Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Strunk Judicial Notice 09-Cv-1295 022410

Strunk Judicial Notice 09-Cv-1295 022410

Ratings: (0)|Views: 981|Likes:
Published by Chris Strunk
By Express Mail EH 699207089 US to the Clerk of the Court

Declarant / Plaintiff, hereby provides the Court with notice of a recent order by the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. The decision and order, issued in Forjone et al. v. the State of California et al. No. 06-CV-1002 (NDNY February 19, 2010), renders Mr. Forjone’s request with 28 USC §1407 moot as it is now a matter on appeal to the Second Circuit that should take several months to resolve. A copy of the court’s decision and order is attached to this notice. The nudge given to Judge Kahn by Mr. Forjone and myself to take that case off the Congressional list of pending matters requiring continuing funding there in NDNY; however, does not change the fact that there is an urgent matter with a deadline of March 15, 2010 in the mailing of the 2010 Census Questionnaire to be done without the two required questions “Are you a citizen?” and or “Are you a permanent resident alien?”

The LCvR 9.1 Motion for a three judge panel remains open and there is a failure here in this District from the get go to comply with local rules specifically LCvR 40.3 (b) ( ) for the Manner of Random Assignment of a District Judge to determine a three judge court that remains unresolved, notwithstanding all the various Motions to Dismiss by the Defendants, and the concern of irreparable harm with time as the essence involved in disseminating the bogus questionnaire to further the amnesty bill without knowing the actual number of ‘Tourists” transients and persons of a diplomatic relation to be obfuscated without the two questions asked. If the Court does not act expeditiously by March 1, 2010 to resolve this matter, Declarant must file an emergency Original Proceeding in Circuit for a preliminary injunction there.
By Express Mail EH 699207089 US to the Clerk of the Court

Declarant / Plaintiff, hereby provides the Court with notice of a recent order by the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. The decision and order, issued in Forjone et al. v. the State of California et al. No. 06-CV-1002 (NDNY February 19, 2010), renders Mr. Forjone’s request with 28 USC §1407 moot as it is now a matter on appeal to the Second Circuit that should take several months to resolve. A copy of the court’s decision and order is attached to this notice. The nudge given to Judge Kahn by Mr. Forjone and myself to take that case off the Congressional list of pending matters requiring continuing funding there in NDNY; however, does not change the fact that there is an urgent matter with a deadline of March 15, 2010 in the mailing of the 2010 Census Questionnaire to be done without the two required questions “Are you a citizen?” and or “Are you a permanent resident alien?”

The LCvR 9.1 Motion for a three judge panel remains open and there is a failure here in this District from the get go to comply with local rules specifically LCvR 40.3 (b) ( ) for the Manner of Random Assignment of a District Judge to determine a three judge court that remains unresolved, notwithstanding all the various Motions to Dismiss by the Defendants, and the concern of irreparable harm with time as the essence involved in disseminating the bogus questionnaire to further the amnesty bill without knowing the actual number of ‘Tourists” transients and persons of a diplomatic relation to be obfuscated without the two questions asked. If the Court does not act expeditiously by March 1, 2010 to resolve this matter, Declarant must file an emergency Original Proceeding in Circuit for a preliminary injunction there.

More info:

Published by: Chris Strunk on Feb 24, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/10/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD 09-cv-1295
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
:Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse and the CHRISTOPHER :(aka “CHRIS”) STRUNK jus tertii People, :
593 Vanderbilt Avenue 281 Brooklyn New York 11238 :845-901-6767
Plaintiffs
:
Civil No.:
09-cv-1295
 : Hon. Richard J. Leonv.
:
:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE :BUREAU OF THE CENSUS (BOC) et al. ::Defendants. :
:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------xPLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF RECENT DECISION AND DISPOSITION OF LOCALRULE 9.1 MOTION FOR A THREE-JUDGE COURT
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, state under penalty of perjury with 28 USC §1746 that:Declarant / Plaintiff, hereby provides the Court with notice of a recent order by the United StatesDistrict Court for the Northern District of New York. The decision and order, issued in
Forjoneet al. v. the State of California et al.
No. 06-CV-1002 (NDNY February 19, 2010), renders Mr.Forjone’s request with 28 USC §1407 moot as it is now a matter on appeal to the Second Circuitthat should take several months to resolve. A copy of the court’s decision and order is attached tothis notice. The nudge given to Judge Kahn by Mr. Forjone and myself to take that case off theCongressional list of pending matters requiring continuing funding there in NDNY; however,does not change the fact that there is an urgent matter with a deadline of March 15, 2010 in themailing of the 2010 Census Questionnaire to be done without the two required questions “Areyou a citizen?” and or “Are you a permanent resident alien?”1
 
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD 09-cv-1295
The LCvR 9.1 Motion for a three judge panel remains open and there is a failure here inthis District from the get go to comply with local rules specifically LCvR 40.3 (b)
()1
for theManner of Random Assignment of a District Judge to determine a three judge court that remainsunresolved, notwithstanding all the various Motions to Dismiss by the Defendants, and theconcern of irreparable harm with time as the essence involved in disseminating the bogusquestionnaire to further the amnesty bill without knowing the actual number of ‘Tourists”transients and persons of a diplomatic relation to be obfuscated without the two questions asked.If the Court does not act expeditiously by March 1, 2010 to resolve this matter, Declarant mustfile an emergency Original Proceeding in Circuit for a preliminary injunction there.Dated: February 24
th
, 2010 /s/.Brooklyn New York 
____________________________Christopher –Earl: Strunk ©in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue – 281Brooklyn New York 11238Phone; (845) 901 6767Email:chris@strunk.ws Attachment: Decision and Order NDNY 06-cv-1002 (February 19, 2010)cc: The Honorable Chief Judge Royce C. LamberthDefendants Counsels
1
LCvR 40.3 MANNER OF ASSIGNMENT (a) RANDOM ASSIGNMENT.Except as otherwise provided by these Rules, civil, criminal and miscellaneous casesshall be assigned to judges of this court selected at random in the following manner:(b) THREE-JUDGE COURT CASES. Civil, including miscellaneous, cases requested orrequired to be heard by a Three-Judge Court shall be randomly assigned to a District Court judge, excluding the Chief Judge.2
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK  _________________________________________ JOHN-JOSEPH FORJONE,
et al.
,Plaintiffs,v. 1:06-CV-1002 (LEK/RFT)STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
et al.
,Defendants. _________________________________________ LAWRENCE E. KAHNUNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DECISION and ORDER 
Plaintiffs filed a Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) in the Western District of New York assertingvarious constitutional violations and other claims arising out of the National Voter Registration Act, 42U.S.C. §1973gg,
et seq.
, and the Help America Vote Act, 42 U.S.C. § 15301
et seq
. (“HAVA”).Among other things, Plaintiffs appear to claim that at least some of the Defendants wrongfully countedthe voting age population (“VAP”) (including illegal aliens and deceased persons), rather than usingthe citizen voting age population (“CVAP”), and thereby used imprecise numbers in redistricting anddetermining eligibility for funds under the HAVA. Plaintiffs also appear to assert a violation of theRacketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. § 1961
et seq
., and the FalseClaims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729,
et seq
. Am. Compl. (Dkt. No. 26) at ¶ 1. Plaintiffs request a three judge panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284.
IBACKGROUND
In ruling upon certain motions before it, the Western District of New York noted that theComplaint:
Case 1:06-cv-01002-LEK-RFT Document 133 Filed 02/19/10 Page 1 of 10

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->