Well, the district judge DID RULE on the
Initial COMPLAINT, didn't he?
Pleadings to courts are petitions to government
for redress of grievances BY DEFINITION:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/dixianne/
Well, then why didn't Sullivan just throw the COMPLAINT
into the trash can, if it's true that ...
government does not have to listen or respond
to Petitions for Redress of Grievances from the People?
Answer: MORE HYPOCRISY -- STRAIGHT FROM SULLIVAN'S MOUTH.
They DO need to answer a SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE:
http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/subpoena.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings....liability.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm
(see Commissioner v. Acker, in chief, which binds Sullivan,
like it or not!)
The USDC is convened coram non judice anyway,
because it is a legislative tribunal:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/aol/cert.htm#drama
http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels...g.title.28.htm
Did anybody submit a FOIA to DOJ for the 4 credentials
required of Sullivan? It's not too late!
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/index.htm
(Office of Information & Privacy has been SUPERB
with their assistance to my office)
Don't let the Clerk of Court BS you: that Clerk is
the designated legal custodian of the APPOINTMENT
AFFIDAVIT pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 2906, 3331:
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/oaths/federal.judges.htm
Do your homework before you REFUSE his opinion for cause.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agenc...ey.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice