my name is cornell d m judge cornish and i am representing myself pro se however i am an attorney in this court otherwise i wouldn't be allowed to be and i appreciate the fact that i am here to argue my case i hope you have a good trip and one of my thought that you had traveled abroad and so it's good to be back again with you for another round because i have had two rounds already and i have another case which is very well may come again here so i'm getting jumpy and are kind of a routine because i think i have a justified tense i know you said to me at the very end of my last case that i had some sort of incapacity and i didn't have any time to answer it because the time has expired so i'm hoping today it comes up again because i think in all of the incapacity is of course that you're not authorized to practice before the  appellee they say i am registered and if that's true and i say it is true i agree with th there's a reason why i'm here because i'm registered they say i'm registered they agree i'm registered that's the criteria for being a patent practitioner in th cage they show i did last year he was registered the other case cited by glass yes is hall she wasn't registered she was allowed assist in many ways as i suppose anybody is allowed to say assist other people and especially they brought up in those two ca whether you are doing it for money for in my case pro sending or pro bono those are two exceptions to the general rule where you have to be registered in order to appear in the patent office on three thirty one in d c maryland or new york so my conduct what i'm asking for this court to say is that i am a registered practitioner in the patent office which is what the first six words of the red recess i'm registered if there are other questions involved send it back to the district court clearly dramatically wrong and there can be no argument against your from the government as to whether or not they think you register shall we sure then you can respond all right thank you m could i bench and one other thing you certainly me that the counsel for the government has stated in a separate issue in a separate letter to the court which i only found out about yesterday that this court has jurisdiction and i maintain that the false light which they put me under and the interference from is my client is not a matter for status first in the state of maryland where he had in his one of his many law licenses he advised the patent office in writing that he was likewise interested in and i want to make sure i get the words  exactly correct in his letter that he was going to cease practice before the us p t o this was back in one thousand nine hundred six the patent office took the position that what that language meant ceasing practice before the us p t o was that he wanted to have his name removed from the register of patent attorneys and sent him a letter and said we're going to take your name off the active role unless you tell us otherwise if we're misinterpreting the letter let us know and we'll and we'll talk about it because at that time the same disciplinary issue that had arisen in maryland had also by that point gotten to the patent office and he did not respond nine years went by before mr cornish came back to the patent office and said i would like to be reinstated he recognized he was only an active role he specifically request with the differing the active in the enacted yes the difference between active and inactive he was not on he couldn't practice because he was not not on the roll but are you still registered or not you have a registration number that never goes away when you first start when you first pass the exam you get a registration number he's always had his registration number we'll take it away it's just he's not authorized to practice for the court  patent on your own pro se you don't have to be a lawyer you have to be registered you don't have to be authorized you have the right as an inventor to pursue a path so he has continued to have a relationship with the patent office where he has pursued these individual patents where he was the inventor so he has a customer number he has a deposit account he has some of these other things that that practitioners will also have but that did not make him an active member of the patent bar authorized to practice patent cases for other people before the patent office now there was communication with the court just yesterday about the timing of our earlier actions and their effect on jurisdiction to clarify that please yes your honor in preparing for the oral argument and going back and looking at what had happened previously and you know this some of you have been i know just press you've been at least on to these prior appeals and judge wright i know you've been on at least one of the there is this case been complicated there's been a lot of motions this is the fourth appeal before the court the last appeal that was before the court was on the district court's decision to grant summary judgment for the patent office  after the court entered that final order a motion for reconsideration was filed and then it almost immediately him a notice of appeal was filed under it was my interpretation looking at the the rules and preparing for the argument that under the federal a procedure that motion for reconsideration rendered that that prior what i would have been final order non final now what should have happened is someone putting us should have figured that out and said to the court wait on this appeal until there's a that well what's happened now is because there has been a ruling on that pending motion for reconsideration we now have a final order and it's this one it's what we're arguing today we have a final order it incorporates what was done in analogy that we have to affirmatively do something about that being on the books i don't think you have to do anything about it other than to in this ruling say without that ruling as well i mean you've already considered the issues in the last go administrative is administrative process some point during the pendency of this litigation he went back to the patent office and started engaging in administrative proceedings and that's what the other litigation is about is there was a decision at some i did ask for a copy but the name on here was changed i have a new name this is c daniel and i asked for a copy of this stuck human with my new name cornell g cornish district of columbia gave me a new name now when i sent a letter to the patent office i asked them to change my  things because a woman gets married and she changes her name and it doesn't change her status in the patent office as a registered patent attorney saying for me only instead of changing the last part of my name i changed the first part still look at maternity before i change my name and after i change my now they made a reference to the letter which said she or even reinstated it means that i continue my previous status as if i was on a train the train pauses at a station and goes on it was not it it changed i said charge me any money if it cost to change my name and they waived it so i was home free i had my name change they told me i didn't have to pay for it and so i went and practiced petrol but when you ask to cease your registration they responded to you and said effectively we're removing you from the rolls is that correct no that isn't your honor and the you didn't respond to them so i had to assume that  be a practicing no they didn't have in city before the patent office they didn't have to assume that and i did not assume that because they say it's a voluntary thing and so that's the problem right no because when i was taking those tests i insisted that they have a person there with me taking the test to find out if i'm incapacitated either as a drinker or physically in some other way in which you've got to pass the test to qualify right to see your honor it's a very very confusing state the only word misuse reincarnat they made me death as to registration they made me dead as if i did not have a registration that's quite another issue than what i say i did and then you think i didn't stop anything i paused long enough to have my dame changed after they said my name is incompetently on my dead misread which is what has been repeated here today and it's a misreading of what i did voluntarily was not true in other words and  earlier argument that i heard you have anything additional to add to what we should consider well i did mention the fact that see they're holding me in false light as the district court did so i'm saying that all this court has to do is say to me that i'm a register with the patent office i'm entitled to this stuff you meant and i take that to the district court and i say district court you erred clearly when you said i was not registered i am registered so the issue before the district court is i am i read history or am i not registered and i will be able to say if this court agrees with me that i'm entitled to this document with my name on it to take back to the district court and ask them to reconsider their holding that i am not registered well in this court doesn't agree with you of course then you're not authorized to continue you understand that no that's not true your  because number one pick the court three thirty one zero nine she says i am able to practice in the court proceeding a perfectly legitimate thing to do under the american  to me i have a signed patent which i can prosecute regardless of what they say here or have said in the other pages they agreed that i can do that so in other words it's one i want to claim that the district court understands that i am entitled to say i'm registered under the first amendment it's true an absolute