Viertel v. USA
Filing
37
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court has received the attached submission, which is a motion to strike docket entries that Petitioner Viertel alleges were fraudulent. There is no basis to change the docket entries, which are consistent with the In dictment filed in this case. To the extent that the petitioner seeks to have his conviction vacated, or to have the denial of any previous Court decision in this case reconsidered, he has not demonstrated any basis for such relief. For these reasons, the petitioner's application is denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/7/2014) (ajs) Modified on 5/8/2014 (ajs).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
────────────────────────────────────
CHRISTIAN VIERTEL,
Petitioner,
- against –
08 Civ. 7512 (JGK)
01 Cr. 0571 (JGK)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
────────────────────────────────────
JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge:
The Court has received the attached submission, which is a
motion to strike docket entries that Petitioner Viertel alleges
were fraudulent.
There is no basis to change the docket
entries, which are consistent with the Indictment filed in this
case.
The Indictment is part of the record that has been
challenged repeatedly and unsuccessfully by the petitioner in
his direct appeal and in numerous post-conviction proceedings.
The petitioner also seeks the release of various documents,
but the petitioner does not have any applications pending to
which the documents would be relevant, and he has failed to show
good cause for the discovery that he seeks.
See Garafola v.
United States, 909 F. Supp. 2d 313, 335 (S.D.N.Y. 2012).
Finally, to the extent that the petitioner seeks to have
his conviction vacated, or to have the denial of any previous
Court decision in this case reconsidered, he has not
demonstrated any basis for such relief, which has been denied on
multiple prior occasions.
For these reasons, the petitioner’s application is denied.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
New York, New York
May 7, 2014
_____________/s/____________
John G. Koeltl
United States District Judge
2
From 1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 3 of 13
Wniteb ~tates j)Bistrict QCourt
---------------------------x
(faxed to chambers @ 805-7912 on May-06-14)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
\'Ai; VICTIS MOTION TO LASTLY STRIKE
OUT CORRUPTED DOCKET ENTRIES #1+#2
FOR INAUGURAL DECEIPT, PREJUDICIAL
LACK IN FACT TO NOW RESTORE THE RULE
OF LAW & SANCTITY TO THE COURT'S DUE
PROCESS BURDEN & TO ORDER USANYS TO
SHOW CAUSE WHY DISMISSAL [NUNC PRO
TUNC] SHOULD NOT RESULT FOR ITS GRAND
JURY DECEPTION, ITS FORGED uARREST
WARRANT", ITS BOGUS FUGITIVE LABELS,
ITS REARWARD STAMPED FALSE BILL, ITS
FILE BACKDATING --;-t- FOR A SULPHUROUS
HOAX
MISSION OBJE,TIV~:TO FRAME & RETROFIT
BOTH TIME BARRED'QVERT ACTS AND WHY
SEVERE SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT FOLLOW
Plaintiff,
FRITZ G. BLUMENBERG,
i
.,
CHRISTIAN T. VIERTEL,
q~fs
2001 (GP) 00S71- (JGK)
J-GFW--t--.--b€-E, exclusive
~p~~ee
"
[published http://bit.ly/1fMcXsd]
,. .. ..
~
•
~
K
~
---------------------~~~---x
/OU
an
abuu':.
.
to Burda M>.tdia t.hat rnv·:i:t;e
~~~ you do that'
C~rr•R!i;nkrs:Cfl-l't~~fl~~ittg.J
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
acts2 purporting to support a §371
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 5 of 13
charge [that Thomas Snow. Main DOJ, swiftly dropped in 2002
from his unconscionable MLAT to France which U.S. proctrix Cohen pestered Snow daily to fax to
Paris], but the Court also provided continued inter-branch shield-support, deliberately scoffed at
199S's mail fraud LAW, repeatedly "ruling" [albeit provisory & subject to revocation] extra-mural
statutory authority [ultra vires]. The Court imprudently trespassed its discretionary Art.Ill license
beyond statutory limitations applicable to, inter alia, §371 in furtherance of utter disrespect for
Congressional exclus1on 3 of non-domestic-territorial "international air freight allegations".
Massive effort to cook the public's Court books
The Court combined, confederated and abutted U.S. government plaintiff's "massive effort
to cook Court books and to oursue historical revisionism to orosecute in tort" throughout this case,
4
and against two aliens , both being badly hampered by federally schooled, federally intimidated
counsel too frightened of retribution to provide effective assistance to doomed defendants, but
2
"overt acts", bogus at best, which Kiefer established as untenable and
fictitious,. because Kiefe~-~lone backdate-stamped the "charged" $8,120.00
Agate post-pay-out-voucher s~iftly upon tray-exit from B,U8DA's own laser
printer a week after these false act allegations.
vindi~ate
'"Our goal is simply to
~5,
to provont the
.
u~e p~
include UPSJ FedEx and
I
the intended purpose of the statute, that
[aame~tic Unite~ Stat~~
.
priv?!~
9r commercial
pastaL maii systems which
[
•
int~rstate
cgrriers] in
furtherance of fraudulent ~nte~prises." United Stat~~ v. Von Barta, 635 F.2d
999, 1005 (2d Cir.1980)~ ,ert. denied, 450 U.S. 998, +01 S.Ct. 1703, 68
L.Ed.2d 199 (1981) (cit~tipns omitted). Others, voicipg the concerns
underlying the doctrin~· 8f strict construction, have ~aken a narrower
view. Several courts
hP,Y~
attempted to reconcile
th~s~
disparate approaches
by seeking to discover pqw far Congress meant to ex~erid § 1341 and by
strictly confining the ~tatute within its intended Qo~nds. See United States
v. Bohonus, supra; Unit~~ States v. McNeive, 536 F.2d·1245, 1247 n.3 (8th
Cir. 1976). "Statutes li~e the federal mail fraud s~atute involved here must
be strictly construed ib'.l~rder to avoid extension bey?nd the limits intended
.rt
by Congress." United st§i~es v. Edwards, 458 F.2d 875;~880 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied,409 u.s. 891, 93-~'.ct. 118, 34 L.Ed.2d 148 (~~]2) .
i:t:~
;;
•
.'
Third defendant John L,~e; sole citizen, was uncere~9niously nolle pressed
on 7/3/2002 upon still~~ecr~t grounds
4
: tf..
,,
"t
, ·~
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 6 of 13
ready to pass off CJA-vouchers for "Gewft"-compliant "dump-truck" performances. Intent goes to
the reason one acts, and ''bad faith'' goes to why an action was undertaken [this Court was
greeted in Texas earlier this year to positive learn, that the Seventh Circuit defined "bad faith" as
"for the purpose of hiding adverse information"].
Conspiracy cannot be carved out of dead wood.
For the reason stated here and heretofore, and on the basis of most offensive, soohisticated
due process violations and further, because of sweeping, Kafltbitly/1eor/t\iE], but White's
r
,;!. -
brainy bunch inside the "U.S.-Wf)r-Room" [Court insiders claim] heap-labeled their concoction:
., , _
~
t.~
~
"INDICTMENT". [NYSD Clerk QfQ) fixed that right up to make the D~cfet look less comprom sing].
1
Queen's Counsel they are not, but then, Lawlords & Lawladies don't populate democratically
: "~ .-f •
elected Court benches 1n the ~.~..
5
~ ~ ..._
~
Nobel-Laureate Fridtjof Nansen warned 1922:
"make baste. lest it be too late tg rue"
~
6
"DocketDoctor-Gate"
tf,
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 7 of 13
Last I was told, Magistrates cannot issue "l!V.P!CVJ1E!Vr5, but that's another GOLD
STANDARD that would not derail "welt supervised" members [Weddle, Harris, Canellas et an of
United States attorney Mary White', her "FRfl/J1ERS-1"EIM1 2·0".
Doctor Pitman meanwhile back at the bench, knowingly & willfully pretended to have
7
chronicled bogus blow-by-blow non-events. vapor aoplications and invisible "SEALS" and caused
harm thereby to a clueless Nation and 3 clueless inbound defendants, but the Spin-Doctor
indisputably certified his SO ORDERED ["INDICTMENT"] declaration to have ad hoc, albeit ignis
fatuus. "SO ORDERED UNSEALMENT" of that same "INDICTMENT" of which no record existed 8, no
Court FILING transcribing such proceeding can be found for a day when the Spin-Doctor was not
on duty [Doctor was off
honoring the Old Glory on U.S. Flag Day 14 June, Movant was advised].
Conclusively, Grand Jurors "abstained" to VOTE UPON a TRUEBILL 6/14/2001.
,.,
PACER IS UBER CLEAR
11.06.2011
CLO~ED,
APPEAL. CASREF
U.S. District Court
.
Soptbem District of New York (Foley ~«JU'are)
CRIMINAL not;pT FOR CASE#: 1:01-cr-00571iPK~..l!!!<'..~~~~-
Tuesday June 1~~ ~@01 was the 170th day in the 9regorian calendar.
,~.~
·~'
. .,,. """ ,...
0
Case ti&: USA v. Blume~ et a:l
Related Caso: l:08~0\'-07$i2-JGK (No -mj- Case)
·t: -~ -
......
Daw F~:·p6119/2001 stuqpRrn intent
8
As in "Ripley's Believe it or not", some hallucinatqr:y clerk typed up an
ii'hes 'since removed - that 9 SEP,-~ WAS BLOWN - He/she
earned to get off scot 'frlee for smeLL inq up bathrooir{toilet seats for that
"entry notation" - 2
tine contribution trom"!fie "SeaLed Documents StoraaE!"j' Movant heard.
~
.! ~ ~..
~
·-,
1
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 8 of 13
and that screen clearly evidences PACER's PUBLIC ACCESS BASE HEADER, the "meta-data-beet:
CASE FILE DATE was 6/19/2001 [see screenshot redacted, supra) and was not "Filed" on any date
or sooner.
The CASE FILE DA TE ON RECORD is prima facie evidence
A CASE FILE DA TE represents the INAUGURATION of a CASE, c1v1I or criminal; also for
tolling & time-bar purposes [unless a "Related Case" was calendared prior, mj-indexed prior and
docketed pnor for certain tolling & time-bar purposes in an OPEN "non-Art.Ill" Magistrate COURT.
In the NYSD, such a Magistrate Case against Blumenberg was not CALENDERED, MJ-INDEXED or
FILED IN OPEN MAGISTRATE COURT for one simple reason,: there was no case yet what meant,
no proceeding, no recording, no judicial action prior to June 19, 2001. The Southern District seems
to be a real-life Petri dtsh for all types of pro-jud1oal, pro-federal malfeasance and for well known
protection rackets amor1g ~e~nloli-re'Ca-~Jur~ts ot";eason
have ~·ssw'red'~Movant.
·
Petit Jury Instructions, not worth~ of credence. allow the Court hindsi~ht. in this precious,
educational post-hoax moment. to draw all jurisdictional consequerices DUE PROCESS calls for:
of canspl '.".I t. dGt
....
~-~rtr~?
iri
t ..
furthera;nce uf the
:f-,.t'd ;;fter .jr::e- :4, J.996.
.
I
-
~
I
•
•
"
W'.::,,-A~,
-1..L.L.J.
f
·~
FIAT UT PET/TUR
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 9 of 13
Second Part
Before this CASE was [f]actually filed [on 6/19/2001 around 09:30am 9, per Court staff's
reconstruction] and equally before a Judge "assignment" [eventually JUDGE KOELTL] had taken
place [which raised significant doubt by Court insiders - even prior to the Second Circuit's blunt
words in Chiasson/ Newman's hearing last week - as to Branch 2'sjudge-picking culture to shun
the "criminal wheel" that could ruin a sordid plan to prosecute and "win at all cost" and
reputational debit] the United States government actors commenced this continuing enterprise
racket to frame three persons tor tame and career, in arrogant defiance of prospects for running
significant due process risks and for sanctions, disbarments, once getting caught.
The United States engaged in elaborate lulling and hard-core BRADY-molestation schemes
[not really out of character for prosecutors nationwide] to hide their inaugural continuing offensive
conduct. Movant was advised by clerks and by probation staff - surely off the record - that the
US. attorney standard calculation is made upon "comity between the two branches" to keep the
lid or. proof-tight block Movant's investigations, assure that demands for LAB-reports are
dismissed. Trial Exhibit 501 can be altered scot-free in Open Court. wire-detail-meta-data dumped
in the gutter and financial certifications shunned [here. the United States theorized wrongly as to
beneficial gain, loss and ownership under §1343]. a miscalculation that blew open now since the
joint inter-branch racket can no longer shove OPENED RECORDS and NOTES OF DATES under
the Courthouse carpet. Coequally, hidden documents, like the 2001 version [SJ of A0190 and the
Grand Jurors Transcripts. must be revealed, at all cost to the bar.
Incidentally, around 09:00am on 6/19/2001, Magistrate Ann E. Vitunac opened FLSD
Magistrate Case #01-5156 against Movant based upon a pseudepigraphous, USANYS falsified
Draft Arrest Warrant, which "U.S. Cltt1re!d!m proctor Mark Harns" selfie rubberstamped, 1n lieu of
9
The Georgian Calendar was bulled in 1582 by Pope Gregory XIII to give the
Julian calendar more flexibility for the solar futur.e and to plug the Sun's
11 minute yearly gap an~'not to.mess up the moon's P.redictability, not only
for Easter. On N~w Ye~r 1752, Britain and their British colonies in America
adopted the new calendar; also because George Washington blowing his B-day
candles twice eacp·year, on tbe llTh and the 2~nd of Febr.u.ary, was wrecking
the political climate. That C~ristian calendar system meant not~ing to the
UNITED STATES governmen~ in June 2001 9fter some powlfialer·~nce~~ed, cowbovf Lavored, anything-goes ~w.hiff blew northwards from 43" $ ~~ Wh;i. te House to
Manhattan in June 2001, qverloading any breathalyzer-lie-detector. The ogre
does what ogres can, became inteqraL part of the Nation's fabric.
%.
~
~.~
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 10 of 13
a real tudicative seal. i.e._by "Magistrate Michael Dolinger" (signature field - intentionally- blank on
the fake warrant draft Movant recuperated from the FLSD with the help of most honest clerks,
because the FBI had specifically & illegally removed Harns' bogus "Novelty Warrant" altogether
from the certified "complete, redacted" set of FBI-FILES FOIA disclosures) applying such fake
stamp of a fictitious "anime" Clerk's "signature" specimen (h1e/anie /...· L.opez., Clerk, is illusionary)
on 6/15/2001 1n the Southern District venue that was later that Harris' "Partner" from the FBl's
"integntv-sguad
10
"
faxed to three other district with the object to deceive additional FBI "Resident-
Partners" to make false, unconstitutional arrests, a kind of friendly fire. Since then, these actors
displayed evasive behaviors, common among the criminal attorney element, to keep detection
and removal from bar & power at bay. No more, Movant submits.
Movant was subject to a FALSE ARREST at 0700am, without a valid Arrest ORDER and
without a valid INDICTMENT or COPIES of valid instruments which constituted unlawful restraint of
an individual's personal liberty or freedom of movement by two federal agents procured (by A. 0.A.
request) from Boca Police purporting to act according to the law. Both Boca Police officers were
roguishly advised by the Federal Bureau of Investigation Integrity Duo to be "in possession of a valid
"FUGITIVE" warrant issued by the SONY'~ when, in fact a quick fact-check "investigation"
~9uld r~veal that the, F~l-~s i.ntern9I p,,rio.rjty fsix of an "uns~gnf!~· l!r!s~qteq iryqjctment draft" smelled
just as foul just as a fantqsy "rt1j,,1'~rs1/ll.:?tt1re" on a draft AjWarroni Novetty 1• Still in true
American gun- holder fashion, Agents Joseph G. Sconzo and un~nown agent John Doe, forced entry
iota Movant's p_riv.ate fam~ly dwelling yttth fire_arms drawn, and consequently tn tort (forthcoming).
'
Justice Thomas stated for an unanimous SCOTUS [9-0] in Millbrook v U.S., 11-10362. that Federal Tort
exception wj;l1v1ng 1mml!n1ty f~om. lawi'u1ts ag:==i1nst the goyernment. "ext~'lds to 9{Xs pr omtSsions of law
=::==
FBI-~o~a: ~··~
~
" Pun intended
DOH, I MI~SED also the fake
11
. ·.... ,
lab~l
•l:it..4..vs&"f
on POM®
.
~
INTEGRITY.
juic~ s~bstitutes.
All of which did could not nobly hinder the FB.J's pttorneys to ignobly
deceive (wink, wink) FLSD Judge Hon.Middlebrooks by claiming arrest
authority under an entitLement theory for bogus beLief! in Florida State
even foolish ones, t~Jt ~ lonely "Clerk's" rubber signature on unsigned
A;rest Warrants suffices°'· even 'l!Jh!le the 'united. Sta:t:'...e? ~tto~neys pqssessed
scienter that vapor., clerk f'ffJelanie 1...-1..-ope?!' was as reai ;as the GH4$T l}F IELLANY
IRX,GE.(see USA Acosta Bri,ef 12/12/2005 ~ 18 re FRCrR ~(b) to 4(b)(l)
.
"
claiming that a real cl~rk "personaLly" signed rather than "/....opez.").
~·
"
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 11 of 13
enforcement officers that arise within the scope of their employment, regardless of whether the officers are
engaged in investigative or law enforcement activity, or are executing a search seizing evidence or making
an arrest" And that would reach "tort by forging Court documents to frame innocent persons", rnter alia.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated by Movant within and 1n earlier submissions, this COURT has no
credible point of entry not to grant Movant's MOVE FOR AN
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY DISMISSAL [NUNC PRO TUNC] SHOULD NOT
RESULT FOR ITS GRAND JURY DECEPTION, ITS FORGED "ARREST WARRANT", ITS BOGUS
FUGITIVE LABELS, ITS REARWARD STAMPED FALSE BILL, ITS FILE BACKDATING HOAX FOR
A SULPHUROUS MISSION OBJECTIVE TO FRAME & RETROFIT BOTH TIME BARRED OVERT
ACTS AND WHY SEVERE SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT FOLLOW
Therefore. Movant expects that this MOTION be granted in both parts and its entirety and
that the Court swiftly DIRECTS THE OVERDUE RELEASE OF the cloaked AO 190 and the GRAND
JURY MINUTES and RECORDS from June 2007. to meet the ends of justice. even 1f 1t 1s not to the
personal advantage and interest of the Presider, and to do so in disregard of Movant's alienage
and distance from the JURISDICTION, and order what other actwns are overdue and deemed just
and reasonable now, that AG Holder pronounced today, that "too big to jail" is not the current
modus operandi at US-DOJ.
Respectfully submrtt~d this 5th tjay of May 2014 [Stn lyyar 5774]
Chr i&tian T Viertel, Movant pro se
i~t. Di Torre Della Giustizia
·
9/18 v. delle Ballodole Firenze, !TALIA 50139 ~iertcl2005@aol.com N/A Tel ~1631 709 9229
~+883 510001197 405
CERTIFICATION of Service /s/ Copies of this submission were faxe9 t,his day to the Hon. Chief
Judge NYSD, Dr. Preska, and em.ailed to USANYS Preetinder Bharar~, and by snail mail to the
~~
(,•
SDNY Clerk. PROPOSED ORDER ATTACHED (2 Pages)
t
:-
{
.;,
.
From
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 12 of 13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
01 Cr. 0571 (JGK)
(P:::oposecii
Against
ORDER
CHRISTIAN VIERTEL
JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge
The Court received the attac2.ed "MOTION to strike-out and correct
three inaugural Docket filings in this Case" from CHRISTIAN VIERTEL,
da~ed
May 5, 2014, which it files with this Order.
Whereas, the Court takes Judicial notice of NYSD Jur.e 2001 dockets, to
hold that the Case was not filed with any Judge or Magistrate, and was not
sealed on June 14, 2001 by any Judge or Magistrate, but was originally filed
5 days :ater - unsealed - as in the Case Title: uDate Filed: 06/19/2001 by
the government ir. the morning of June 19, 2001, moments prior to my
Assignment.
Whereas, the Court holds, that DOC#2
was
~repared
by the
~
[a document labeled "INDICTMENT"]
government and was not prepared by Magistrate
Pitman, who nevertheless signed off "SO
ORDERE~"
on June 19, 2001,
"Unseal!ng a sealed Indictment of June 14, 2001 upon application". The
Magistrate's Order was contrived for tolling
p~rposes
of Count One, to shoe-
1n two allegations of time-barred overt acts by CHRISTIAN VIERTEL for
prosecut1or. under the Conspiracy statLte 18 U.S.C. §371 to unfairly survive.
Whereas,
the Court holds that an appl!cation to seal the IND:CTMENT ir.
this on or after June 14, 2001 purportedly made by United States was a
fictitious
cla~m
Whereas,
dated
Janua~y
and must be stricken uFor All Purposes" from the records.
the Court rPscinds its MO #9:579 dated May 4, 2005 and its MO
30, 2014 and hereby orders public release and docket entry of
the June 2C01 Grand Jury minutes, trctrscripts and documents.
Whereas, the Clerk is also directed to strike-out portions and add the
exact corrective language to counterfactual entries as detailed be:ow:
rrom 1.877.233.3839 Tue May
Ca~e
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 13 of 13
title: USA v. Blumenberg, et al
Date Filed: 06/19/2001 (original)
Entries underlined or bold are new
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
·1
Date Ffl~d
06/t 4P001
#
---- ·- ··--
loock~t-T;~(--·-
12-)--rSEALED INDICTMENT
--1
3;f
to .Sealed DefeAdr..At I (1) COttAt(s) 1-:-2.
ISenled DefendaAt 2 (2) eottRt:(s) l, 2, 3, Sea-lea DefenElaAt 3 (3) ee'dflt_(.")_-1-.-2; j
I3-8m7 (Entered: 06/20/2001) ***BE AWARE*** Correction below:
IFraudulent Entry above: Stricken in its entirety cSigned by Judge
;
.
j
r--------r---r-1K_o_e_lt_I~ !Entered:
06/1912001
a!J
-·-----·--·---
(-1)
/
12014)
ORDER r:m to Seuled DefendnAt 1, SeHled Defeedant 2, Sealed Defendant 3,
UmiecJing Indictment (Signed by Magistrate Jttdge HeRry 8. Pitman);
Coplen n1r..-iled. Gn'l) (ERtered: 06/20/2001) ***BE AWARE***
Correction below:
i Fraudulent Entry above:
i KoeltlJ (Entered:
/
Stricken in its entirety cSigned by Judge
12014)
'61191'.lOO 1
I ;'!r.•e entry in this.cas_e .
Christian Viertel's motion is therefore granted in both parts.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
New York,
May -
J
ITndictm;~t--FTLED , For A11 P~;~~~-~ , CASE A;~i;ned -t~ Judge John ...... ·:
I
~ew
2P*4
York
John G. Koeltl
United St~tes lo~strict Judge
From 1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 2 of 13
Fax transmission Cover Sheet 1+11 pages
6 May 2014
For NYSD:
Hon. Chief Judge Preska
Hon. Judge Koeltl
From
TO:
1.877.233.3839 Tue May
6 05:57:52 2014 PST Page 1 of 13
United States District Court
nuncprotunclaw
FROM:
New York Southern
COMPANY:
1st.Di Torre Della G1ustizia
COMPANY:
2128057912
FAX:
+883510001197405
FAX:
01-0571 (JGK)
SUBJECT:
Tuesday, May 06, 2014
DATE
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?