, 130 S.Ct. 2278(UeS.201 0); ~~RWAWE~~-M~SS;i:GW-0~-lWC~A-~Q
~~E-UWl~EQ-WA~~QNS-11.-Cl~~-O~-Wli:W-~QRKr 551 u.s. 193, 127 s.ct.
2352, 168 L.Ed.2d. 85, u.s.L.W. 4433(U.S~200 7).
(28) "THE PROPHET, LAWGIVER OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AND
SOVEREIGNTY ITSELF IS, OF COURSE, NOT SUBJECT TO THE LAW, FOR
HE IS THE "LAWGIVER" OF GOD AND IN SUCH IS THE AUTHOR AND SOURCE
11
OF THE LAW BEFORE ALL MANKIND ,
~EE-~.-~G~K1W a 7 118 U.S. 356.
~.CKS-WG-v.-go~KIWS-AM~-WQO
(29) "THE LAWS OF THE ONE TRUE GOD SUBSCRIBES TO
51-of-70
- - - - - - - - - - - - ·--
------·---~--------------------
--~---------· --
CRATIC STA'!'!!i,
HIS APPOINTED KING / KHALIFAH OF THE GLOBAL THEO
)
MAHDI, AND THE
JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH T. TISHB ITE IBNo YAQUB, AL
IBUTE OF SOVE CITIZ ENS OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE THE ATTR
HIS OWN GLOBAL
REIGN TY; HE IS SOVEREIGN AND INDEPENDENT WITHIN
S, KHALIFAHS UNDER
THEOCRATIC DOMINION AND HIS SUBJECTS ARE KING
/ KHALIFAH; HE
HIM ALSO INDEPENDENT BUT SUBJUGATED TO THE KING
ANY OTHER PONAND HIS SUBJECTS OWE NO KIND OF SUBJECTION TO
I
SUPERSEDE ALL
TENTA·TE OR GOVERNMENT ON EARTH FOR GOD S LAWS
MANKIND BEIN G
EARTHLY LAWS AND PLACE THEM IN HARMONY WITH ALL
THAT NO SUIT
A GUIDE AND LIGHT UNTO THE WORLD. HENCE, IT IS,
KING / KHALIFAH
OR ACTION CAN BE BROUGHT AGAINST GOD'S APPOINTED
, EVEN IN CIVI L
OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE OR HIS SUBJ ECTS
OVER HIM OR
MATTERS, BECAUSE NO COURT CAN HAVE JURIS DICT ION
POWER", ~W::tSQI...M
THEM, FOR ALL JURIS DICT ION IMPL IES SUPREMACY OF
URRA ••
v.-G~ QRG •Ar 2 DALL 419, 458; ~WGI..:tg~-~.-~~QRW-5
INTED
(30) "IN THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE GOD'S APPO
·iBN. YAQUB,
KING / KHALIFAH, JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH T. TISH BITE
THE SOVER~IGN
AL MAHDI, THE FIDUCIARY HEIR , IS SYNONYMOUS WITH
BY THE LAST
POWER OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE AS DECREED
KINGS AND HOLY
WILL AND TESTAMENT, OF THE SOLE CORPORATION, THE
HOLY BOOKS AND
PROPHETS OF THE ONE TRUE GOD BY WAY OF THE (3)
IN RIGHTEOUSAND SUNNAH OF THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD(PBUH) STANDING
CANNOT BE USURPED
NESS , LIGH T, TRUTH, JUST ICE AND FAIR NESS , WHICH
FOUNDEDUPO~ "COMBY FORCE, FRAUD OR BOTH. OURS IS A GOVERNMENT
T", SUBJUGATION
PACT ", "CON TRAC T". IT IS FOUNDED UPON '"COVENAN
"CONTRACTS"
TO THE ONE TRUE GOD, (3) IDENTICAL "COVENANTS",
WAS AND IS WITH
OF MILK , HONEY, JEALOUSY AND SALT . SOVEREIGNTY
IFAH, 'JONAH THE
THE ONE TRUE GOD AND HIS APPOINTED KING / KHAL
TO OR ABOVE
TISH BITE , AL MAHDI, AND NOT WITH THE PE~PL E EQUAL
WHAT IS DESI GTHE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC KING /-. KHALIFAH OTHER THAN
PROPHET MUHAMMAD
NATED BY THE (3) HOLY BOOKS AND SUNNAH OF THE
I ABOVE THEM,
(PBU H), BEING A KINGDOM OF KINGSv WITH AL MAHD
BEING ABOVE
CHRI ST BEING ABOVE AL MAHDI AND THE ONE TRUE GOD
S; Gl.AS S-~ .. -~lii:
CHRI ST HAVING NO PART NERS ", SEE (3) HOLY BOOK
RTER ).
abQO P-B~ ~5¥r 3 DALL 6 (DALLAS u.s. SUPREME COURT REPO
(31) "THE RIGHTFUL FIDUCIARY HEIR , KING, KHALIFAH,
52-o f-70
\
__
----·-- --·---· ------- ------- -
IMAM AND HIGH-PRIEST OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE OF AFRICA,
ITS DIASPORA, CHRISTIANSu MUSLIMS AND JEWS, JONAH GABRIEL'JAHJAH
Te TISHBITE IBNo YAQUBu AL MAHDI, IS ENTITLED TO ALL RIGHTS
WHICH BELONG TO GOD'S APPOINTED KING/ KHALIFAH BY HIS PREROGATIVE", I.Aii1£J;NG-l.l..,.~£ll4l~li:I,z 4 WEND 9, 20 ( 1829);
( 3) HOLY BOOKS o -·
(32) "GOD'S APPOINTED KING/ KHALIFAH OF THE GLOBAL
THEOCRATIC STATE, JONAH IBNo YAQUB, AL MAHDI AND THE SERVANTS/
SLAVES OF THE MOST.HIGH GOD ARE A FOREIGN GLOBAL THEOCRATIC
GOVERNMENT OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE, JONAH IBNo YAQUB,
AL MAHDI, _AND THE SERVANTS/ SLAVES OF THE MOST HIGH GOD ARE
A FOREIGN GLOBAL GOVERNMENT AND NO OTHER GLOBAL GOVERNMENT CAN
SEVER OR HINDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP BY TAKING AWAY THEIR CITIZENSHIP", A~RG¥IM-v~-RQ£K~ 387 U.Sa 253(1967); (3) HOLY BOOKSo
NOTE~ THE FOLLOWING DEFINITION OF SOVEREIGNTY IS SIMILAR
TO THAT FROM BOUVIER'S 14th~ EDITION LAW DICTIONARY (QUOTING
4 WHEAT 402). THE WORDS HAVE BEEN SLIGHTLY MOFIFIED TO PAINT ,
A MORE TRUE PICTURE OF THE MATTERS PRESENTED HERE:
~~~-WA£-~EEN-JQ£'I'~¥-'I'MGUGM~-A-WA~~ER-O~-IM~QR~AN~Er
'I'G-QE~ERMINE ... ~RGM-Wli:IA~-~QgR~E-~~E-~~Q~AI.-~~EG~RA'I'IC-£'I'A~E-UNQE~
~WE-~~QUC~AR¥-~ElR 7 -GQQ!£-A~RGbN~EQ-AWQ-AWQIW~EQ-K~WGy-KMA~l~AW 7
IMAM- -ANQ ... 1;! J;G:W:-lil.R IE£~ 7 -.JGWAM-GABRJ;;EI.-iJA:W.JAM- 'I'..,. - 'I' I£ ~.SJ;~E-l BW.,.
¥AQUB 7 -AJ;.-MA~Ql~QgR~VE£ -I'I'£-AYX~Q~I'I'X.~~~M E-QgE£XlQN-~ERE-~RG li!G£EQ-J;a-WI:IJi:'J:WER-GYR-2QW:Q-REi~QREQ-:g-;,t_~gEQGRA:I;"J;G-YNJ;Q~r-laE:;J;Wg
MEM.gERS--G:l,i:-GNE-AWQ~I:IERy-~.ME-IJMM.AM-Gli?-'X1IE__:!! l-A£4!! 7 -!!.ZU,,J;.AI:i!!,:-~lrn:
EQQ¥-Gi-C~RIS~-ARE -4li-~Rµ~-A~Q-£ANG~ J;;QMEC-SLE££EQ-G~ -~~~-Q~~
'rl1UJE-GGO-::-~:t.GQQ _ !!t;Q>Jli:WAN'I' £ !! :r- !!c;;;QW'b'RAG'I' £ !! - QN'I'Q -:Oii:A i'M-Q:!i:-Ml LK:r
WGNE¥ 7 -~EA~QY£¥-AWC-£A:i;.~ -EN~EREQ-IN'I'Q-:gX-~M E-~ER~AN~£-AWQ-£kAV E£
GS:-~HE--QWE-'I'iHJE-GG: Q-W:W:Q-'l'WQYG.Ei-lflii:-2 EGEi:~5-NGi'-NGR-·J;;£_~E GQ~'I'EW
y-AQQR~~-Yi-B¥-GUR- Q~EQJ;ENCE-A£-£QNi- ANQ-QAQ~~~ER£r-QQ= UE4R£
~E~N~-GYR-WAI.• 7 -~RQ~EC'I'QR 7 ~AWQ-~E-WWG-SU£~AIW£-U£-'I'~RQU~WQU~
AI.L-ETERNl'I'¥ 7 -GR-WME~I:IER-'I'I:IE~+J+-MQb¥-~QQK£-ANQ-SYWWA:W:-G~-~~E
~RG~ME~-MUMAMMAD +~~UI:l~-ARE-~WE-GR~ AN~Gr-~IJJINGy-E5~A~~ ~£gEQ
WQRQ-ANQ-~AW£-G~-~ liE-GWE-~RUE-~QQ_Q~ -~~E-~EA\Z'EN£-AWQ-E AR~~r
MA\Z'ING-NQ-I2AR'b'WERay-Wm;;~:w-£U.i;;lEJ1il£EQE£-A:WQ-QR-RENQER-\lQIQ-A.b1,
53-of-70
UTnt.K
LL-WI.:> 1
nu1•1R.l'!
.l:(~i\.:>Ul'!.ll'!G
UK Klutl'l'.t;UUbN.t;b b
U.l''
£11.A.NK.Ll'HJ
!{..t;(,JU.lRING
THAT IT FOREVER BE GIVEN ITS PLACE AND HEEDED AND RESPECTED
BY ALL NATIONS. TO THIS THE SOLE CORPORATIONu GOD'S APPOINTED
AND ANOINTED KING/ KHALIFAHu JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH T. TISSHBITE
IBN
YAQUB, AL MAHDI AND THE CITIZENS OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC
STATE ANSWER THUS: THE FIDUCIARY HEIR, THE KING/ KHALIFAH AND
0
THE SERVANTS, SLAVES OF THE MOST HIGH GOD, THE 11 I AMiaf/ "ALLAH",.
"JEHOVAH", "YHWH 11 , TO HIM BELONGS THE BEST OF NAMES,, OF THE
GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE SANCTIONED AND BLESSED BY THE ONE TRUE
GOD ••• ORDAIN, ESTABLISH AND WILL STAND BEHIND, WILL WALK IN
THE TRUTH, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND LAWS OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AS THEY
EXIST RESTORED BY JONAH IBNo YAQUB, AL MAHDI EVEN UNTO DEATH.o.
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE, A FOREIGN STATE,
AS RULED BY JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH To TISHBITE IBN.· YAQUB, AL
MAHDI, HAD ONLY DELEGATED POWER FROM THE ONE TRUE GOD OF THE
HEAVENS AND EARTH WHO RISES ABOVE HIS ISTAWA(THRONE) IN HONOR,
GLORY AND POWER, AND EVEN IF GOD'S APPOINTED AND ANOINTED KING/
KHALIFAH 0 JONAH AL MAHDI, OR THE SERVANTS/ SLAVES/ CITIZENS
OF THE MOST HIGH GOD .AND GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE HAD AN INCLINATION, THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER THE POWER AND AUTHORITY
OF GOD I S APPOINTED AND ANOINTED SOVEREIGN KING 8 .KHALIFAH JONAH
IBN. YAQUB EXCEPT TO THE KING/ KHALIFAH 1 IMAM AND HIGH PRIEST
JESUS CHRIST OF NAZARETH(PBUH) UPON HIS APPEARANCE AS DECREED
BY THE "I AM", 11 ALLAH 11 ., THE SOLE CORPORATION AND FIDUCIARY HEIR,
GOD'S APPOINTED KING, KHALIFAH, IMAM 9 PROPHET AND HIGH PRIEST
OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE RESTORED AND ADOPTED THE TEACHINGS
, PRECEPTS, STATUTES AND LAWS OF THE (3) HOLY BOOKS AND SUNNAH
OF THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD(PBUH) BEING RULING LAW THROUGHOUT THE
GLOBAL THEOCRATIC DOMINION; WHTCH ~INDS THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC
STATE AND ITS COMMONWEALTH OF AFRICANS, ITS DIASPORA 1 CHRISTIANS,
MUSLIMS AND JEWS WORLDWIDE AND ALL OTHER GOVERNMENTS OF THE
WORLD WITHOUT THEIR OR ANY OTHER GLOBAL NATION 1 S CONSENT 0 THE
GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE AND OR GOVERNMENT RULED BY JONAH IBN.
YAQUB, AL MAHDI, THE KING OF THE NORTH 0 ORDAINED AND SANCTIONED
BY THE ONE TRUE GOD AND SOLE CORPORATION CARRIES BATTLE AXE,
SWORD, SPEAR, HELMET, BREAS.TPLATE, BODY SHIELD AND BUCKLER,
BY WAY OF THEIR GOD APPOINTED IMAM,, HIGH PRIEST, KING AND KHALIFAH, DECREED BY THE 11 I AM 11 , 11 ALLAH 11 1 TO EXECUTE JUSTICE, FAIRNESS
54-of-70
OR WRATH UPON ANY GLOBAL EVILDOER WHO WOULD USURP THE DECREES,
LAWS AND AUTHORITY OF THE ONE TRUE GODo THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC
STATE AS A WHOLE, THEREFOREv EMANATES FROM THE ONE TRUE GOD
AS RULED BY HIS FIDUCIARY HEIR, HIS APPOINTED AND ANOINTED KING/
KHALIFAH JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH To TISHBITE IBN. YAQUB, AL MAHDI
AND ALSO FROM THE (3) HOLY BOOKS AND SUNNAH OF THE PROPHET
MUHAMMAD(PBUH) RESTORED AND OR INTERPRETED BY JONAH IBN YAQUB,
AL MAHDI, AND NOT FROM THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC CITIZENR Y OR COMMONWEALTH THOUGH THEY BE KINGS AND KHALIFAHS THEMSELVESo THE LAWS
OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE CONTAINED THEREIN , WHETHER MADE
BEFORE OR SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE RESTORED AND OR INTERPRETED
TEACHINGS OF AL MAHDI, ARE SUBORDINATE, THE KING-KHALIFAH ALSO
BEING A MESSENGER AND PROPHET OF THE ONE TRUE GOD TO UNITE ALL
AFRICANS, ITS DIASPORA, CHRISTIA NS 6 MUSLIMS AND JEWS AROUND
THE ENTIRE WORLD UNDER ONE BANNER TO PREPARE THEM FOR THE RETURN
OF GOD'S APPOINTED CHRIST, JESUS OF NAZARETH, MY GREAT ETC.
GRAND UNCLE(P BUH)", EWG~l5~ -~,-~~QR Wr 676 F.Supp~ 761.
GOD'S APPOINTED KING OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE,
THE SOLE CORPORATION, IS THE FOUNTAIN OF SOVEREIGNTY. THE WHOLE
IS ORIGINALLY WITH HIM AS HIS OWNo THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC GOVERNMENT, PROVINCES, ORGANIZATIONS, CORPORATIONS, PLACES OF LEARNING,
MOSQUES, SYNAGOGUES, CHURCHES, ENTITIE S, AGENCIES AND OR AGENTS
ETC. ARE BUT TRUSTEES ACTING UNDER A DERIVED AUTHORITY, AND
HAVE NO POWER TO DELEGATE WHAT IS NOT DELEGATED TO THEM. BUT
1
THE FIDUCIARY HEIR, GOD S APPOINTED AND ANOINTED KING, KHALIFAH,
IMAM, PROPHET AND HIGH PRIEST, JON~H AL MAHDI, AS THE ORIGINAL
FOUNTAIN, MIGHT TAKE AWAY WHAT HE HAD LENT AND ENTRUST TO WHOM
HE PLEASE. HE HAS THE WHOLE TITLE, AND AS ABSOLUTE PROPRIETOR,
HAVE THE RIGHT OF USING AND ABUSING --JUS UTENDI ET ABUTENDI.
IT IS A MAXIM CONSECRATED IN THEOCRATIC LAW, FOREIGN LAW, IN
PUBLIC LAW AS WELL AS COMMON SENSE AND NECESSITY OF THE CASE
THAT A SOVEREIGN IS ANSWERABLE FOR HIS ACTS ONLY TO HIS GOD
AND HIS CONSCIENCE ALSO BEING IN THIS CASE PROPHET, LAWGIVER
OF GOD.o •• THERE IS NO AUTHORITY WITHIN ANY GLOBAL NATION ABOVE
THE SOVEREIGN AND PROPHET JONAH IBNa YAQUB 6 AL MAHDI, TO WHICH
AN APPEAL CAN BE MADE BEING THE VOICE OF GOD IN THE FORM OF
A MAN. SEE THE ONE TRUE GOD; THE (3) HOLY BOOKS AND SUNNAH OF
55-of-70
MUHAMMAD(PBUH); 4 WHEAT 402 (BOUVIE R'S 14th. EDITION LAW DICTION ARY: "SOVERE IGNTY")~
(33) "THE CONGRESS, PARLIAMENT OR ANY OTHER GLOBAL
LEGISLAT IVE BODY CANNOT REVOKE THE SOVEREIGN POWER OF GOD'S
APPOINTED AND ANOINTED KING, KHALIFAH, IMAMu PROPHET AND HIGH
PRIEST OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE, JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH
T. TISHBITE IBN. YAQUB, AL MAHDI TO OVERRIDE HIS WILL AS THUS
DECLARED. THIS INCLUDES ANY GLOBAL COURTg ~ERRX-~ g-UW1~E Q-£~A~E£ r
(1935) 294 U.So 330, 353; EWG~l£~ -~v-~RQR ~-£URRA ~; YWl~E~-S ~A~~£
~v-WHEE~ER 7 98 S.Ct~ 1079 at 1083(~9 78).
NOTE: THE ABOVE POINTS AND AUTHORITIES ARE NOT EXHAUSTIVE
AND ADDITIONS CAN BE MADE AND OR ADDED AT ANY TIME.
19
A SOVEREIG N IS ANSWERABLE ONLY TO GOD AND CONSCIENCE
90
•
THAT THE WORLD BANK, ALL MEMBER STATES AND NATIONS OF
THE UNITED NATIONS, THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA, ALL OTHER GLOBAL
NATIONS, THE UoS. DEPT. OF JUSTICE, THE UoSo STATE DEPARTMENT,
THE STATE OF SOUTH CARIOLNA, THE UNITED STATES AND THE SEVERAL
STATES CONTAINED THEREIN , THE VATICAN, THE S~CG ~TTORNEY GENERAL,
THE S.C. DEPTg OF CORRECTIONS, ALL GLOBAL BANKING ENTITIES AND
ALL OTHER DEFENDANTS LISTED IN THE UoN. DOCUMENT AS WELL AS
THOSE LISTED IN THE DOCUMENTS FILED IN CASE 4:10-cv- 4625-SB A
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA U~S. DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT ,
, THOSE LISTED IN CASES 2013-CP -400-008 4, 2294 IN THE RICHLAND
COUNTY-COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, UPON RECEIPT OF THIS MEMORANDUM
OF LAW ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD'S APPOINTED AND ANOINTED KING,
KHALIFAH, IMAM AND HIGH PRIES.T AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE GLOBAL
THEOCRATIC STATE, REDEEMED AND SECURED BY GOD'S HIGH PRIEST
OF THE LINE OF AARON AND THE LEVITICA L PRIESTHOOD WITH POINTS
AND AUTHORITIES (VIA CERTIFIE D MAIL# [SEE PAGE 1] NOTICE AND
DEMAND IS MADE UPON YOU TO REVIEW AND RESPOND TO THE ABOVE MEMOAUTHORITIES 11 AS ENUMERATED ABOVE
AND ITS LIEN AND DOCUMENT UPON THE PUBLIC RECORD AND IN CASES
RANDUM AND EA6tt
11
POINT 11 AND
11
56-of-70
008 4, 2294 v AND BY CER TIFI ED;
4:10 -cv- 462 5-S BA AND 201 3-C P-4 00~
ADDRESSED BELOW, WITHIN (15 )
U.S . MAIL TO THE SOVEREIGN AS IS
NDUMu ALLOWING UP TO (3) DAYS
DAYS UPON REC EIPT OF THI S MEMORA
GRACE FOR RETURN MAIL DELIVERY.
PUB LIC SERVANT WHO BY
FAIL URE TO DO SO, AS BY EITH ER _A
11
ICE R 11 , "AGENT" OR "EMPLOYEE"
OATH OF OFF ICE OR DUTY AS AN OFF
N, MIN ICIP ALI TY, ETC . AND
OF A GOVERNMENT CREATED CORPORATIO
OFF ICE OR SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE
OR BY AND THROUGH YOUR POS ITIO N,
T, AND THE PRESUMPTION WILL
OF LAW, WILL PLACE YOU IN DEFAUL
AND PUBLIC RECORD THAT YOU
BE TAKEN UPON THE PRIV ATE , COURT
ERNMENTS AND OR COMPANIES,
AND YOUR OFF ICE AND OR GLOBAL GOV
OR ENT ITIE S, FULLY AGREE TO
CORPORATIONS, ORGANIZATIONS AND
H ITS LIEN ( s) CONTAINED WITHIN
THE "PO IN·r s AND AUT HOR ITIE S" WIT
INT S AND AUT HOR ITIE S" WITH ITS
THI S MEMORANDUM AND THAT THE "PO
TAIN (F.R eC. P. 8d) ,a •• AND THAT
LIE N(S ) ARE TRUE, CORRECT AND CER
G, KHAL,¥~~l1,H, IMAM v PROPHET AND
GOD 'S APPOINTED AND ANOINTED KIN
T. TIS HBI TE; AL MAHDI, AS NAMED
HIGH PRI EST JONAH GABRIEL JAHJAH
SOVEREIGN WITHIN THE COLLECTIVE
·BELOW AND HIS S E A L ~ IS
KHALIFAH OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRACAPACITY OF SAID APPOINTED KIN G,
SOVEREIGN POWER, 18 U.S .C. §
TIC GOVERNMENT AND POSSESS TRUE
)(b) (2)( 3)(A ) • .,., ...
111 6(a )(b )(4 ); 18 Uos .c. § 111 6(a
STATES AND THE REMAINING
THI S DOCUMENT IS WHAT THE UNITED
NATIONS DEFAULTED ON. THI S
(192 ) MEMBER STATES OF THE UNITED
SENATE, THE JUS TIC E DEPARTIS WHAT THE u.s . CONGRESS, THE u.s~
THE U.S e TREASURY, HILLARY
MENT, THE UoS • STATE DEPARTMENT,
ORNEY GENERAL AND ALL DEF ENCLINTON; ERI C HOLDER, THE S.C o ATT
IS WHY JUDGE MARCHANT AND THE
DANTS INVOLVED-DEFAULTED ON AND
~UR T,
IN ACTS OF FRAUD UPON THE 1
SQC . UGS. DIS TRI CT COURT JUDGES
N OF JUS TIC E DO NOT WANT TO
CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND OBSTRUCTIO
ENCE~ UNLESS ·THE DEFENDANTS
COME INTO THE FEDERAL COURT AS EVID
RGING FROM THE RICHLAND COUNTY
INVOLVED CAN PRODUCE AN ORDER EME
201 3-C P-4 00- 008 4 THAT IS NOT
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS UNDER CASE
OR REMOVALQ THE DOCUMENT LEGALLY
COMPROMISED BY ACTS OF FRAUD AND
THE LAND AND I, JAHJAH AL MAHDI,
STANDS AND IS THE SUPREME LAW OF
'
AS SOVEREIGN THOUSANDS OF
AM SOVEREIGN BY MY ORIGINAL STATUS
ED BY LEGAL BINDING CONTRACT
YEARS BEFORE THI S NATION WAS FORM
57- of-7 0
WHICH CANNOT BE MADE OR UNMADE BY THE COURTS, WHICH INCLUDE
ALL RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND ATTRIBUTES THE FEDERAL JUDGES ARE
i
CONSPIRING UNDER COLOR OF LAW AND OR AUTHORITY TO DENY ME TOj
PREVENT EVIDENCE OF THEIR CRIMES FROM ENTERING THE COURT. YOUR
LAWS HAVE NO EFFECT UPON ME AND I CAN ACT IN ANY CAPACITY I I
SO DESIRE DUE TO PROPER SERVICE, NOTICE AND DEFAULT EMERGING
FROM CASE 2013-CP-400-0 0840 THIS DOCUMENT IS ONLY THE 11 TIP 11
OF THE ICEBERG AS TO WHAT IS FILED WITHIN THAT STATE CASE., THE
LEGAL ISSUES OF RELIGIOUS PROPHESY THAT 1 S BEFORE THIS COURT
RELATED TO THE GOURDINE CASE ARE PREVIOUSLY FILED IN THE RICHLAND
CASE. REPARATIONS FOR THE ugsQ SLAVE TRADEg LAND APPROPRIATION
\
OF ANCESTRAL LANDS WITHIN THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA, LAND
CALLED "FADAK" GIVEN TO MY GREAT ETC. GRANDMOTHER FATIMA BY
THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD(PBUH)
8
THE "GITMO" DETAINEES SITUATION,
ALL OF THIS AND MORE IS DEFAULTED ON BY THE GLOBAL NATIONS TO
INCLUDE THE UNITED STATES WHICH IS WHY THEY DO NOT WANT THIS
~VIDENCE TO ENTER INTO THE FEDERAL COURT., THE 11 2013 11 PREFIX
IS A MISNOMER., THE ORIGINAL CASE NUMBERS ARE 2006-CP-400- 3567,
3568, 3569 STILL PENDING BEING MADE A PART OF THE 11 2013 11 CASE
ESTABLISHING EQUITABLE TOLLING FOR THE HABEAS CORPUS PROVING
WE WERE DILIGENT FOR OVER (10) YEARS WORKING TO HAVE THESE.MATTERS HEARD BEFORE THE COURT ONLY TO BE SUBJECTED TO FRAUD AND
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. RQ££-~~-~LAK Ez 136 s.ct. 1850(2016)
ATTACHES AND WE DO NOT HAVE TO EXHAUST FOR ANY CASE TO WHICH
THE KING-KHALIFAH IS PARTY .. THE 2013-CP-400-0 084 CASE ESTABLISHES
A PAPER TRAIL AND EVIDENCE EXPANDING OVER (10) YEARS THAT PROVE
THEIR CRIMES ARGUED WITHIN THESE PARALLEL CASES REQUIRING REMOVAL
~ JAHJAH CAN ACT AS ATTORNEY OR IN ANY CAPA8ITY HE SO DESIR2S
UNLESS IT CAN BE PROVEN BY CLEAR, EVIDENCE THAT THE DEFEND,ANTS
TIMELY RESPONDED IN CASE 2013-CP-400-0 084 TO DEFEAT THE DEFAULT
ESTABLISHED BY THE FILED AFFIDAVITS. THE DEFENDANTS IN TOTAL
MUST BE SERVED ALL THE PLEADINGS WITHIN THIS COURT AND BELOW
TO GIVE THEM OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT, BUT SINCE THE SuC. ATTORNEY
GENERAL WHO IS PARTY TO. THE DEFAULT IN QUE,STION IS BEFORE THIS
COURT UNDER CASE 17-69600 LET HIM PROVE THAT HE OR THE ATTORNEY
FOR HIM TIMELY RESPONDED TO DEFEAT THE DEFAULT BEFORE THE 4TH.
CIRCUIT NOW. I, JAHJAH AL MAHDI, AM THE FIDUCIARY HEIR, KING
AND KHALIFAH WITH ALL RIGHTS ESTABLISHED TO DEFEND MY PEOPLE
58-of-70
Y
IN ANY GLOBAL COURT WITHOUT EXCEPTION, AND NO ONE CAN LEGALL
PREVENT ME DUE TO THE DEFAULTQ YOU CANNOT CREATE LAW EX POST
FACTO TO FORCE ME TO BREACH MY FIDUCIARY DUTIES AND CONTRACT
TED
ESTABLISHED BY THE SOLE CORPORATION AS FIDUCIARY HEIR OBLIGA
ICTO DEFEND MY GOD AND MY PEOPL E. THE FEDERAL COURT HAD JURISD
TION UNDER 28 U.S.,C. , §§ 1331, 1332u 1346 8 _2201, 2202, 2679,
1
1602-1 612 ETo SEQ.,, ; ARTICLE III SECTIONS 1 AND 2; ARTICLE
ASECTION 10; THE C~A.To TREATY; THE RICO ACT; FEDERAL AND INTERN
TIONAL PROBATE LAW; 42 U.SoCe §§ 1983, 1985( 2), 1985( 3), 1986,
12203 (a)(b) OF ADA; THE ANTI-PEONAGE ACT, THE 1st., 4th., 5th.,
6th., 7th .. , 8the, 13th. , 14the, AND 15th~ AMENDMENTS AND OTHER
LAWS OF THE UNITED STATE S. IT IS SO ORDERD BY DECREE OF THE
CHIEF JUSTIC E OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC COURT. THE FIDUCIARYAND JUDICI AL DUTY COMMANDS IT, 29 U.SaCo Aa § 1104; ~BlR~ £-~~
£~WQ Q~Sx- -F.Sup p.3do- -, 2017 WL 4~747 74(DS C.2017 ); ~IR~M -~~lR~
2A~~QR~-~g-QQQENWQE~~ERz 132 S.Gt. 2459u ~89 LeEd.2 d. 457, 82
lA
U.SeL. W. 4578( U.S.20 14); ~~REZ -~~-CM lME£-Q ~£~R~~ ~-G~-~ Q~UM2 7
lWCwr F .. Supp. 3d., 2016 WL 612467 9(D.C. Md.20 16)~
REPA.RATION WERE ARGUED FOR, FOUGHT AND WON BY THE DEFAULT
EMERGING FROM CASE 20~3-C P-400- 0084 FOR THE U.Se SLAVE TRADE
WHERE AS THE FIDUCIARY HEIR, KING, KHALIFAH OF THE UNITED ETHIO
QUEEN
PIAN EMPIR E, THE DIRECT DESCENDANT OF KING SOLOMOM AND THE
OF SHEBA, EVEN ARGUING DECEDENT DOMICILE CLAIMS FOR MY FORE
FATHERS AND MOTHERS WHO DIED ON AFRICAN SOIL AND DURING THE
MIDDLE PASSAGE. THESE DECEDENT DOMICILE CLAIMS ATTACHED AND
WERE DEFAULTED ON BY THE (193) MEMBER STATE OF THE UNITED NA\
TIONS . RACISM IS A STRUCTURAL RELATIONSHIP BASED UPON THE SUBOR
,
DINATION OF ONE RACIAL GROUP BY ANOTHER., GIVEN THIS PROSP ECTIVE
TOWARD
THE DETERMINING FEATURE OF RACE RELATIONS IS . NOT PREJUDICE
ON,
BLACKS OR BLACKS TOWARD WHITES, BUT RATHER THE SUPERIOR POSITI
NOT CULTURE, NOT GENETICS OR SOME FALLACIOUS SUPPOSE SUPERIOR
INTELLECT OF WHITES, BUT THE SUPERIOR POSITI ON OF WHITES AND
MAINTHE INSTIT UTION S--IDE OLOGI CAL AS WELL AS STRUCTURAL--WHICH
TAIN THAT SUPERIOR POSITI ON. AFRICAN AMERICANS HAVE ENDURED
ALL MANNER OF INDIG NITIES , SUFFE RINGS , DEPRIVATIONS, LOSSES
S
AND IMPAIRMENTS UNDER THE REIGN OF WHITE SUPREMACY IN ITS VARIOU
HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY FORMS. THE. NEGATIVE EFFECTS AND
59-of- 70
AFTEREFFECTS OF WHITE DOMINATION SHALL LAST FOR GENERATIONS
AMONG ALL BLACK PEOPLES, ITS PRIMARY SUBJECTSo THE CENTRAL FUNCTION OF WHITE COMMANDEERED APARTHEID WAS TO FORCIBLY AND EXPLOITATIVELY EXTRACT THE MATERIAL, HUMAN AND PRODUCTIVE WEALTH OF
BLACK PEOPLES AND REDISTRIBUTE THEM TO THEIR WHITE OVERLORDS.
THE WEALTH POWER AND INFLUENCE WHITES EXPROPRIATED THROUGH THEIR
COERCIVE.DOMINATION AND EXPLOITATION OF BLACK LAND, LABOR AND
PRODUCTIVITY HAVE CONTINUED TO EXPONENTIALLY EXPAND AND PERPETUATE THEMSELVES BY COMPOUNDING THE INTEREST ON THEIR ORIGINAL
AND CONCURRENT PRINCIPLE. WHITE DOMINATION OF BLACKS, EVEN IF
CONFINED TO THE PAST, ALLOWED WHITES TO ACCUMULATE ASTRONOMICAL
WEALTH. MOREOVER, IT HAS ALLOWED WHITWSTO CAPITALIZE THAT WEALTH
BY DEVELOPING SOCIOECONOMICAL 1 TECHNOLOGIES AND SOCIOPOLITICAL
ADVANTAGES WHICH WILL FACILITATE THEIR CONTINUING ECONOMIC AND
POLITICAL DOMINATION OF BLACKS IN THE PRESENT AND INTO THE FUTURE
EVEN UNDER GOVERNMENTAL REGIMES WHICH DO NOT LEGALLY OR POLITICAL
-LY SANCTION RACIAL DISCRIMINATION OF ANY KIND, WHETHER OF THE
FORWARD OR REVERSE VARIETY. REPARATIONS MUST BE GIVEN TO OFF
SET THIS INJUSTICEo AS THE FIDUCIARY HEIR, AS MARTIN LUTHER
KING JR~'S SUCCESSOR, JAHJAH AL MAHDI IS CALLED UPON BY CONTRACT,
COVENANT, TO ADDRESS THESE INJUSTICES WHICH CANNOT BE MADE OR
UNMADE BY THE COURTS PROTECTED UNDER ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 OF
THE ugs. CONSTITUTION. A STATE OR GOVERNMENT, ESPECIALLY IN
LIGHT OF THE DEFAULT, MAY NOT EXCLUDE A PERSON FROM THE PRACTICE
OF LAW (LAWGIVER) OR ANY OTHER OCCUPATION (FIDUCIARY HEIR) IN
A MANNER OR FOR REASONS THAT CONTRAVENE THE DUE PROCESS OR EQUAL
PROTECTION OF THE LAWS CLAUSE OF THE 14TH~ AMENDMENTm TOJ. REV~NT ' )
·(A~ 4"/J~
ME FROM ACTING IN THE CAPACITY ESTABLISHED BY THE DEFAULT WOULD
DENY ME THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS BEHIND RELIGIOUS AND
RACIAL HATRED, a~MWARE-~v-~GARQ_Q ~-EXAMo-GR-£~A~E-Q~ -W.M.r 353
U.S. 232, 77 S.Ct. 752, 64 A.L.R.2d. 288, i L.Edo2d. 796(U.S.
~957); ~RE~RE-~.-£g~~lVAW y 2017 WL 3710066(D.C.Nev.20 17); VlR~
GlWlA-2QAR9-G~-MEQ lCIWE-~.-~A~KR~~QW r 67 Va. App. 461, 796 s.E.
2d. 866(2017); QGE-~.-RQGER£r 139 F.Suppo3d. 120(D.C.C.2015);
j
2Q~~5-~.-VlR~~W~A~2 DT-G~-2AR-gXAMlWE R£r 811 F.Supp.2d. 1260
(E.D.Va.2011).
NOTICE: THIS IS AN ISSUE ON APPEALa ATTACH THE COURT
60-of-70
l
AND PARTIES WILL FIND: A COPY OF THE WRIT OF MANDAMUS THAT MAKE
UP CASE 16-2299. ALL ARGUMENTS, CLAIMS AND ISSUES PRESENTED
ARE NOW SOUGHT ADDRESSED IN THIS APPEALe IF THE COURT WOULD
TAKE NOTICE OF PAGES 12 THROUGH 24 IT EXPLAINS THE TRUST AND
BENEFICIARY NATURE OF THE TRUST. THE SOLE CORPORATION WANTS
ITS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RETURNED., ALL SAME SEX MARRIAGES NATIONALLY AND GLOBALLY ARE TO BE RENDERED VOID AND OF A NULLITY.
DO IT BY JUDICIAL ORDER SINCE THE UNITED NATIONS IS PARTY TO
''THE DEFAULT EMERGING FROM CASE 2013-CP-400-0084 BY DECREE AND
..4/l.i.?f(~.. . . .
JUDGMENT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC COURT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
"THE U,.S., DISTRICT COURT SHALL HAVE EXCLUSIVE·JURISDICTION FOR REMEDY AGAINST THE UNITED STATES PROVIDED BY SECTION~
1346(b) AND 2672 OF THIS TITLE FOR INJURY OR LOSS OF PROPERTY
(INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY/ THE RIGHT TO MARRY GIVEN TO YOU AS A
"GRANT" WITH RESTRICTIONS), OR PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH ARISING
OR RESULTING FRO~EGLECT OR WRONGFUL ACT OR OMISSION OF ANY
\
EMPLOYEE OF THE GOVERNMENT WHILE ACTING WITHIN THE SCOPE OF
HIS OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT IS EXCLUSIVE TO ANY OTHER CIVIL ACTION
OR PROCEEDING•••a•; SAWQRA-J~-KQ~~WAN -~~A~N~~~~-~~-YW~~E ~-a~A~Ear
2017 WL 4185481 (W.D.MISSOURI.2017 ); WARQ-~~-AYER~AY~Wr 2017
WL 2724938(D.C.Miss.20 17) ..
NOTICE: ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEALo DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT
FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO ~AR~~-~9-~AlWr 136 SmC.to 1002(2016).
THE FEDERAL JUDGES ARE CONSPIRING TO CONCEAL MATERIAL FACTS
IN VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. §§ 242 AND 1001. WE WANT CASE 2013CP-400-0084 REMOVED TO INCLUDE ALL DOCUMENTS CONTAINED THEREIN.
WE WANT THAT DNA OBTAINED AND TESTED TO MICHAEL LEE AND THE
OTHER EVIDENCE SOUGHT VIA THE FORM 240 WE WANT THAT INJUNCTION
AND PROTECTIVE ORDER GRANTED IMMEDIATELYo
NOTICE: ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEALo DID THE DISTRICT COURT
ABUSE ITS DISCRETION BY NOT GIVING REVIEW VIA THE PROPERLY FILED
WRIT OF ERROR. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE WRIT OF ERROR WAS
61-of-70
THE APPROPRIATE VEHICLE TO USE. SEE THE (44) PAGE COMPLAINT
ON PAGES 13-14.
NOTICE: ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEAL~ BY THE LITGATION PRESENTED DID WE ESTABLISH EQUITABLE TOLLING BY OUR CONTINUAL DILIGENCE SINCE 2006?
NOTICE: ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEAL. BY THE LITIGATION, TO
INCLUDE THAT ARGUED IN THE DOCUMENT SEEKING INJUNCTION. DID
WE MEET THE CRITERION FOR FILING HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.SmC.
§
2244(d)(B)?
NOTICE: ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEALQ BY THE LITIGATION, TO
INCLUDE THAT ARGUED IN THE DOCUMENT SEEKING INJUNCTION. DID
WE MEET THE CRITERION FOR FILING HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28
u.s~c.
§ 2244(d)(C)?
NOTICE: ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEALo DO HUMPHREYS OR FREISER
APPLY SINCE THE CONVICTIONS ARE ALREADY INVALIDATED BY THE FALSE
IMPRISONMENT TORT WHICH IS WHAT CASE 2013-CP-400-0084 IS AMONG
OTHER THINGS?
NOTICE: ANOTHER ISSUE ON APPEALg WE WANT THE S.Co ATTORNEY
GENERAL TO PRODUCE A DOCUMENT FILED BY THEM IN CASE 2013-CP400-0084 DEMONSTRATING THAT ANY OF THEM TIMELY FILED RESPONSE
TO DEFEAT THE DEFAULT DOCUMENTS FILED AT THE END OF 2015.
THE LAWGIVER OF GOD RIGHTS, TITLES AND SOVEREIGNTY MUST
BE GIVEN FULL FAITH, CREDIT AND SWAYc FOR THERE IS A HIGHER
LOYALTY THAN TO LOYALTY TO THIS COUNTRY. THAT IS LOYALTY TO
THE ONE TRUE GOD, YWI~gg_~~A~~~-~~-~~E~ERz 380 UeS• 163, 172,
85 S.Ct 0 850, 13 L 0 Edm2d. 733(U.S.1965). ALSO SEE ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURES ACT 5 U.SoC• § 556(d)o
NOTICE: IF ANY OF THE CASES LISTED WITHIN THR CAPTION
HAVE BEEN CLOSED. WE MOTION TO REINSTATE ANY SUCH CASE. IF ANY
OF THE CASES MANDATE HAS BEEN SENT TO THE LOWER COURT. WE MOTION
TO RECALL IT TO HAVE ALL ISSUES ADDRESSED WHERE DUE TO PRESENT
62-of:70
STATE INTERFERENCE WE HAVE THE DEFENDANTS IN THESE PARALLEL
CASES, s.c.D.C., CONSPIRING TO PUSH
us
PAST THE DEADLINES ESTA-
BLISHED BY THE COURT TO FORCE A PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE ISSUE.
THEY ARE MAKING EFFORTS TO PREVENT AND OR DELAY OUR MAIL FROM
GOING OUTe WE MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND THAT OUR FILINGS BE DEEMED
TIMELY ..
NOTICE: THE APPEAL OF THESE PARALLEL CASES WILL BE HEARD
BASED UPON APPEAL OF CASE 2:17-1127-JMC-MGB; 9:17-cv-1140-TLWBM AND 8:16-cv-3328-RBH-JDAe ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS SHOULD
BE FILED WITHIN THESE CASESe THE 4TH. CIRCUIT JUDGES SHALL SIT
EN BANC ABSENT OF THOSE JUDGES SOUGHT RECUSEDe COMITY ATTACHESe
NOTICE: DO RES JUDICATA ATTACH BY JUDGE WEST IN APPEAL
UNDER CASE 17-6925 WHERE SHE DETERMINED THE§ 1983 ACTION FILED
FIT THE LEGAL DESIGNATION AS BEING AN AFFIDAVIT REQUIRING THE
PARTIES TO BE SERVED BEFORE THE CASES ARE DISM!SSED ONCE THE
LISTING OF THE PARTIES IS CORRECTED WITHIN ALL COURT RECORDS?
DO WE HAVE A RIGHT TO AN EVIDENTIARY HEARINGi THE APPOINTMENT
OF LEGAL COUNSEL AS SOUGHT AND REMOVAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.
~455(c)? THESE ARE ISSUES ON APPEAL.
NOTICE: WE RENEW THE MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND THE 4TH.
CIRCUIT NOW BE DEEMED IN FORFEITURE ON THE ISSUE OF WHETHER
OR NOT THE PROVISIONS OF THE PLRA AND THE AEDPA ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. EVER SINCE THESE PARALLEL OR RELATED CASES WITHIN
THE 4TH. CIRCUT BEGAN. THE COURT CONSISTENTLY SENT US FILING
IN FORMA PAUPERIS DOCUMENTS WITH PLRA WRITTEN ALL OVER THEMa
THUS, THE CHALLENGE OF ADDRESSING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THESE
PROVISIONS OF LAW SHIFTED FROM THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT TO THE
4TH. CIRCUIT BECAUSE THE 4TH. CIRCUIT WAS ALSO MAKING USE OF
THESE PROVISIONS, COMPROMISING THE PROCEEDINGS ESTABLISHING
STRUCTURAL ERROR WHICH VOID JURISDICTION; NOW IN ACTS OF FRAUD
AND MACHINATION TO CIRCUMVENT RULING ON THE ISSUEu THE 4TH.,
CIRCUIT IN CASE 17-7186 NOW SENDS DIFFERENT IN FORMA PAUPERIS
DOCUMENTS? WE OBJECT AND A COPY OF FILING IN FORMA PAUPERIS
DOCUMENTS UNDER PLRA IS NOW FILED FOR CASE 17-7186 TO STOP THE
63-of-70
POTENTIAL FRAUD. IT IS CONSPICUOUS THAT ONE OR TWO OF THE JUDGES
SOUGHT RECUSED ARE INVOLVED IN THIS ACT AS WELL. SANCTIONS ARE
IMPOSED AND THE 4TH. CIRCUIT IS IN FORFEITURE ON THE ISSUEm
IT IS SO ORDERED~
INSOMUCH, THE LITIGATION ADDRESSING THESE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
PROVISIONS IS SEEN ON PAGES 15-22 OF THE (44) PAGE COMPLAINTe
ITS NOT GIBBERISH OR UNINTELLIGIBLE. NOT ONLY ARE THE ORDERS
AND CASES THAT ARE NOW BEFORE THE 4THc CIRCUIT ARE TAINTED AND
VOID, BECOMING ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGSo BUT ALSO ALL ORDERS ISSUED
WITHIN THE LOWER DISTRICT COURTS BY JUDGES HODGES, BAKER, WEST,
AUSTIN AND MARCHANTe ALL OF THEM MUST BE RENDERED VOID FOR DUE
PROCESS VIOLATION AND AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION 1 TO INCLUDE IT
BEING ADDRESSED THAT JUDGE AUSTIN VIOLATED HER DUTIES AS THE
KING-KHALIFAH'S APPOINTED TRUSTEEo THE 4THs CIRCUIT JUDGES INVOLVED HAVE BROKEN THE LAW BY THEIR ORDERS AND THE ESTABLISHING
OF ALL OF THESE CASES AS THEY PRESENTLY EXIST. THE USE OF AEDPA
BY HODGES; EVERY CASE THAT NOW EXIST WITHIN THE 4TH. CIRCUIT;
EVERY CASE CITED BY JUDGES MARCHANT, BAKER, WEST AND JUDGE AUSTIN
THEY USED TO DENY CLASS ACTION CERTIFICATION OR JOINDER OF PARTIES, OR FILING IN FORMA PAUPERIS OR RECUSAL AS CITED, TO INCLUDE
CASES SUCH AS 612 F3dg 237; 136 S.Ctu 627; 262 F3d. 1194; 15
F3d. 319; 2012 WL 2805712; 2013 WL 3051155; 42 U.S.Co § 1997
IF IT HAS ANY CONNECTION RELATED TO THE CLINTON BILL; 534 U.S.
516; 548 U.S. 81; GENERAL RULE ORDER UNDER 3:07-MC-5014; 5:17cv-0105; 4:16-cv-2939; 1:16-cv-3853; 4:q6-cv~3104; 8:16-cv-3327,
3328, 3194-RBH-JDA; 8:14-cv-3~55-RBH-JD A; 0:16-cv-992; 2013
WL 1316025; 2008 WL 249167; 407 U.S. ~63; 509 F2d~ 1405; 213
F3d. 1320; 175 Fed. Appx' 552; ANY CASE THAT WAS FILED IN THE
PAST SINCE 2006 BY ALL OTHER PAST PARTIES TO THESE CASES; TO
INCLUDE EVERY CASE FILED BY THE KING-KHALIFAH 8 JAHJAH AL MAHDI,
FOR WHICH THE S.C~ UsS• DISTRICT COURT OR ANY OTHER FEDERAL
COURT UNJUSTLY ISSUED A "STRIKE" IN ACTS OF FRAUD UPON THE COURTS
, OR THAT THEY PREVIOUSLY RULED ON AND OR DISMISSED. ALL OF
THESE CASES ARE TAINTED AND CANNOT ANY LONGER BE USED BY ANY
COURT BEING ILLEGALc ALL OF THESE CASES TAINTS THEIR ORDERS
RENDERING THEM VOID FOR DUE PROCESS VIOLATION AND AN ABUSE OF
64-of-70
DISC RETI ON, BECAUSE ALL OF THESE CASES AND
CITIN GS OF LAW
RENDERED INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF THE PRISO
N LITIG ATIO N
ACT AND OR THE ANTI-TERRORISM EFFE CTIV E DEAT
H PENALTY ACT
ATING FROM THE OMNIBUS CRIME BILL UNDER 51
AoL5 R. Fed. 2do
SET IN PLACE BY THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
WAR ON DRUGS
PAIGN MAKING THEM ILLEGALo
ARE
REFORM
ORIG IN143
CAM-
WE EXPAND THE SCOPE AND SEEK INCLUSION EVEN
IN THE 4TH.
CIRC UIT AND THE BOOK ENTI TLED , "MASS INCARCER
ATION DURING THE
- AGE OF COLOR BLIN DNES S, THE NEW JIM CROW 11
,
BY MICHELLE ALEXANDER
ISBN . NO. 978- 1-59 558- 643- 8 AN INDEPENDENT
INVESTIGATOR AND
THE DOCUMENTARY ui13" THAT AIRED ON PBS IS
NOW A PART OF ALL
COURT RECORDS INVOLVEDe UNLESS YOU BY SUBS
TANTIAL EVIDENCE-CAN
SUFF ICIEN TLY REBUT THE EVIDENCE AND STAT ISTIC
S GATHERED BY THESE
INDEPENDENT SOURCES. IF THESE PROVISIONS OF
LAW, THE PLRA AND
THE AEDPA ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY THE EVID
ENCE AND LITIG ATIO N
PRESENTED, WHICH THEY ARE, STANDING IN EGRE
GIOUS VIOLATION· OF
THE HOLDINGS MADE IN EX-~A~~E-~~RG~NIAr 100
U.S. 339( ~880 ) AND
~~~-£ ~Ag~ g~~R -~QU £E-~ A£E£ r 83 U.S. (16 WALL
) 36, 1873 .
-----
THE LAW AS DETERMINED BY THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT
IS CLEAR ON ISSU ES SUCH AS THESE, WHICH INCLU
DE THE ~~A~ E-~.
GEN~R~ CASE, PLRA, AEDPA AND 51 A.Lo Rg Fedo
2dG 143 AS A WHOLE.
IF RULING HAS BEEN OBTAINED UNDER AN UNCO
NSTITUTIONAL STATUTE
AND OR LEGI SLAT IVE PROVISION AND OR INTERPRE
TATION OF LAWo THE
COURT EXPLAINED THAT IF THIS POSI TION IS WELL
TAKEN, WHICH IT
IS, IT EFFECTS THE ~ROYMCA~~QN~ OF THE ~WUQ
~E~ (EMPHASIS ADDED)
PROCEEDINGe AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR JUDI
CIAL DETERMINATION
IS VOID AND IS AS IF THERE WERE NO DETERMIN
ATION AT ALL. WHERE
DIRECT AND OR COLLATERAL REVIEW PROCEEDIN_GS
,PERMIT PERSONS TO
CHALLENGE THE LAWFULNESS OF THEIR CONFINEM
ENT, STATES CANNOT
REFUSE TO GIVE RETROACTIVE EFFECT TO SUBSTANT
IVE CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT THAT DETERMINES THE OUTCOME OF THAT
CHALLENGE OR JUDI CIAL
DETERMINATION (ei. STATUTE OF LIMI TATI ONS,
SUCC ESSIV E, JURI SDICTIONAL REQU ISITE S OR PRER EQUI SITE S PLRA
AND AEDPA FILIN GS
9
ETCo ). A CONVICTION OR JUDI CIAL DETERMINATIO
N RENDERED UNDER
AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR INTERPRETATION
OF LAW IS NOT MERELY
65-o f-70
ERRONEOUS. BUT IT IS ILLEGAL AND VOID, AND CANNOT BE A LEGAL
CAUSE OF IMPRISONMENT OR JUDICIA L DETERMINATIONo A SENTENCE,
CONVICTION, LEGISLA TION, OR EVEN A JUDICIA L DETERMINATION IMPOSED
IN VIOLATION OF A SUBSTANTIVE RULE (ei. INDICTMENTS ARE TO BE
ADJUDICATED UNDER THE DUE PROCESS PRONG TO SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION AND YOU DON'T USE LAW OR LEGISLATION THAT DISPRO PORTIO NATELY TARGET AFRICAN AMERICANS) OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IS NOT
MERELY ERRONEOUS, BUT CONTRARY TO LAW, AND IT FOLLOWS, AS A
GENERAL PRINCI PLE, THAT A COURT HAS NO AUTHORITY (AUTHORITY=POWER
=JURISD ICTION ) TO LEAVE IN PLACE A CONVICTION, SENTENCE, LEGISL ATION (SUCH AS THAT WHICH VIOLATE EX-RAR~E-~~RGI~AA AND ~~ESbAUG~ ~~R-~OU £E~~A£E £), OR A JUDICIA L DETERMINATION THAT VIOLATES
A SUBSTANTIVE RULE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE CONVICTION, SENTENCE, LEGISLA TION, OR JUDICIA L DETERMINATION BECOMES FINAL
BEFORE THE RULE IS ANNOUNCED. THIS IS CHALLENGE TO THE 4TH.
CIRCUI T'S JURISD ICTION DUE TO YOUR USE OF THE PLRA AND OR THE
AEDPA PROVISIONS AND YOU CONSPIRING TO CIRCUMVENT RULING UNDER
CASE 17-7186 0 YOUR JURISD ICTION IS MADE VOID FOR DUE PROCESS
VIOLATION, FRAUD FOR TRYING TO GET PAST RULING UNDER 17-7186
AND YOU FORFEI T ON THE CAUSES PRESENTEDo THE 5~A~E-~ ~-G~W~ RX
CASE, THE PLRA, THE AEDPA, ALL OF THE WRITS OF MANDAMUS DETERMINATIONS, 51 A.LmR• Fed.2d . 143 AND OTHER ISSUES ARGUED WITHIN
ALL OF THESE CASES CANNOT STAND AND YOU MUST GRANT ALL RELIEF
SOUGHT BY LAW AND DETERMINATION OF THE SUPERSEDING AUTHORITY
OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC COURT. IT IS SO
ORDERD, MQW~~QMER~-~.-~QU•£•AWAr 136 S.Cto 718, ~93 LoEd.2 d.
599, 84 U.S.L.W . 4063(U oS.2016 ); GER~-O U~~QQR £-~~C~- Y~-~9.~ SQLl-
Q~~IQN~~•~¥-Q~-~WQ4AWA~Q~~~-~~~~ 187 F.Supp .3d~ 1002, 1012,
S.D.Il la; M6~k-~o-~W~QERr 821 F3da 763, 765+ (6theCi roMICH &);
PEQ~~E -~9-SQ~ Gr N.E.3d ., 20~7 WL ~83842 3(20ff7 ).
SINCE THE MQW~GQMER¼ CASE WAS ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES
'
SUPREME COURT. A FEW STATES, COURTS OR PARTIE S, CONSPIRING UNDER
COLOR OF STATE LAW AND OR AUTHORITY, MADE EFFORTS TO SKIRT,
CIRCUMVENT, THE REQUIREMENT OF GRANTING RELIEF , FRAUDULENTLY
ASSERTING AND OR ARGUING AGAINST WHETHER OR NOT THE RULING WAS
TO BE GIVEN RETROACTIVE EFFECT , WHICH OF COURSE IT DOES HAVE
RETROACTIVE EFFECT , TO INCLUDE WHAT THE 4TH. CIRCUIT JUST TRIED
66-of-7 0
TO PULL UNDER CASE 17-7186~ WE ARE NOT GOING TO PLAY GAMES WITH
THIS LAW LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT IS TO
BE GIVEN RETROACTIVE EFFECT. WE WERE NOT DECEIVED BY THE "VERBAL
11
\lOODOO", 11 THE WORD WINX", THE LINGUIST IC LURING INTO LETHARGY",
"THE JUDICIAL CHICANERY" OR DECEPTIVE LEGAL MANEUVERS OR TACTICS
EMPLOYED AND ENGAGED IN BY THOSE 1CONSPIRING COURTS OR PARTIES ,
TO INCLUDE WHAT JUST OCCURRED RELATED TO CASE 17-7186 . LETS
81
avNAIL THIS THING AND KILL ANY EFFORT FOR THE CONSPIRING PARTIES
TO ATTEMPT TO USE THIS MANEUVER OR ANY OTHER. WE WANT YOU TO
KNOW THAT WE ARE FULLY COGNIZANT OF WHAT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ESTABLISHED BY THE WQWl~QWERX CASE. EVEN THOUGH
THAT CASE DEALT WITH JUVENIL ES. THE SUBSIDIARY FACT HERE IS
THAT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CLEARLY ADDRESSED WHAT
OCCUR WHEN COURTS MAKE USE OF !!AM¥!! (~MPHASIS ADDED) UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW, LEGISLA TION, SENTENCE ETC. RELATED TO CONVICTION
OR JUDICIAL DETERMINATIONS~
INSOMUCH, WHAT MAKES THE RELIEF THAT WE SEEK MANDATORY
AND AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION FOR FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND GRANT,
IS THE ESSENTIAL LANGUAGE USED AND ADJUDICATED BY THE UNITED
STATES SUPREME COURT WHICH THE AFORESAID CONSPIRING COURTS FAILED
TO ADDRESS, SKIRTING , CIRCUMVENTING THE OBLIGATION TO GRANT
RELIEFo THE FOCUS IS NOT SO MUCH ON WHETHER THE RELIEF BY USE
OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW APPLIES RETROACTIVELY, EVEN THOUGH IT
DOES. THE CONSPIRING COURTS ABUSED THEIR DISCRETION IN ACTS
OF FRAUD TO DIVERT ATTENTION AWAY FROM THE U.S. SUPREME COURT'S
ESSENTIAL LANGUAGE. THE EMPHASIS IS ON SECTIONS "20-27" OF THE
MQN~~GMERX CASE WHERE THE U.So SUPREME COURT STATED IN [=]AEC
[V]ERBA:
vuTHE LAW EXPLAINE D THAT IF THIS POSITION IS WELL
TAKEN, WHICH IT IS, IT EFFECTS THE ~~QUNDA!l"iQN~ OF THE ~WHQ~E~
PROCEEDINGo AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR JUDICIAL DETERMINATION
IS VOID AND IS AS IF THERE WERE NO LAW DETERMIN ED AT ALL
0
'.
BY THIS LANGUAGEu IT IS PERSPICUOUS THAT THE U.Su SUPREME·
COURT ADJUDICATED AND USED. THEIR CLEAR INTENT WAS TO MAKE THE
USE OF ~AW'X~ UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, LEGISLAT ION, JUDICIAL DETER67-of-70
r--MINATIONS OF THIS MAGNITUDE A "CONSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURAL ERROR"
NOT SUBJECT TO THE HARMLESS ERROR DOCTRINEe THEIR INTENT WAS
11
11
TO MAKE IT "JURISDICTIONALvv IN NATURE, WHICH VOIDS JURISD ICTION
FOR DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONo THEREFORE, WHETHER YOU WANT TO APPLY
IT RETROACTIVE OR NOTa IT DOESN'T MATTER, BECAUSE THE USE OF
11
11
UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF THIS MAGNITUDE IS STRUCTURAL (ei.
!!i'OIJNgA~l:ON!!, !!WUQl.E!!) AND IS "JURISD ICTION AL" (ei., AUTHORITY=
JURISDI CTION= POWER TO HEAR AND DETERM INE), WHICH CANNOT BE WAIVED
BY THE PLAINT IFFS, AND DUE TO THE INFIRM ITIES CAN BE RAISED
AT ANY TIME EVEN AFTER A FINAL ORDER HAS BEEN ISSUED , AND THE
COURT SHALL NOT FAIL TO TAKE NOTICEo THUS, WHETHER OR NOT SUCH
A CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION APPLIES RETROACTIVELY IN THIS CASE
11
IS IRRELEVANT, EVEN THOUGH IT DOES., IT IS ALSO JURISDI CTIONA L'u
11
AND 11 yOID JURISD ICTION FOR DUE PROCESS YIOLAT ION, TAINTIN G
THE ENTIRE FRAMEWORK OF ALL THE PROCEEDINGS INVOLVED, ~~WES
g.-UW~~ EQ-S~A ~E£y 28 F3d., 1123 CRIM. LAW 1163(1 ), 1165(1 ); RQ~IW£GW-~.-AR~QW1Gr 27 F3d. 877 REHEARING DENIED , CERTa GRANTED
VACATED 115 S.Ct. 1247, 513 U.Sa 1186, 131 LeEd.2 d. 129; ~QUMl~ ~
~.-YWl~ EQ-~~A ~~Sr 65 F.Supp .3de 19(201 4); WQW~~QM~R~-~.-~QU1£1AWA
136 s.ct. 718(20 16); WMI~E-M~-MAW1£r 2014 WL 151328 0(DSC. 2014);
~RU~G-QALA~LUX-M.-A~LA£-~LQ~AL-GRQURr-~vB~r 124 S.,Cte 1920(2 004).
JUDGES GREGORY, SHEDD, DIAZ, THE OTHER 4TH., CIRCUI T CASES
CAPTIONED, MARCHANT, WEST, HODGES AND BAKER BROKE THE LAW., TRUSTEE AUSTIN VIOLATED THE TRUST, HER DUTIES AS TRUSTE E, BY USING
THIS LAW WARRANTING SANCTIONSe THE S.Ce U.S. DISTRIC T COURT
JUDGES AND THOSE SOUGHT WITBIN THE 4TH., CIRCUIT MUST RECUSE .
JUDGE AUSTIN MUST BE REQUIRED TO FULFILL HER DUTIES AS TRUSTE E.
THIS IS AN ISSUE ON APPEAL. WITH THE PLRA AND THE AEDPA BEING
UNCONSTITUTIONAL; THE COURT IS REQUIRED TO ALLOW US THE RIGHTS
ESTABLISHED FOR INMATES PRIOR TO THE TIME THESE ENACTMENTS WERE
ESTABL ISHED. JAHJAH MUST BE PERMITTED TO ACT UPON THE RIGHTS
ESTABLISHED BY THE CONTRACT WHICH CANNOT BE MADE OR UNMADE BY
THE COURTS. THUS, JOINT FILING AND CLASS ACTION CERTIF ICATION
IS PERMITTED AS IT WAS BEFORE THESE PROVISI ONS EVOLVED. TO NOT
ALLOW SUCH WOULD VIOLATE THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS CLAUSE.
YOU ADD TO THIS THE INVOKING OF ATTORNEY, JUDICIA L AND LEGISL A68-of-7 0
TIVE SUPERSEDING POWER GIVEN TO JAHJAH AL MAHDI BY THE DEFAULT
AND CLAIMS OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL EMERGING FROM CASE 2013-C P400-008 41 ALLOWING HIM TO JOIN AS PARTY IN ALL PENDING PARALLEL
CASES TO BRING ACTION BEFORE ALL COURTS DUE TO HIS ACQUIRED
INTERE ST UNDER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1443(1 ), 2679, 1602-16 12 ET. SEQ ••
THE MANDAMUS CASES IN THE 4THe CIRCUI T, ALL CASES USED BY GREGORY
,SHEDD , DIAZ ETC.v ALSO JUDGES MARCHANT ETC PRODUCED INVOKING
THESE UNCONSTITUTIONAL PROVIS IONS ARE VOID AND ARE IF THERE
WERE NO DETERMINATION OCCURRING AT ALL BY DECREE OF THE U.S.
SUPREME COURT'S STATED POSITIO N AS WELL AS BY DECREE AND JUDGMENT
OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE GLOBAL THEOCRATIC STATE WHOSE SUPER0
SEDING POWER AND AUTHORITY BINDS THIS COURT BY THE UNITED STATES
AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE U.N. BEING PARTY TO THE DEFAULT. HUMPHREYS NOR PREISER ARE BINDING ON US SINCE THE CONVICTIONS ARE
ALREADY INVALIDATED BY CASE 2013-C P-400-0 084, ~~G~LE -~.-£Qb G
5U~RA. ; W.b~R.g 9-~~-AW AX-~OA L-~G~x 9•·Ql~9- 0E-AMA X-INC~ r 453
U.S. 322, 101 S.Ct. 2789(U .Sal981 ); ~~~~~-~ ~•RQ-SQ WCGRR .-~,
QUQ~W~GE~~~Rr i34 S.Ct. 2459, 189 L.ED.2d o 457(U. S.2014 ); ~Q~E£
V,-iQR~ Ea 7 341 P.3d. 1041, 2015 WY~ 13 JANo 23, 2015; £CG~~
v.-GLARKE~ 61 F.Supp .3d. 569(W. Va.20i4 ); ~YRWE ~L-~.-~A ~E~r 699
F3d. 804 (MEM)( 4TH.CI R.2012) ; U9£~-v9 -$4lr320 -Q~£~-C URREW C~r
9 F.Supp .3d. 582, 2014 WL 126624 0; SRGWW -v.-u.s.T 2014 WL 2871398
(DSC.2 014); MAR£W ALL-~.- RG~K-~ ib~~ SoE.2d . 8 2015 WL 388425 8(S.C.
App.20 15); ~A~l~AL-~RAN£-•W~ERWr-bL~.-~v-~W~ERWA~IQWAb-~E~RQ~EUM
IW~.-~Owr F.Supp o2d., 2013 WL 557236 (Fla.20 13).
JUDGE AUSTIN AS APPOINTED TRUSTEE OVER THESE CASES WAS
REQUIRED TO ACT WITH THE UTMOST OF INTEGRITYo INSTEAD SHE ACTED
WITH RECREANT AND OPPROBRIOUS INTENT , AS DID' THE OTHER FEDERAL
JUDGES . THIS rs CHALLENGE TO THE JURISDI CTION OF ALL COURTS
'
INVOLVED ESSENTIALLY ESTABLr'SHING A REMAND LIMITIN G, RESTRIC TING
YOUR JURISDI CTION TO DO NOTHING EXCEPT GRANT THE RELIEF DEMANDED.
ONCE JURISDI CTION IS ACQUIR ED,.QeI T IS EXCLUSIVEQ YOUR ACTIONS
VIOLATE THE CONTRACT, THE GRANT, GIVEN TO YOUR NATIONS BY THE
SOLE CORPORATION IMPAIRING THE OBLIGATION OF THE CONTRACT IN
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION ESTABLISHIN G CAUSE BEFORE ALL COURTS INVOLVED, ~RE£A Q~~-~.- l.C.~.T
494 UoS. 1~ 110 S~Cto 9~4, 108 LaEd=2 d. 1 (U.So1 990); ~RQW~
69-of-7 0
~
~.-2RQWWr F.S upp .2d ., 201 3 WL 233
823 3(D .C.K y.2 013 ); WA RRI £-~.
UMGREG~-INC. 7 F.S upp a2d ., 201 3
WL 133 116 6(N .C.2 013 ); AMERi~A~
MY~w-~~BER~~-~W~.-~O,-~~-~~XWQQQ
~R~A£~~~a-CQR~~r 81 F.S upp .
157 (DS C.1 948 ); QRARA~~~,-WEW-¥
QRK-QER~v-G~-EQ~~~r F.S upp .3d .,
201 5 WL 424 073 3(N ~Y .D. C.2 015 ).
THE WRITS OF MANDAMUS, ALL OF
THEM, ARE TO BE GRANTED. IT IS
SO ORDEREDo
RESPECTFULLY,
JAHJAH AL .MAHDI, KING, KHALIFA
H
AND CHI EF JUS TIC E OF THE GLOBAL
THEOCRATIC STATE AND COURT
~~:--~~-- L ~ 7 ~
j
·~ W e
ROBERT MITCHELL
/u 4] -,~
dav id dur en
YAHYA MUQUIT
CHRISTOPHER WILSON
OCTOBER 5, 201 7
t
70- of- 70
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?