Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/120704324/Supreme-Court-Brief
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 04:40:56+00:00

Document:
The court of appeals issued a judgment on October 31, 2011 (No. 11-1332), denying appellant's appeal and granting defendant-appellee Bank of America Corporation’s motion to dismiss the complaint. I (petitioner) have submitted a Motion For Leave To Proceed In Forma Pauperis and for writ of certiorari and placed it in the United States Postal Service via first-class postage prepaid, on January 25, 2012 before the final date allowed for filing. The Court's jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1), which provides: Cases in the courts of appeals may be reviewed by the Supreme Court by the following methods: (1)By writ of certiorari granted upon the petition of any party to any civil or criminal case, before or after rendition of judgment or decree; (2)By certification at any time by a court of appeals of any question of law in any civil or criminal case as to which instructions are desired, and upon such certification the Supreme Court may give binding instructions or require the entire record to be sent up for decision of the entire matter in controversy.
or abridging the freedom of speech. arising under this Constitution.--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party. other public Ministers and Consuls. Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. or the Citizens thereof. other public Ministers and Consuls. or the right of the people peaceably to assemble. shall be by Jury. and Treaties made. Section. both as to Law and Fact. 2. receive for their Services a Compensation. 1. and between a State.--between a State and Citizens of another State. the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed. which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office. Section. and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors.--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction. Amendment V 3 . or of the press. the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction.Roy A. In all the other Cases before mentioned. The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court. the Laws of the United States. with such Exceptions. The Trial of all Crimes. both of the supreme and inferior Courts. and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. and those in which a State shall be Party.-between Citizens of different States. and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed. shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour. under their Authority. but when not committed within any State. in Law and Equity.--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States. and foreign States. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases. Citizens or Subjects. except in Cases of Impeachment. Slay CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED Article III. or which shall be made. and shall. In all Cases affecting Ambassadors. the Supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. at stated Times.--to Controversies between two or more States. The Judges.
also known as the 'Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act' (in the Senate) and 'Corporate and Auditing Accountability and Responsibility Act' (in the House). the right of trial by jury shall be preserved. Section 5. nor be deprived of life. or otherwise infamous crime. *Changed by section 1 of the 26th amendment. also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. is a United States federal law enacted on July 30. The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB). and no fact tried by a jury. Slay No person shall be held to answer for a capital. without due process of law. enacted July 30.Roy A. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. without due process of law. public company boards. except in cases arising in the land or naval forces. nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. which set new or enhanced standards for all U. nor shall private property be taken for public use. unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury. management and public accounting firms. AMENDMENT XIV Section 1. nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.S. the provisions of this article. where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars. there must be a policy in place to 4 . liberty. when in actual service in time of War or public danger. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. The Congress shall have the power to enforce. 2002. liberty. 2002). whether a financial institution discloses nonpublic information or not. than according to the rules of the common law. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. without just compensation. by appropriate legislation. or property. GLB compliance is mandatory. shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States. nor shall any State deprive any person of life. or in the Militia. are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. All persons born or naturalized in the United States. or property. nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. Amendment VII In Suits at common law.
Sec. and to report suspicious activity that might signify money laundering.S. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION. or privileges of employment because the employee. Slay Major components put into place to govern the collection.Roy A. Specifically. or any order. the Federal Government. or is about to provide or cause to be provided to the employer. or any act or omission the employee reasonably believes to be a violation of any provision of this Act or any other Act enforced by the Commission. caused to be provided. Sec. or other criminal activities. §2087]. to end "too big to fail". or ban under any such Acts. disclosure. or the attorney general of a State information relating to any violation of. Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010. conditions.-(a) No manufacturer. may discharge an employee or otherwise discriminate against an employee with respect to compensation. Subchapter I. (3) assisted or participated or is about to assist or participate in such a proceeding. or retailer. government agencies to detect and prevent money laundering. whether at the employee's initiative or in the ordinary course of the employee's duties (or any person acting pursuant to a request of the employee)-(1) provided. (2) testified or is about to testify in a proceeding concerning such violation. private labeler.S. or otherwise known as the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act) requires financial institutions in the United States to assist U. [15 U. 6801-6809 Disclosure of Nonpublic Personal Information. standard. and for other purposes. to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts. rule. to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices. or 5 . the act requires financial institutions to keep records of cash purchases of negotiable instruments.C. regulation. tax evasion. distributor. terms. The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 (or BSA. and protection of consumers’ nonpublic personal information.000 (daily aggregate amount). The Dodd-Frank Act is to promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system. and file reports of cash purchases of these negotiable instruments of more than $10. 40. or personally identifiable information includes: Financial Privacy Rule Safeguards Rule Pretexting Protection 15 USC.
in writing. practice. any activity. and of the opportunities that will be afforded to such person under paragraph (2). regulation. of the substance of evidence supporting the complaint. (B)(i) The Secretary shall dismiss a complaint filed under this subsection and shall not conduct an investigation otherwise required under subparagraph (A) unless the complainant makes a prima facie showing that any behavior described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (a) was a contributing factor in the unfavorable personnel action alleged in the complaint. and request a hearing on the record. or ban under any such Acts. or both. the Secretary shall notify. standard. by clear and 6 . If the Secretary concludes that there is reasonable cause to believe that a violation of subsection (a) has occurred. Not later than 30 days after the date of notification of findings under this paragraph. or any order. the complainant and the person alleged to have committed a violation of subsection (a) of the Secretary's findings. Any such hearing shall be conducted expeditiously. (b)(1) A person who believes that he or she has been discharged or otherwise discriminated against by any person in violation of subsection (a) may. Upon receipt of such a complaint. in writing. the preliminary order shall be deemed a final order that is not subject to judicial review. policy. (ii) Notwithstanding a finding by the Secretary that the complainant has made the showing required under clause (i). The filing of such objections shall not operate to stay any reinstatement remedy contained in the preliminary order. or refused to participate in. the Secretary shall accompany the Secretary's findings with a preliminary order providing the relief prescribed by paragraph (3)(B). Slay (4) objected to. either the person alleged to have committed the violation or the complainant may file objections to the findings or preliminary order. no investigation otherwise required under subparagraph (A) shall be conducted if the employer demonstrates. If a hearing is not requested in such 30-day period. not later than 180 days after the date on which such violation occurs. the person named in the complaint of the filing of the complaint.Roy A. of the allegations contained in the complaint. (2)(A) Not later than 60 days after the date of receipt of a complaint filed under paragraph (1) and after affording the complainant and the person named in the complaint an opportunity to CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY ACT 106 submit to the Secretary a written response to the complaint and an opportunity to meet with a representative of the Secretary to present statements from witnesses. rule. the Secretary shall initiate an investigation and determine whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the complaint has merit and notify. file (or have any person file on his or her behalf) a complaint with the Secretary of Labor alleging such discharge or discrimination and identifying the person responsible for such act. or assigned task that the employee (or other such person) reasonably believed to be in violation of any provision of this Act or any other Act enforced by the Commission.
the complainant may bring an action at law or equity for de novo review in the appropriate district court of the United States with jurisdiction. (iv) Relief may not be ordered under subparagraph (A) if the employer demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the employer would have taken the same unfavorable personnel action in the absence of that behavior. conditions. (B) If. the Secretary determines that a violation of subsection (a) has occurred. that the employer would have taken the same unfavorable personnel action in the absence of that behavior. the Secretary may award to the prevailing employer a reasonable attorneys' fee. (4) If the Secretary has not issued a final decision within 210 days after the filing of the complaint. to be paid by the complainant. the Secretary shall order the person who committed such violation-(i) to take affirmative action to abate the violation. which shall have jurisdiction over such an action without regard to the amount in controversy. or within 90 days after receiving a written determination. and (iii) to provide compensatory damages to the complainant. as determined by the Secretary. and the person alleged to have committed the violation. (C) If the Secretary finds that a complaint under paragraph (1) is frivolous or has been brought in bad faith. the complainant. or in connection with. a proceeding under this subsection may be terminated on the basis of a settlement CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY ACT 107 agreement entered into by the Secretary. and privileges associated with his or her employment. the bringing of the complaint upon which the order was issued. in response to a complaint filed under paragraph (1). If such an order is issued under this paragraph. the Secretary shall issue a final order providing the relief prescribed by this paragraph or denying the complaint. At any time before issuance of a final order. at the request of the complainant. Slay convincing evidence. (3)(A) Not later than 120 days after the date of conclusion of any hearing under paragraph (2). shall assess against the person against whom the order is issued a sum equal to the aggregate amount of all costs and expenses (including attorneys' and expert witness fees) reasonably incurred. not exceeding $1.Roy A. and 7 . by the complainant for. (ii) to reinstate the complainant to his or her former position together with compensation (including back pay) and restore the terms. Slay paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (a) was a contributing factor in the unfavorable personnel action alleged in the complaint. (iii) The Secretary may determine that a violation of subsection (a) has occurred only if the complainant demonstrates that any behavior described in Roy A.000. the Secretary.
Review shall conform to chapter 7 of title 5. and Roy A. The proceedings shall be governed by the same legal burdens of proof specified in paragraph (2)(B). expert witness fees. without regard to the amount in controversy or the citizenship of the parties. or in the United States district court for the District of Columbia. (7)(A) A person on whose behalf an order was issued under paragraph (3) may commence a civil action against the person to whom such order was issued to require compliance with such order. at the request of either party to such action. injunctive relief and compensatory damages. The court shall have jurisdiction to grant all relief necessary to make the employee whole. with interest. including injunctive relief and compensatory damages.Roy A. in issuing any final order under this paragraph. allegedly occurred or CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY ACT 108 the circuit in which the complainant resided on the date of such violation. and reasonable attorney's fees. any person adversely affected or aggrieved by a final order issued under paragraph (3) may obtain review of the order in the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the violation. including-(A) reinstatement with the same seniority status that the employee would have had. (B) The court. operate as a stay of the order. including litigation costs. the Secretary may file a civil action in the United States district court for the district in which the violation was found to occur. but for the discharge or discrimination. may award costs of litigation (including reasonable attorneys' and expert witness fees) to any 8 . unless ordered by the court. The petition for review must be filed not later than 60 days after the date of the issuance of the final order of the Secretary. the district courts shall have jurisdiction to grant all appropriate relief including. to enforce such order. Slay which action shall. United States Code. but not limited to. be tried by the court with a jury. Slay (C) compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the discharge or discrimination. In actions brought under this paragraph. (5)(A) Unless the complainant brings an action under paragraph (4). to enforce such order. with respect to which the order was issued. The commencement of proceedings under this subparagraph shall not. (B) the amount of back pay. The appropriate United States district court shall have jurisdiction. (B) An order of the Secretary with respect to which review could have been obtained under subparagraph (A) shall not be subject to judicial review in any criminal or other civil proceeding. (6) Whenever any person has failed to comply with an order issued under paragraph (3).
distributor.Roy A. victim. private labeler. or both. and shall permit the United States to intervene for presentation of evidence.C.S.C.S. and for argument on the question of constitutionality. United States Code. shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years. Slay party whenever the court determines such award is appropriate. or retailer (or such person's agent). if evidence is otherwise admissible in the case. deliberately causes a violation of any requirement relating to any violation or alleged violation of any order. subject to the applicable provisions of law. The United States shall. (e) (!2) Whoever conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy US Code . (d) Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to an employee of a manufacturer.Section 1513: Retaliating against a witness. officer or employee thereof is not a party. before or after rendition of judgment or decree.S. (2)By certification at any time by a court of appeals of any question of law in any civil or criminal case as to which instructions are desired. Certified questions: Cases in the courts of appeals may be reviewed by the Supreme Court by the following methods: (1)By writ of certiorari granted upon the petition of any party to any civil or criminal case. wherein the constitutionality of any Act of Congress affecting the General. for providing to a law enforcement officer any truthful information relating to the commission or possible commission of any Federal offense. Certiorari. regulation. or an informant (whistleblower) (e) (!2) Whoever knowingly. 28 U. and upon such certification the Supreme Court may give binding instructions or require the entire record to be sent up for decision of the entire matter in controversy. (c) Any nondiscretionary duty imposed by this section shall be enforceable in a mandamus proceeding brought under section 1361 of title 28. § 2403 : US Code – Section 2403: Intervention by United States or a State. 18 U.Chapter 73: Obstruction of justice 28 U. have all the rights of a party and be subject to all liabilities of a party as to court costs to the extent necessary for a proper presentation of the facts 9 .C. suit or proceeding in a court of the United States to which the United States or any agency. distributor. private labeler. takes any action harmful to any person. or consumer product safety standard under this Act or any other law enforced by the Commission. including interference with the lawful employment or livelihood of any person. or retailer who. constitutional question (a)In any action. with the intent to retaliate. § 1254 : US Code – Section 1254: Courts of Appeals. § 1513 : US Code . acting without direction from such manufacturer.
and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same. of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia. any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia 42 U.S. officer.C. except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity. or causes to be subjected. or to influence the verdict. by force. ordinance. intimidation. and mentioned in section 1985 of this title. freely. or juror. have all the rights of a party and be subject to all liabilities of a party as to court costs to the extent necessary for a proper presentation of the facts and law relating to the question of constitutionality. or of his being or having been such juror. regulation. or indictment lawfully assented to by him.C. or employee thereof is not a party. and truthfully. and shall permit the State to intervene for presentation of evidence. § 1986 : US Code – Section 1986: Action For Neglect To Prevent: Every person who. or other proper proceeding for redress. § 1983 : US Code – Section 1983: Civil Action For Deprivation of Rights: Every person who. privileges. or indictment of any grand or petit juror in any such court.S. or usage. or to injure such party or witness in his person or property on account of his having so attended or testified. custom. intimidating party. or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to deter. § 1985 : US Code – Section 1985: Conspiracy To Interfere With Civil Rights: (2) Obstructing justice. having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done. For the purposes of this section. the court shall certify such fact to the attorney general of the State. and for argument on the question of constitutionality. any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights. or if two or more persons conspire 42 U. under color of any statute. presentment.(b)In any action. any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court. or to injure such juror in his person or property on account of any verdict. subjects. The State shall. shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law. or proceeding in a court of the United States to which a State or any agency. 42 U. wherein the constitutionality of any statute of that State affecting the public interest is drawn in question. fully. neglects or 10 . or threat. or from testifying to any matter pending therein.Roy A.S. are about to be committed. subject to the applicable provisions of law.C. if evidence is otherwise admissible in the case. presentment. witness. suit. suit in equity. Slay and law relating to the question of constitutionality. injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.
or data contained in a computer. and if there be no widow. for the benefit of the widow of the deceased. (2) obtaining money. § 11-52-6(a)(b)(c)(d)(e) Civil action. and for fraudulent or other illegal purposes. altering. computer program. computer network. representations. computer system. directly or indirectly. damage. damages. computer software. – Whoever directly or indirectly accesses or causes to be accessed any computer. and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action. shall be liable to the party injured. in lieu of actual damages. or destruction. computer system. shall be guilty of a felony and shall be subject to the penalties set forth in § 11-52-5. deleting. if there be one. or promises. intentionally. without authorization. – (a) Any person injured as a result of a violation of this chapter may bring a civil action against the violator for compensatory damages. – Whoever. the injured person. alteration. or services by means of false or fraudulent pretenses. and any other relief that the court deems appropriate. punitive damages. § 11-52-3 Intentional access. destroying. court costs. other than an electronic mail service provider. § 11-52-2 Access to computer for fraudulent purposes.Roy A. and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case. or (3) damaging. (b) If the injury arises from the transmission of unsolicited bulk electronic mail. computer system. for all damages caused by such wrongful act. or computer network shall be guilty of a felony and shall be subject to the penalties set forth in § 11-52-5.000 damages therein. or computer network for the purpose of: (1) devising or executing any scheme or artifice to defraud. or removing any program or data contained in it in connection with any scheme or artifice to defraud. may also recover attorney's fees and costs and may elect. which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented. alters. and may recover not exceeding $5. the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefor. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued. including reasonable attorneys' fees. Slay refuses so to do. or destroys any computer. computer program. property. accesses. to recover the lesser of five hundred dollars ($500) for each and every unsolicited bulk electronic 11 . and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect. then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. or his legal representatives. if such wrongful act be committed.
computer network. 12 . (c) If the injury arises from the transmission of unsolicited bulk electronic mail. computer program and computer software involved in order to prevent possible recurrence of the same or a similar act by another person and to protect any trade secrets of any party. conduct all legal proceedings in such a way as to protect the secrecy and security of the computer. an injured electronic mail service provider may also recover attorneys fees and costs.000) per day. in its discretion. computer data.000) per day. and may elect. the court may.Roy A. Slay mail message transmitted in violation of this chapter up to a maximum of twentyfive thousand dollars ($25. The injured person shall not have a cause of action against the electronic mail service provider which merely transmits the unsolicited bulk electronic mail over its computer network. to recover the greater of five hundred dollars ($500) for each and every unsolicited bulk electronic mail message transmitted in violation of this chapter up to a maximum of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25. in lieu of actual damages. (d) At the request of any party to an action brought pursuant to this section.
§ 2403 (Intervention by United States or a State. my Fourteenth Amendment – Section 1 rights (―Due Process of Law and Equal Protection Of The laws‖) and Article III. Slay STATEMENT OF THE CASE This case is about the denial of my (Petitioner) Seventh Amendment right (―Trial by Jury‖) in a civil case. except in Cases of Impeachment. 3 business days after receiving my (Appellant) Petition for review of my misconduct complaint(s) dated October 26. 2011 and the filing of a Misconduct Petition against that magistrate judge dated July 06.C. for the Respondent (Bank of America N. 28 U. 13 . He has waived any other claim of error. 2011. ―accepted a magistrate judge’s March 9. 2011 recommendation and granted defendant-appellee Bank of America Corporation’s motion to dismiss the complaint‖ and ―Slay’s only preserved claim of error—that the dismissal of his complaint violated his due process right to a jury trial—is meritless. 2011 to the Judicial Council by stating appellant.C. constitutional question) and 42 U. 2011. Two Temporary Agencies I can name that were involved are Randstad US and Volt Workforce Solutions.Section 1-2.A. or an informant (whistleblower)).C.S.) act of terminating my employment and actions since of leaving me destitute. 18 U. I (Petitioner) disagree with the above statement from the court of appeals. my First Amendment right (―Freedom of Speech‖).Roy A.Section 1-2 ( ―Shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour‖)(―The Trial of all Crimes. § 1513.S. 28 U. Fifth Amendment right (―Due Process of Law‖). my Fourteenth Amendment – Section 1 rights (―Due Process of Law an Equal Protection Of The Laws‖). blacklisting and manipulating me in my employment search.S.S. victim. In addition. shall be by Jury‖). The United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit err in its judgment on October 31. § 1983 (Civil Action For Deprivation of Rights). § 2403 should apply in my quest for justice for what the lower courts failed to uphold and 18 U. Article III. § 1513 (Retaliating against a witness.S. The statement by the judges of both the district court and the court of appeals is in direct violation of my civil rights under the Constitution in particular.‖ after filing a Notice of Appeal dated March 25.C.C.
Anderson who is named in my complaint was contacted and spoken with by Judge Martin or someone from the court on his behalf. except in Cases of impeachment. was my name in it?‖ Any interviews conducted by Judge Martin or individuals acting on his or the court behalf with the Appellee employee’s wasn’t administer under oath. changes are needed. and granting the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint. Anderson is quoted. David K. Slay The United States District Court For The District Of Rhode Island err in its judgment when it violated the. Judge Martin partially quoted some quotes from my Timeline.C. The United States District Court For The District Of Rhode Island violated Article III – Section 1-2 ―shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour & The Trial of all Crimes. Judge Martin Report and Recommendation is bias and misleading. § 1983 should apply to Bank of America N. ―What letter. so it should be considered hearsay and not be included in his Report and Recommendation.S.‖ which I (Plaintiff) did.Roy A. Examples of Judicial misconduct include. pursuant to this Court’s Memorandum and Order dated March 16. 2011 that is based on a bias and misleading Report and Recommendation that violates the Judicial Conference Of The United States Committee On Judicial Conduct And Disability and the court own Local Rules of requesting a Jury Trial by. shall be by Jury‖ and Plaintiff Seventh Amendment right of the United States Constitution to a ―Jury Trial‖ when it issued Judgment dated March 16. David K. by stating. Judge Martin violated the Judicial Conference Of The United States Committee On Judicial Conduct And Disability.S.C. ―Judicial Conference Of The United States Committee On Judicial Conduct And Disability. below the case number. § 1513. ―plaintiff Roy A. ―Any pleading containing a demand for a jury trial shall set forth the demand to the right of the caption.‖. The United States District Court For The District Of Rhode Island violated 14 . for providing false information to the Rhode Island Department of Labor and Training.A. As for the district court. Slay. accepting the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation dated March 9. 18 U. 2011. ―having improper discussions with parties or counsel for one side in a case. 42 U. 2011. treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner.‖ The written transcript doesn’t match the recorded transcript.
15 . during the Motion To Dismiss hearing. In addition. 2011 to the Judicial Council by stating appellant. 2011. ―accepted a magistrate judge’s March 9. I (Plaintiff) wasn’t allowed to completely read my court statement and received an alter transcript from that Motion To Dismiss hearing. The United States District Court For The District Of Rhode Island violated my (Plaintiff) Constitutional First Amendment right of ―Freedom of Speech‖ and Article III Section 1 ―shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour‖. 3 business days after receiving my (Appellant) Petition for review of my misconduct complaint(s) dated October 26. 2011 followed by its Judgment on March 16. 2011 recommendation and granted defendant-appellee Bank of America Corporation’s motion to dismiss the complaint‖ and ―Slay’s only preserved claim of error—that the dismissal of his complaint violated his due process right to a jury trial—is meritless. 2011.Roy A. He has waived any other claim of error‖. The United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit violated my (Appellant) Constitutional Fifth Amendment right of ―Due Process of Law‖ when it issued Judgment on October 31st. The United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit violated my First Amendment right when the court decided that my appearance was not needed after I filed a Notice Of Appearance. Slay my (Plaintiff) Constitutional Fifth Amendment right of ―Due Process of Law‖ when it violated the Judicial Conference Of The United States Committee On Judicial Conduct And Disability when it issued a bias and misleading Report and Recommendation on March 9.
The Tiverton Police Department had police cars cruise my street until one of the officer’s cruise by a couple of times and finally sees me taking out the trash. § 1983 and 37 CFR 10.C. shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour‖) and my (Petitioner) First. the Judicial Conference of The United States Committee On Judicial Conduct And Disability. Seventh and Fourteenth Amendment rights. David K. § 1985) when David K. was my name in it?‖ In Judge Martin Report and Recommendation.C. 42 U. I (Petitioner) submit this Petition (To The Director). The judge conduct regarding me violated Article III Section 1 of the Constitution. I was 16 .146. My (Petitioner) rights have been violated by the district court. ―what letter. both of the Supreme and Inferior Courts.S. The district court final violations were my Seventh Amendment right of a (―trial by jury‖) and my Fourteenth Amendment right (―due process of law‖) when it issued ―Judgment‖ based on a bias Report and Recommendation that omitted facts. Article III – Section 1 (―The Judges. The district court disregarded the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings that it warrants a review by the Supreme Court. During the Motion to Dismiss hearing. pulls over to make some notes. The district court also acted improperly. Anderson is quoted.Roy A. (under 42 U. 37 CFR 2.S. Judge Martin or someone from the court acting on his behalf contacted my (Plaintiff) town police department. wasn’t accurate and violated the Judicial Conference of The United States Committee On Judicial Conduct And Disability and Article III – Section 1 of the Constitution.89. my First Amendment right was violated when I the (Plaintiff) wasn’t allowed to finish reading a prepared statement I wrote for the hearing. Slay REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT A Writ of Certiorari should be granted because the district court violated its own Local Rules (LR Cv 5(a)(4)) (―demand for jury trial‖) applicable to civil proceedings. Under the Code of Federal Regulations. Anderson who is named in my complaint was contacted and spoken with by Judge Martin or someone from the court on his behalf.
―granted defendant-appellee Bank of America Corporation’s motion to dismiss the complaint. In any event. ―He has a 25 million dollar lawsuit against Bank of America. when we were interrupted by another neighbor. the district court conducted its judicial process with disregards to my First. where it was quickly moved to federal court. Constitutional Question is needed regarding my Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. S. I Notice a Tiverton Police Car parked in front of his house and a police officer talking with him for over 40 minutes a few days prior. misleading Report and Recommendation from the district court. I (Petitioner) requested this when I filed my civil suit in state court. I filed a Judicial Misconduct Complaint. How many others (Citizens) have had their Constitutional rights.Roy A.S. I overheard him tell her. I next submitted a petition to the Judicial Council for review of my misconduct complaint. only to have it dismissed. my appeal from the district court was entered into Judgment. and Fourteenth Amendment rights.‖ This neighbor has friends who are Police Officers in the Tiverton Police Department. Fifth. C.A. disregarded or will during future litigations? Under 28 U.C.S. § 2403 and 42 U. Three business days later.. My neighbor walked to the edge of her property to greet him. Seventh. not Bank of America Corporation. The actions of the court of appeals violates 28 U. § 1983 and are based on a bias. 28 U. C. § 2403(a)(b). § 2403(a)(b) and its own rules. This civil action needs to go to a Jury Trial.C. S. I (Petitioner) appealed the district court ruling to the court of appeals. Slay speaking with one of my neighbors. 17 . Intervention By United States Or A State.‖ My civil action was against Bank of America N.
2012 18 .Roy A. ______________________ Roy A. Respectfully submitted. the petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted. Slay CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons. Slay 131 Canonicus Street Tiverton. RI. 02878 (401) 636-1371 Date: January 25.

References: § 1254
 §2087
 § 2403
 § 1254
 § 1513
 § 1986
 § 1983
 § 1985
 § 11
 § 11
 § 11
 § 11
 § 11

§ 2403
 § 1513
 § 1983
 § 2403
 § 1513
 § 1983
 § 1513
 § 1983
 § 1985
 § 2403
 § 1983
 § 2403
 § 2403