Mohan A.

Harihar - Complainant
7124 Avalon Drive, Acton, MA 01720 | 617.921.2526 (Mobile) | mo.harihar@gmail.com

Date

Ms. Anastasia Dubrovsky

Administrative Attorney
United States Courts for The First Circuit
1 Courthouse Way Suite 3700
Boston, MA 02210

RE: Petition for Review of Judicial Misconduct

Complaint No. 01-17-90021, 01-17-90011 thru 01-17-
90018, and Show Cause Order.

Dear Ms. Dubrovsky:

I hereby petition the Judicial Council for review of the Chief
Judge’s orders (2), issued February 7, 2018, dismissing my
judicial misconduct Complaint No.’s 01-17-90021, and 01-17-9011
thru 01-17-90018. Please be advised, as evidenced by the Court
record(s), Chief Justice Jeffrey R. Howard is considered to have
PREVIOUSLY LOST JURISDICTION for failing to uphold Federal
Law(s). By IGNORING Federal Rules pertaining to jurisdiction,
refusing to RECUSE and continuing to issue orders, Chief Justice
Howard stands accused of TREASON against The Constitution under
ARTICLE III Section 3. Therefore, these issued orders are
considered VOID, and are interpreted as INCREMENTAL claims of
Treason. It is the opinion of this Complainant that the
continued abuse(s) of power demonstrated by Chief Justice Howard
(and other Circuit/District court judges) has been raised to a
level that warrants removal from the Bench, including (but not
limited) to IMPEACHMENT.

This petition also addresses the SHOW CAUSE ORDER, issued on

February 7, 2018, by Circuit Judges: Howard, Torruella,
Thompson, Kayatta, and Barron. Similarly, in addition to the
Chief Judge, the referenced Circuit judges(above) have also lost

Page 1
jurisdiction to rule here and stand accused of Treason under
ARTICLE III. By continuing to rule again here, the Complainant
necessarily brings incremental claims of Treason against ALL
five (5) Circuit judges associated with this (invalid) order.
District Judges Hillman and Delgado-Hernandez are NOT included
with these claims, as they have not been previously associated
with this litigation. HOWEVER, as with every accused officer of
the court associated with this litigation, Judges Hillman and
Delgado-Hernandez are respectfully given a SINGULAR opportunity
to take corrective action here, including (but not limited to)
sua sponte recusal. Any failure to do so will necessarily bring
evidenced judicial misconduct complaints against them.

Under Article III Section 3, the referenced Treason claims have

been witnessed by at least two (2) additional parties, and as
indicated below, the President of the United States has
necessarily been informed.1 The complainant will provide
additional detail for the record in the following petition.

I. COMPLAINANT’S DISCLOSURE

The gravity of serious legal issues addressed in the Civil

Complaint against THE UNITED STATES, the associated Appeal, and
in the RELATED Appeal,2 include (but are not limited to)
evidenced allegations of TREASON under ARTICLE III, Section 3 of
the Constitution, Economic Espionage pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1832, which are believed to impact matters of National Security.

The evidenced allegations against referenced officers of the

Court include CRIMINAL misconduct - Therefore, it has now become
necessary to file Criminal Complaints with the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) against the TEN (10) identified Federal
(Circuit and District) Court Judges.3 Copies of this petition are
necessarily sent via email, social media and/or certified mail
to the:

1. Executive Office of the President (EOP);

1 See Attachment A – Proof of Delivery to/from the White House

informing the President of evidenced claims of Treason under
Article III.
2 The related Appeal references HARIHAR v. US BANK et al, Appeal

No. 17-cv-1381 (Also, lower court Docket No. 15-cv-11880).

3 See Attachment B – Criminal Complaints filed with the FBI on

March 19, 2018.

Page 2
 2. US Inspector General - Michael Horowitz;
3. US Attorney General - Jeff Sessions;
4. Members of the US Senate and House of
Representatives;
5. House and Senate Judiciary Committees;
6. House Oversight Committee;
7. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI);
8. Office of the Special Inspector General for the
Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP);
9. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC);
10. Federal Trade Commission (FTC);
11. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS);
12. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).

A copy will also be made available to the Public, as this

judiciary’s effort to “promote public confidence in the
impartiality of the judicial process,” has irrefutably been
compromised. By informing the Public, ALL AMERICANS serve here
as WITNESS. Parties are additionally informed for documentation
purposes, and out of the Complainant’s continued concerns for
personal safety/security.

Here, Complainant states that the referenced Officers of the

Court continue to blatantly ignore Federal Rules pertaining to
jurisdiction and judicial conduct, as if they are somehow exempt
from adhering to the law. These irrefutable and continuing
PATTERNS OF CORRUPT CONDUCT are well documented within the
record, as well as with the filed judicial misconduct complaints
before this council. At minimum, these Officers of the Court
exemplify a malicious intent to:

1. Critically damage the legal efforts of this Plaintiff;

2. Negatively impact a legal precedent designed to assist
4.2M+ Americans impacted by ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE; and
3. Bring a National Security THREAT that ultimately
prevents the implementation of a framework designed to
repair and grow the United States Economy.4

The Complainant respectfully makes clear, that he DOES NOT look

for this Judicial Council to assist with delivering an order in
a pending case. HOWEVER, as an AMERICAN CITIZEN, the Complainant
DOES expect the Constitution to be UPHELD, and respectfully

4 The Complainant references his Intellectual Property/Trade

Secret, also known as the HARIHAR FCS MODEL©

Page 3
DEMANDS ACCOUNTABILITY for evidenced allegations of judicial
misconduct which are irrefutable; noting that the accused have
yet to even reference the words - “TREASON, ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE,
or NATIONAL SECURITY”, anywhere in court record(s).

Allowing these decisions to stand will (at minimum) re-affirm a

Pattern of Corrupt Conduct which demonstrates that the First
Circuit Appellate Court is compromised. It will also contribute
to and expand upon the Complainant’s already existing claims
against the United States which include (but are not limited
to): Violations to the Due Process Clause, Color of Law
violations, Conspiracy claims, Civil/Criminal RICO violations,
and Federal Tort Claims.5

II. DEMAND FOR CLARIFICATION TO ALLOW RULING UNDER 25(f) – “IN

THE INTEREST OF SOUND JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION”

Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability

Proceedings 25(f)Substitute for Disqualified Chief Judge. If
the chief judge is disqualified from performing duties that
the Act and these Rules assign to a chief judge, those duties
must be assigned to the most-senior active circuit judge not
disqualified. If all circuit judges in regular active service
are disqualified, the judicial council may determine whether
to request a transfer under Rule 26, or, in the interest of
sound judicial administration, to permit the chief judge to
dispose of the complaint on the merits. Members of the
judicial council who are named in the complaint may
participate in this determination if necessary to obtain a
quorum of the council.

First, the Complainant calls for this council to provide

detail explaining exactly HOW - based on evidenced judicial
misconduct that includes TREASON, Judicial FRAUD on the Court
and others - authorization was given to ALLOW Chief Judge
Howard to rule here. Please clarify for the record:

1.) The names of the individual council members who made

such a determination;
2.) If the evidenced record shows that five (5) out of ten
(10) circuit judges are considered disqualified, WHY
then were duties NOT ASSIGNED to the most-senior active
circuit judge not disqualified? Please explain why

5 Reference Appeal No. 17-2074, HARIHAR v THE UNITED STATES

(Lower Court Docket No. 17-cv-11109).

Page 4
 Circuit Judge’s – Lynch, Selya, Boudin, Stahl and Lipez
were not considered replacements as mandated by Rule
25(f);
3.) Considering the PLETHORA of egregious judicial
misconduct evidenced by this federal judiciary, please
explain in detail WHY a TRANSFER to another council was
not considered under Rule 25(f);
4.) CLEARLY, there exists conflict with ACCURATELY
ASSESSING “the MERITS” of the complaint. Please provide
the details of ALL supported (Plaintiff/Appellant/
Complainant) arguments reviewed by the council, and how
specifically the council could possibly have arrived at
the conclusion(s) that would authorize Chief Judge
Howard to dispose of the complaint(s).

Please be advised, SHOULD there be any failure (or

refusal) by this council to provide the requested
clarification, such action will certainly contribute to
the list of abuses alleged against this judiciary.

III. JURISDICTION

This council is respectfully reminded that collectively –

between the filed civil complaints, their associated
appeals and filed judicial misconduct complaints/petitions,
the Complainant has raised JURISDICTION ISSUES in OVER
FIFTY (50) filed court documents. ALL jurisdiction issues
have been, and as evidenced in these recent orders -
continue to be BLATANTLY IGNORED.

The Complainant IS NOT an attorney and has NO LEGAL

EXPERIENCE. Perhaps Chief Judge Howard and the other NINE
(9) accused judges are considered EXEMPT from adhering to
Jurisdiction Rules. Based on the evidenced court record,
please explain if ANY JUDGE within this circuit has earned
such an exemption to ignore jurisdiction rules. IF NO SUCH
JURISDICTION EXEMPTION EXISTS, then the Complainant’s
interpretation of the Law is that the accused officers of
the court ARE DISQUALIFIED. Allowing officers of the Court
to continue ruling without jurisdiction demonstrates that
the INTEGRITY of this FIRST CIRCUIT is COMPRIMISED.

Page 5
IV. EVIDENCED TREASON TO THE CONSTITUTION UNDER ARTICLE III

As evidenced by the record(s), SIX (6) Officers of the Court

stand accused of Treason under Article III, Section 3 for
continuing to rule without jurisdiction. They include:

1.) First Circuit Chief Judge Jeffrey R. Howard;

2.) US District Court Judge Allison Dale Burroughs
(Recused);
3.) US District Court Judge Denise J. Casper;
4.) First Circuit Judge Juan R. Torruella;
5.) First Circuit Judge William J. Kayatta, Jr.; and
6.) First Circuit Judge David J. Barron

With each of these claims, referenced judges were

respectfully made aware of the offense and given the
opportunity to initiate corrective action. Not only was no
corrective action taken, but a review of court records will
show that these judges never even acknowledge the word
TREASON, as if no claim was ever made. It is the
Complainant’s understanding, that as an AMERICAN BORN
CITIZEN, and under FEDERAL LAW, ANY Witnessed act of Treason
must be reported to: The President of The United States, the
Governor (of the state where the alleged act occurred) or a
Judge. Furthermore, any FAILURE to REPORT a witnessed act of
Treason constitutes MISPRISION of TREASON under 28 U.S.C.
2382. With each of the evidenced claims and IN FULL PUBLIC
VIEW, the Complainant has informed – The President, Governor
Charlie Baker (R-MA) and the Court.

Please be advised, with the February 7, 2018 “SHOW CAUSE

ORDER”, incremental claims of Treason are brought against
the Circuit judges referenced above. Treason claims are now
similarly brought against Judge Thompson, who was previously
disqualified, and has refused to recuse and/or initiate
corrective action. Therefore, her conscious decision to rule
here without jurisdiction constitutes an act of Treason
under Article III.

V. CONTINUED PATTERNS OF CORRUPT CONDUCT

Since initially filing judicial misconduct complaints

against US District Court Judge Allison Dale Burroughs
August 2016, this council is well-aware of the judge’s
RECUSAL shortly thereafter from the related case, HARIHAR v
THE UNITED STATES. Despite this recusal and the

Page 6
Complainant’s continued efforts to address, the District
(and Appeals) Court has failed to address/void all related
decisions which have been impacted. But that’s not all –
What has followed throughout the 3-year history of this
federal litigation is a PATTERN OF CORRUPT CONDUCT
exemplified by EVERY (District or Circuit) judge to follow.
This evidenced pattern is considered identical (or
synonymous) to that which mandated the recusal of Judge
Burroughs.

Throughout the historical record the Complainant has

clearly articulated and evidenced these patterns of corrupt
conduct. The following list of demonstrated Judicial
techniques corroborates misconduct allegations and has been
evidenced as a matter of record. These techniques include
(but are not limited to):

1.) Failure to consider the possibility of erred

judgments of the State Court(s);
2.) Ignoring the Law - One of the primary techniques
used by corrupt judges is to simply ignore the
law. One party cites the law and overwhelming
case law. The favored party doesn't have the law
on their side. The judge simply ignores the law
and rules against the party that was legally
right;
3.) Citing Invalid Law - claiming a case applies when
it doesn't;
4.) Ignoring the Facts - Judges are always under
oath, and a judge is supposed to never say or
write anything that isn't true. So, when a judge
knowingly lies in orders for the purpose of
ruling against a party for the judge's criminal
reasons, it is a criminal violation of perjury.
Each such instance is a separate count;
5.) Ignoring Issues - rather than make up an
explanation, a judge just ignores those tough
issues.;
6.) Saying Nothing in Orders - corruptly calling a
complaint "frivolous" and denying motions with no
valid explanation whatsoever;
7.) Block Filing of Motions and Evidence - The pro se
party is denied the information needed to defeat
the other party, and there is no record of this
evidence and these arguments on appeal;

Page 7
 8.) Tampering with Evidence – as evidenced in the
Middlesex Superior Court, and ignored;
9.) Denying Constitutional Rights – as evidenced;
10.) Automatically Ruling against PRO SE LITIGANTS –
as evidenced;
11.) Violating the Judicial Oath of Office and the
Code of Judicial Conduct – as evidenced;
12.) Allowing Perjury - When the judge knows the
testimony is perjured, the judge is suborning
perjury when he or she does nothing about it and
accepts the perjury as if it was fact;
13.) Premature Dismissal PRIOR to DISCOVERY – as
evidenced;
14.) Denying a Hearing - Hearings are dangerous for
dishonest judges as courtroom observers, media,
and the transcript of the hearing will force the
judges to be a little more honest;
15.) Denying a Jury Trial - Judges corrupt the
judicial process by depriving parties of a jury
trial. Juries can't be controlled by the judges
to ensure that their favored party wins, so
judges end cases before the people who should win
can reach a jury; and
16.) Ignoring the Impact of Recusal – as evidenced.

In addition to these demonstrated judicial techniques, the

Complainant also references section X (below), which lists
EVIDENCED ABUSES OF JUDICIAL POWER. Collectively, these
deceptive techniques and judicial abuses show cause (at
minimum) for removal from the Bench, including (but not
limited to) IMPEACHMENT.

VI. CONSPIRACY CLAIMS

The Court is reminded that the recusal of Judge Burroughs

shows cause for the Appellant to attack all related
judgments that SHOULD ALREADY be considered VOID but have
not. The judicial misconduct complaints filed by this
Complainant against TEN (10) Federal Judges exemplifies
what MAY be collectively considered the largest, and
certainly most egregious ABUSE OF AUTHORITY by a Federal
Judiciary in US history. The argument can certainly be
made, and should be clear to ANY objective observer, that
there appears to be a set agenda by this Federal Judiciary
to ensure that the Complainant – Mohan A. Harihar, DOES NOT

Page 8
 receive a FAIR or JUST RESOLUTION in either of his civil
complaints.

The Complainant firmly believes and has clearly articulated

as a matter of record his reasons as to why such a
conspiracy may exist. They include (at minimum) the
following:

1.) Avoid Setting Legal Precedent – It is WELL-

DOCUMENTED, that this litigation stems from the
ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE of the Complainant’s Property,
which has been identified along with 4.2M others as
part of the 2008 US Foreclosure Crisis – arguably
the LARGEST case of FRAUD in the history of our
Country.6 If the Law(s) is to be upheld here, and a
ruling is rightfully made IN FAVOR of the
Plaintiff/Appellant/Complainant, it would certainly
SET a SUBSTANTIAL LEGAL PRECEDENT for this Nation.
Allowing such a precedent – even if it is the right
thing to do by law, may conflict with the agenda of
a corrupted officer(s) of the Court. While further
investigation is needed to determine the “WHY”,
there can be NO DOUBT, that these referenced
officers of the Court have wrongfully CONSPIRED to
(at minimum) avoid setting a legal precedent here.
Further investigation is also necessary to determine
if additional parties play a role in this conspiracy
claim.
2.) Misappropriation of a Trade Secret – There can be
NO QUESTION, that BOTH of the civil complaints filed
by MOHAN A. HARIHAR involve his INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY (IP) RIGHTS. Since this IP has been created
to ultimately benefit The United States, it is
considered a TRADE SECRET; where ANY ATTEMPT to
DAMAGE/Misappropriate a Trade Secret is protected
under the Economic Espionage Act.

3.) NOWHERE in the record, is there even a judicial

reference to the words, “Intellectual Property”,
“Economic Espionage”, “National Security” or even
“Treason”. Legal arguments can certainly be made,

6 The Complainant references the historical $25B National

Mortgage Settlement, where the DOJ and Federal Bank Regulators
identified 4.2M Illegally Foreclosed Homeowners, including the
Complainant, Mohan A. Harihar.

Page 9
 based on the record(s) that these referenced
officers of the Court appear determined to ensure
that this Trade Secret, designed to economically
assist the United States, NEVER comes to fruition.
While further investigation is needed to determine
the “WHY”, there can be NO DOUBT, that these
referenced officers of the Court have wrongfully
CONSPIRED to (at minimum) misappropriate a Trade
Secret. Further investigation is also necessary to
determine if additional parties play a role in this
conspiracy claim.

4.) Prejudice/Bias against a Pro Se Litigant - It is

NO SECRET, that many in the legal community, judges
and lawyers alike, are not fans of the pro se
litigant. There are a host of reasons that
contribute to this view. One view is EGO, and the
belief that the pro se litigant is not “playing by
their rules” by not hiring a licensed attorney to
represent them on their behalf... They believe that
the pro se litigant is incapable of understanding
the complex laws and procedures of the Court, and
therefore have a pre-determined disposition to
consistently brush aside and rule against the pro se
litigant, regardless of the severity of issues at
hand.

This conspiracy argument against this pro se

litigant has certainly been well evidenced
historically throughout this Federal (and State)
litigation. If a pro se litigant were to be ALLOWED
to succeed here, aside from setting an additional
legal precedent for the Nation, a sense of
EMBARRASSMENT, for opposing attorneys as well as the
presiding judge(s) is likely. A conspiracy to
prevent such a precedent is likely here.

VII. CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS NOW FILED with the FBI

Based on the historical record of this litigation, it is

CLEAR to this Complainant that Chief Judge Howard, and the
other referenced officers of the Court have NO INTENTION
of: 1.) upholding the Law; 2.) their Judicial Oath or 3.)
the judicial machinery of the Court. Instead, what has been
evidenced is a CLEAR INTENT to criminally inflict harm and
increased damages against an ILLEGALLY FORECLOSED

Page 10
 HOMEOWNER, and on a grander scale – commit crimes of
ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE against THE UNITED STATES. These
evidenced crimes impact not only the individual
Complainant, but the Nation as a whole. As an American-Born
citizen, this CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR is UNACCEPTABLE and will NO
LONGER BE TOLERATED. These criminal allegations are not
hypothetical, there is NO GREY AREA HERE – it is BLACK AND
WHITE, clearly evidenced within the historical record(s),
and has been placed in FULL PUBLIC VIEW. The Complainant
has to live in constant fear for his safety and well-being,
knowing that both the Federal and State Court(s) will not
uphold the law. The Complainant is CERTAIN that ANY
OBJECTIVE OBSERVER, who has clear understanding of this
historical record will irrefutably AGREE with this
assessment. THEREFORE, CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS have now been
filed with the FBI against the following Federal (Circuit
and District) Court Judges for evidenced crimes including
(but not limited to) TREASON, CONSPIRACY, ECONOMIC
ESPIONAGE and others:

1.) US District Court Judge Allison Dale Burroughs

(Recused);
2.) US District Court Judge Denise J. Casper;
3.) US Chief Judge Jeffrey R. Howard (First Circuit)
4.) US Circuit Judge Juan R. Torruella;
5.) US Circuit Judge William J. Kayatta, Jr.;
6.) US Circuit Judge David J. Barron;
7.) US Circuit Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson;
8.) US Chief Judge Joseph N. LaPlante (US District
Court (NH);
9.) US District Court Judge John J. McConnell, Jr.
(US District Court (RI);
10.) US District Court Judge John David Levy (US
District Court (ME).

VIII. RESPONSE to the SHOW CAUSE ORDER

EVEN IF the referenced SHOW CAUSE ORDER was valid, the

Complainant disagrees with its content:

“You have now filed three judicial misconduct complaints,

each of which has been found to be patently without merit.
These complaints are No. 01-16-90033; Nos. 01-17-90011 –-
01-17-90018; and No. 01-17-90021.”

Page 11
 Based on the evidenced record and each of the articulated
misconduct claims, please explain in detail HOW EXACTLY the
judicial council concluded that these claims have been
found to be patently without merit. In your explanation,
please show which documents reviewed contributed to your
decision, for EACH of the claims made. It’s also important
to note that five (5) out the of seven (7) judges who
issued the order, stand accused of misconduct including
(but not limited to) TREASON.

Also, please explain how referenced Circuit judges who

stand accused of misconduct including Treason have not been
disqualified under RULE 25.

IX. THE APPEARANCE OF JUSTICE

The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the

principle that “justice must satisfy the appearance of
justice”, Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct.
1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11,
14, 75 S.Ct. 11,13 (1954).

“Recusal under Section 455 is self -executing; a party need

not file affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is
obligated to recuse herself sua sponte under the stated
circumstances. “Taylor v. O’Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir.
1989).

Further, the judge has a legal duty to disqualify himself

even if there is no motion asking for his disqualification.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals further stated that
“We think that this language (455(a)) imposes a duty on the
judge to act sua sponte, even if no motion or affidavit is
filed.” Balistrieri, at 1202.

Judges do not have the discretion not to disqualify

themselves. By law, they are bound to follow the law.
Should the judge not disqualify himself as required by law,
then the judge has given another example of this
“appearance of partiality”, which, possibly, further
disqualifies the judge. Should another judge not accept the
disqualification of the judge, then the second judge has
evidenced an “appearance of partiality” and possibly
disqualified himself/herself. None of the orders issued by
any judge who has been disqualified by law would appear to

Page 12
 be valid. It would appear that they are void as a matter of
law and have no legal force or effect.

If you are a non-represented litigant, and should the court

not follow the law as to non-represented litigants, then
the judge has expressed an “appearance of partiality” and,
under the law it would seem that he/she has disqualified
him/herself.

However, since not all judges keep up to date in the law,

and since not all judges follow the law, it is possible
that a judge may not know the ruling of the U.S. Supreme
Court and the other courts on this subject. Notice that it
states “disqualification is required” and that a judge
“must be disqualified” under certain circumstances.

The Supreme Court has also held that if a judge wars

against the Constitution, or if he acts without
jurisdiction, he has engaged in treason to the
Constitution. If a judge acts after he has been
automatically disqualified by law, then he is acting
without jurisdiction, and that suggests that he is then
engaging in criminal acts of treason and may be engaged in
extortion and the interference with interstate commerce.

Courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity

from their criminal acts. Since both treason and the
interference with interstate commerce are criminal acts; no
judge has immunity to engage in such acts.

ANY OBJECTIVE OBSERVER, who has ACCURATELY been informed of

details of this litigation will undoubtedly conclude that –
THERE IS NO APPEARANCE OF JUSTICE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
LITIGATION.

X. EVIDENCED ABUSE(S) OF POWER WARRANTS IMPEACHMENT

Aside from the previously described Patterns of Corrupt

Conduct (See section V), The Complainant respectfully
reminds this council that the list of EVIDENCED JUDICIAL
ABUSES OF RECORD INCLUDE (but are not limited to) the
following:

1. Failing to address evidenced claims of TREASON under

ARTICLE III, Section 3 of The US Constitution alleged
against SIX (6) Federal (Circuit and District) Judges,

Page 13
 including Chief Justice Howard, for RULING WITHOUT
JURISDICTION;

2. Failing to address multiple evidenced claims of

MISPRISION of TREASON, PURSUANT to 18 U.S. Code § 2382,
brought against three (3) additional officers of the
Court7 and twenty-one (21) parties in the related
litigation, HARIHAR v. US BANK et al;

3. Failing to address Evidenced ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE claims

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1832, and matters believed to
impact National Security;

4. Failing to promptly exercise judicial discretion by

wrongfully denying or unnecessarily delaying WITHOUT
CAUSE - repeated requests for the Court to Assist with
the Appointment of Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915;

5. Failing to address the EVIDENCED and UNOPPOSED FRAUD

on the COURT claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3).8

6. Failing to address evidenced UNOPPOSED claims of

JUDICIAL FRAUD on the COURT, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b)(3) and clear violations to the Judicial Code of
Conduct;

7. Failing to address identified DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS;

8. Failing to address the clearly evidenced IMBALANCE OF

HARDSHIPS;

9. Failing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242

Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law;

7 Misprision of Treason claims pursuant to 18 U.S. Code § 2382

are filed against Circuit Clerk – ROBERT M. FARRELL, Circuit
Clerk MARGARET CLARK and Deputy Clerk – MATTHEW A. PAINE;
8 The Appellant draws reference to the related case, Harihar v.

US Bank et al, where the Court (Both District and Appellate)

repeatedly failed to acknowledge the CLEARLY EVIDENCED and
UNOPPOSED Fraud on the Court claims brought by the
Plaintiff/Appellant, Mohan A. Harihar. By Federal Law, a DEFAULT
judgement in favor of the Plaintiff/Appellant – Mohan A. Harihar
SHOULD HAVE already been issued.

Page 14
10. Failing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights;

11. Failing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1001

Fraud and False Statements;

12. Failing to address Title 42 Sec. 1983, Civil

action for Deprivation of Rights;

13. Failing to address the Plaintiff’s/Appellant’s

REPEATED concerns for his personal SAFETY AND SECURITY;

14. Failing to promptly reimburse accruing Legal (and

other) Fees due to the Appellant, as stated within the
record;

15. Failing to address DEMAND(S) for TRANSFER to

another circuit WITH Jurisdiction;

16. Failing to address DEMAND(S) FOR CONGRESSIONAL

INTERVENTION;

17. Failing to address repeated requests to TIMELY

VALIDATE (AND VOID) the referenced Dismissal Order(s);

18. Failing to address and ACKNOWLEDGE the

relationship of this Complaint to HARIHAR v US BANK et al
(Appeal No. 17-1381), including PACER recognition;

19. Failing to address DEMAND(S) for CLARIFICATION

HEARINGS, with the presence of an INDEPENDENT COURT
REPORTER;

20. REFUSAL(S) to RECUSE by both Circuit and District

Court judges. It is important to note, that while US
District Court Judge Allison Dale Burroughs refused to
recuse herself (twice) in HARIHAR v US BANK et al (Docket
No. 15-cv-11880), her IMMEDIATE RECUSAL for the EXACT
SAME REASONS when assigned to the related complaint
HARIHAR v. THE UNITED STATES (Docket No. 17-cv-11109) is
certainly recognized;

21. Failing to address evidenced argument(s)

supporting PREMATURE DISMISSAL;

Page 15
 22. Failing to address the well evidenced and
continued PATTERN of CORRUPT CONDUCT within this
litigation;

Collectively, based on the complainant’s interpretation

of the Constitution and Federal Law(s) these evidenced
abuses of judicial power are so egregious, removal from
the Bench, including (but not limited to) impeachment
here is believed to be warranted. Also, based on: 1.) the
number of judges who are considered disqualified to rule
here and 2.) past failures by this judicial council to
initiate CORRECTIVE action, it becomes necessary to AGAIN
appeal to members of Congress DIRECTLY. Therefore, with
the filing of this judicial misconduct petition, copies
are additionally delivered to the direct attention of:

1.) US Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA);

2.) US Senator Ed Markey (D-MA); and
3.) US Congresswoman Niki Tsongas;

XI. COMPLAINANT’S CLOSING STATEMENT

This legal experience is one which NO AMERICAN should EVER

have to endure. Based on the Complainant’s interpretation of
the law(s), those officers of the Court who stand accused of
crimes including TREASON, have DISCRACED both the Court AND
the Country for which they have the distinct privilege to
serve. There is NOTHING HONORABLE with these actions. And when
the accused are tied to evidenced claims of ESPIONAGE, it is
again the Complainant’s interpretation of the Law that they’ve
now become Domestic Enemies of The United States. Therefore,
there MUST now be civil, criminal and professional
accountability for these evidenced crimes. ANY failure to do
so will be IN FULL VIEW of the American Public. Based on the
historical record, the Complainant NO LONGER HAS CONFIDENCE in
this Judicial Council to initiate the necessary corrective
action. There is certainly an expectation for the Circuit
Executive, as witness to also inform the appropriate
offices/agencies, as it pertains to these evidenced claims of
TREASON and perceived threats to National Security.

Finally, this Complainant states that he has been

respectful to this and EVERY Court and has followed the law
to the best of his ability for the past seven (7) years.
While the many evidenced acts of misconduct have shown just
cause to lose faith in government, it remains my SINCERE

Page 16
HOPE, that the United States will take corrective steps in
restoring that faith.

For documentation purposes, after sending a copy of this

petition to the President, confirmation of its receipt is
attached (See Attachment A) with the filed Court copy. If
there is a question regarding ANY portion of this Petition,
the Complainant is happy to provide additional supporting
information upon request, in a separate hearing and with the
presence of an independent court reporter. The Complainant is
grateful for the Judicial Council’s time and consideration of
this very serious matter.

Respectfully Submitted,

Mohan A. Harihar

Complainant

Page 17
Attachment A

Page 18
Attachment B

Page 19
Page 20
The CRIMINAL COMPLAINT TEXT BOX reads as follows:

I, Mohan A. Harihar, complainant in this case, state that the following is true to the best of my
knowledge and belief.

DEFENDANTS:1.)US District Court Judge Allison Dale Burroughs;2.)US District Court Judge Denise J.
Casper;3.)US Chief Judge Jeffrey R. Howard (First Circuit)4.)US Circuit Judge Juan R. Torruella;5.)US
Circuit Judge William J. Kayatta, Jr.; 6.)US Circuit Judge David J. Barron;7.)US Circuit Judge O. Rogeriee
Thompson;8.)US Chief Judge Joseph N. LaPlante (US District Court(NH);9.)US District Court Judge John J.
McConnell, Jr. (US District Court (RI); 10.) US District Court Judge John David Levy (US District Court
(ME).

Contact Information: John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse,1 Courthouse Way, Boston, MA 02210,
Clerk's Office: 617-748-9057

ALLEGATIONS AND SUPPORTING FACTS: The crimes alleged against referenced officers of the Court
have occurred in the timeline associated with the associated litigation: HARIHAR v. US BANK et al,
Appeal No. 17-1381 (Lower Court Docket No. 15-cv-11880); HARIHAR v. THE UNITED STATES, Appeal No.
17-2074 (Lower Court Docket No. 17-cv-11109); and actions related to filed judicial misconduct
complaints/petitions.

The evidenced allegations conclusively show that (at minimum) 6 out of 10 referenced officers of the
court have ruled without jurisdiction, constituting an act(s) of Treason under Article III, Section 3 of the
Constitution. The individual and collective actions of these court officers also show the intentional and
collective CONSPIRACY to (at minimum) Misappropriate a Trade Secret (IP) designed to assist the United
States with economic growth/repair associated with the US Foreclosure Crisis. The complainant believes
that upon further investigation, additional (related) crimes committed by these officers will be
evidenced. The Complainant maintains the right to expand upon/file new claims if deemed necessary.

STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CAUSE: The Complainant states that these facts establish probable cause
that (at minimum) the following crimes have occurred: TREASON to the Constitution under ARTICLE III,
Section 3; ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE (Economic Espionage Act) 18 U.S. Code § 1831; MISPRISION OF
TREASON 18 U.S. Code § 2382; 18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United
States.

Supporting Documents are part of the Court record(s) associated with the referenced litigation. Please
be advised, since this matter involves evidenced claims of TREASON and matters perceived to impact
National Security, the Complainant (by his interpretation of Federal Law) has necessarily
communicated these claims to the President. Members of Congress and appropriate agencies. The
PUBLIC has also been copied out of concerns for personal safety and security. Copies of this criminal
complaint will be delivered to the President's attention, filed with the Court and communicated to
other referenced parties as well.

Page 21
Page 22