12
1.
R equest for P ertificate of A ppealability
3
A ppellant (hereinafter \u00e7\u00e7Fine'') filed a R equest for Certificate of
4
A ppealability on July 1, 2009,in the U S D istrict C ourt. A s of th e present tim e,
5
the U S D istrict C ourthas done nothing in response other than file the R equest as
6
a \u00e7\u00e7N otice of A ppeal''
7
G iven the history ofthe U S D istrict C ourtof violating statutes in this case,
8
is doubtful that th e U S D istrict C ourtw ill act on the R equ est.
9
F ine respectfully requ ests that thls C ourt im m ediately issue the C ertificate
10
of A ppealability.
11
If this C ourt d oes not im m ediately act, this case w ill b e unn ecessarily
12
prolonged as h as already occurred by this C ourt's failure to prom p tly act in case
13
09-7 1692.
14
In such case, F ine filed an E m ergency P etition for W rit of H abeas C op u s
15
in this C ourt alleging that the U S D istrict C ourtviolated 28 U SC j 2243. The
16
D istrict C ourt refused to tile the Petition. T his C ourt filed it as a Petition for
17
W rit of M andate/prohibition on Ju ne 3, 2009. T his Petition w as separate from
18
the Petition in U SD C case no. 90-C V -19 14 (D ocket # 1) as the new P etition
19
alleged violations ofth e D istrictC ourt. The P etition in U SD C case no.09-C V -
20
1914 alleged violations by Judge Y affe and the LA Superior C ourt in a contem pt
21
action, resulting in th e in carceration of Fine to tdcoerce'' him to respond to
22
questions about his assets. Fin e challen ged Ju dge Y affe's right to preside at th e
23
contem pttrialand judge his ow n actions,am ongst other things.
24
In case no. 09-7 1692, this C ourt delayed its decision until June 30, 2009,
25
w hich w as the day after the D istrict C ourt approved the M agistrate Judge's
26
R eport and R ecom m endation (ttR epolfi) over F ine's O bjections (D ocket #30).
27
This C ourtm istakenly refen-ed to the M agistrate Judge's R eport dated June 18,
28
2009 (D ocket #25) as the decision of the D istrict C ourt. This C ourt never
Case: 09-56073 07/23/2009 Page: 3 of 12
DktEntry: 7003921
Leave a Comment