US Judge Virginia Phillips
US District Court, Central District of California
Los Angeles, December 27 – “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” litigation has been conducted out of compliance with United States law, and the October 12, 2010 Judgment of the US District Court is void, according to a Motion to Intervene filed by Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO) with the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. [1]
Appeals from both parties in Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al (10-56634 and10-56813) are currently before the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. There are many flaws with the District Court litigation. The most significant are:
· The Clerk of the US District Court refuses to certify the docket of the case.
· The Clerk also refuses to provide the copies of the electronic certification records of the two opposing judgments, which appears to be in violation of First Amendment rights.
The docket of the US District Court documents litigation that was conducted out of compliance with the law:
· No record is available in the docket of the complaint or of the summons, which is required by U.S. law.
· No record is avaliable of execution or waiver of the service of the summons.
· No valid Assignment Order for a Presiding Judge is found in the docket. Therefore, it appears that the two judges, who appeared as Presiding Judges in the case, did so without authority.
· The two judges issued two opposing judgments: The first judgment, issued in 2006 by Judge George Schiavelli, was in favor of the United States of America, and dismissed the Log Cabin Republicans’ complaint. It was entered in the Judgment Index of the US District Court, and consequently the case was considered closed. Judge Schiavelli’s Judgment was not overturned. A second judgment, issued four years later, in 2010, in the same case by Judge Virginia Phillips, was in favor of the Log Cabin Republicans.
The judgment by Judge Phillips is the now the basis for the appeals in the US Court of Appeals.
The Motion to Intervene by Dr Zernik claims that Judge Phillips’ ruling is invalid and void and cannot be the basis for an appeal. Any objections to the judgment should be deemed moot, or irrelevant, because the judgment itself is void. Therefore, the appeals by both parties should be dismissed.
The case has many similarities to a previous case that was brought before Judge Phillips in 2008, Zernik v Connor et al, in the U.S. District Court.
Zernik v Connor et al is a case that went before Judge Phillips in U.S. District Court and alleged corruption of litigation in California Superior Courts by Bank of America.
However, in Zernik v Connor et al Dr Zernik did manage to access the electronic certificates of authentication/attestation by the Clerk, where access was denied in Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al. The electronic certificates of authentication/attestation of the minutes, the orders, and the judgment in Zernik v Connor et al were all invalid, without exception. Therefore, the electronic certificates of authentication/attestation in Zernik v Connor et al provide conclusive evidence of the conduct of invalid litigation in the US District Court through collusion of Judge Virginia Phillips and Clerk Terry Nafisi.
The corrective actions sought by the Motion to Intervene in both cases are also the same: declarations by the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, that Judge Phillips’ judgments in both cases are null and void, since she appeared as Presiding Judge with no authority, and the judgments in both cases are uncertified.
The Motion to Intervene also aims to restore the Clerk’s accountability for the integrity of the online electronic court records. The measures would prevent the conduct of invalid proceedings in the US District Court, as seen in both Log Cabin Republicans v United States of America et al, and Zernik v Connor et al.
Through the Motion to Intervene Dr. Zernik and Human Rights Alert also seek to restore public access to the electronic certificates of authentication/attestation by the Clerk (NEFs – Notices of Electronic Filing), which are public records.
If the U.S. Court of Appeals rules on the Motion to Intervene, the decisions may exert profound impact on the integrity of the US courts in California and beyond.
Dr. Zernik and Human Rights Alert have previously filed requests with the US Congress to initiate investigation and impeachment proceedings against Judge Virginia Phillips and Clerk Terry Nafisi of the US District Court for the conduct, such as seen in Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al and Zernik v Connor et al.
The Motion to Intervene has been filed also with the US Congress Judiciary, Armed Services, and Finance Committees. In filing the papers with the US Congress, Dr Zernik alleges that conduct of Judge Virginia Phillips and Clerk Terry Nafisi undermines the Rule of Law, and with it - Civil Rights, Banking Regulation, and management of the Armed Services.
LINKS
[1] 10-12-27 Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al (10-56634 and 10-56813) in the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, Dr Joseph Zernik's Motion to Intervene:
Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Human Rights Alert focuses on the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of the integrity of the justice system in the United States.
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345
1 comment:
FOR ALL THE REGULAR TYPES, WHO SAY THAT MY WRITING IS TOO COMPLICATED:
In simple language: The High School principal wrote an 80 page college Recommendation Letter for a student, claiming that he graduate valedictorian, and the Head Counselor sent it on his behalf to the college.
However, when the college asked for the Transcript and Graduation Certificate, signed by the Head Counselor, the Head Counselor refused to send it.
Post a Comment