5 PlaintifTs Ex Parte request for a hearing June 2, 2010 was erroroneously deniedby Judge Shelleyanne W.L. Chang, and subsequently, so was Plaintiffs request for ahearing June 4, 2010 to decide whether to remove Damon Dunn from the ballot and/or nothave votes counted for him as a Secretary of State candidate.6 Judge Chang stated in the Order "No explanation is given for why plaintiff waitedseveral monttis after tfie candidate filed tiis requisite papers before seeking an OST for anOrder to Sfiow Cause RE- Injunctive Relief"; to which Plaintiff contends is contrary to thefacts that:a. Plaintiff only had a tentative confirmation that Damon Dunn's Declaration ofCandidacy and California Voter Registration Form were erroneous andfraudulent, on or about April 13 when Plaintiff received a copy of the letter fromJean Mane Atkins, Director of Voter Administration, Office ofthe Supervisor ofElections, Florida, confirming that Damon Dunn had a prior voter registration as aDemocrat in Florida and tried to get the Florida elections department to erase hisvoter registration record;b. Plaintiff filed a formal complaint with the Secretary of State's Office May 3, 2010,as the proper channel for voter, ballot, and election fraud. While waiting for ananswer from the Secretary of State's Election Fraud Division (that came by mailafter May 12, 2010 while I was out of
Plaintiff filed her complaint againstDamon Dunn, Debra Bowen, and Edmund G. Brown May 10, 2010;c. Plaintiff, a pro se party did research how to get an expedited hearing on removingDamon Dunn from the ballot. While Plaintiff attended an important matter in NewYork from May 12, 2010 through May 20, 2010. Plaintiffdid assign an agent,Shirley Freemen, assigned to file plaintiffs proposed Order to Show Cause (OSC)for an expedited hearing in conformance with any such request for injunctive
but the OSC was rejected by the Clerk ofthe Court 4 days before plaintiffre-filed the Proposed Order to Show Cause for injunctive Relief May
2010requesting a expedited hearing to have Damon Dunn removed from the ballot andnot have any votes be counted for him.
Plaintiff was then denied two more times by Court officials despite Plaintiffcompliance with each phone line request authonzed according to the Superior
- 3 -EX PARTE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF HEARING