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
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
CODY ROBERT JUDY - JUDY Letter to U S Supreme Court July 1st 2012

CODY ROBERT JUDY - JUDY Letter to U S Supreme Court July 1st 2012

Ratings: (0)|Views: 701|Likes:
Published by Jack Ryan

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Jack Ryan on Jul 02, 2012
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

07/15/2012

pdf

text

original

 
CODY ROBERT JUDY3031 So. Ogden Ave.Suite #2Ogden UT. 84401801-497-6655- - - - - - - -SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATESOffice of the Clerk 
 – 
Mr. William K. SuterWashington, DC 20543-0001RE: Cody Robert Judy v. Barack Obama July 1st, 2012- - - - - - - - -Dear Mr. Suter- Clerk of the Court:The first class mail return of my document, Petition for Writ of Certiorari on June 30
th
, 2012,was returned with a letter dated from the Clerk Gail Johnson June 28
th
2012 stating:
―Dear Mr. Judy
- The above-entitled petition for a writ of certiorari was received again on June 28
th
, 2012,and is herewith returned for the reason stated in my letter May 17
th
,2012. Sincerely William K. Suter,Clerk 
 – 
By Ga
il Johnson‖
 Also included in the returned box was a copy of the May 17
th
,2012 letter clarifying any doubt of thereasons it was sent back stating
 – 
 
― The enclosed papers were received again on May 17
th
, 2012 and areherewith returned for the reasons stated in my letter dated April 10,2012. Until and unless you receive adecision from a United States Court of Appeals or highest state court within which a decision could behad this Court does not have jurisdiction of your case. By: Gail JohnsonSir, the Petition for Writ of Certiorari dated June 25
th
,2012 has an appeal for the eleventh circuit from thehighest court available in Georgia- The Georgia Supreme Court Judy v. Obama et.al., Case No.S12D1584.The abusive treatment I am the recipient of in the return of my document by analyst Gail Johnsonapparently not even analyzing my document and thinking it was the same document of April 4
th
,2012 isdefinitely a bias towards me that has prejudiced me and my Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. The firstparagrap
h states Sir that the Supreme Court of Georgia granted my ‗indigent status‘.
 
How could I have indigent status from the Georgia Supreme Court if I didn‘t‘ have a decision from the
Georgia Supreme Court in my appeal to the U.S. Supreme court? Why would I have included a copy of 
the Notice of Appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court from the Georgia Supreme Court if I didn‘t have an
Appeal from the highest court in Georgia? Why should a document dated June 25
th
,2012 be consideredthe same document as one dated April 4
th
,2012 worthy of the same letter of May 17
th
,2012 when a denialis on record in the Petition for Writ of Certiorari of a decision made by the Georgia Supreme Court June21
st
, 2012 case No S12D1584?
 
If the Clerk‘s Office had a question for me why can‘t yo
u or Ms. Johnson just call me instead of sendingthe documents back costing the Court more money in the return and me time and more money in postagein re-sending them?This employed tactic was used by the Georgia Supreme Court and I immediately faxed them copies of theOrders that were had in the Superior Court, which they could have got from the Court also but chose toget them from me which was okay, and I did my very best to accommodate any questions they had.My concern of time is a genuine concern on the merits of the case and delay such as Ms. Gail Johnsonseems to be employed in is having the affect of biasing me from the U.S. Supreme Court consideration.I have now been to two State Supreme Courts both of which are entered in the Petition for Writ of Certiorari- One State Supreme Court decision from the New Hampshire Supreme Court and the latestSupreme Court decision from the Georgia Supreme Court. These are both Courts qualifying, as is statedin the May 17
th
, 2012 letter from Ms. Gail Johnson as ―
highest state court within which a decision could
 be had‖ and the presumption ―until‖ and ―unless‖ I had a decision from the highest state court presumes I
would receive a U.S. Supreme Court case number with State Supreme Court case numbers, which I
haven‘
t so far.My June 25
th
,2012 Petition for Writ of Certiorari to make things as simple and plain as I possibly can isfrom the Georgia Supreme Court, case number again is JUDY v. OBAMA et.al, S12D1584 received June21
st
,2012.If the Justices had been informed of my case it may have altered their decision on the ACA Decision asObama is not eligible or qualified by the demands of the Constitution for the Office of the President. I feelthat withholding my case from their consideration is a blatant discrimination towards me and towards theJustice of their decisions that may have been altered if presented.
That circumvention of Justice is not at all my fault. It is remains at the feet of the Clerk‘s
office of whichyou are in charge. If the ACA needed an eligible person first qualified under the Constitution as Presidentto sign it, and Obama was not, the Act was not ripe for the U.S. Supreme Court decision and their
decision is rendered ‗moot‘.
 While the Justices have recessed as of June 29
th
,2012 my Petition for Writ of Certiorari was in their hallsJune 27
th
,2012 and absolutely capable of being considered albeit your handing it to them. The timing of my Petition is imperative to the scheduled Sept. 5
th
,2012 National Democratic Party Convention of whichif considered from the moment it entered the halls of the U.S. Supreme Court June27th, 2012 meets themost important standing requirement
number 3 ‗redressability‘
, thus the employment of stalling iscorrupting my redress of grievances rights.There are three standing requirements:1.
 
Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury
 — 
an invasion of a legallyprotected interest that is concrete and particularized. The injury must be actual or imminent,distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be economic as well as non-economic.

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)//-->