review by the Court of Appeals is needed, required or should occur although no claim normatter was pending in the District Court for litigation and judgment since October 8,2010; twelve days before the Court of Appeals’ October 20, 2010 Order dismissing theappeal for being premature. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has not indicated arejection of the District Court’s alleged intent to dismiss all remaining and pendingclaims in the District Court’s October 8, 2010 Order. A removal and/or concealment of documents, such as those filed electronically on September 30, October 8, and October14, 2010, from the case files of the Court of Appeals and the District Court wouldconstitute a criminal violation of
Title 18, U.S.C.
2071, resulting in a
fine orimprisoned not more than three years, or both. Further, a conspiracy to deprive theplaintiff of protected rights and/or due process right to be heard upon the first threePrivacy Act claims for relief that are alleged in the Complaint but were converted intodifferent claims by the District Court Judge also constitutes criminal violations of
18U.S.C. § 241; 18 U.S.C. §242; 18 U.S.C. § 245; and 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
However, despite the deprivation of protected rights and the possible criminal actsreflected in the orders of both Courts, notice is hereby given that Pamela Melvin, plaintiff in the above named case, respectfully appeals to the Honorable United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.Respectfully, submitted this the 15
day of December 2010.
____________________________________ Pamela Melvin, pro se4949 Fieldcrest Drive