You are on page 1of 45

Mohan A.

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

June 29, 2018

Ms. Susan Goldberg


Circuit Executive
United States Courts For The First Circuit
1 Courthouse Way Suite 3700
Boston, MA 02210

RE: Formal Complaint Against First Circuit Clerk, Margaret Carter

Dear Ms. Goldberg:


I have received your June 22, 2018 correspondence regarding the complaint filed against Clerk
Margaret Carter. In your letter, you state that you have personally reviewed the entire record
and have found my allegations are “without merit.” You additionally state, “As there is no
indication of any bias or wrongdoing by court personnel, no further action will be taken.”

As you know, the referenced Appeal No. 17-1381 (and all associated litigation) includes (but is
not limited to): (1) evidenced claims of TREASON under ARTICLE III, (1) MISPRISION of
TREASON - 18 U.S. Code § 2382; (3) 18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or
to defraud United States; (4) ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE (Economic Espionage Act) 18
U.S. Code § 1831, and matters believed to impact National Security. There has NOT BEEN A
DENIAL of a single claim, and ALL evidenced claims have been placed in FULL PUBLIC
VIEW.

If you are now saying for the record, that after reviewing the entire record (over three (3) years),
you find these evidenced claims to be without merit, that is a serious concern. Respectfully, as a
reminder, there are NO LESS THAN TWENTY (20) unresolved issues before the First Circuit
with regard to Appeal No. 17-1381. They include (but are not limited to):

1. Continued REFUSAL(S) to address/clarify JURISDICTION issues1;

1
The record shows that the Appellant has filed over FIFTY (50) + court documents which raise
a JURISDICTION issue, ALL of which have been IGNORED by referenced Federal (District
and Circuit) Judges.
1
2. Refusing to clarify the referenced Judgment;
3. Refusing to clarify the referenced Mandate;
4. Refusal(s) to RECUSE;
5. Continuing to issue orders after LOSING JURISDICTION - EACH constituting an act
of TREASON under ARTICLE III, Section 3 of the Constitution;
6. Refusing to address: a.) the Plaintiff’s Intellectual Property (IP) Rights, b.) Evidenced
ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE claims pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1832 and c.) matters
believed to impact National Security;
7. Refusing to exercise judicial discretion by wrongfully denying or unnecessarily delaying
WITHOUT VALID CAUSE - repeated requests for the Court to Assist with the
Appointment of Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915;
8. Refusing to address the EVIDENCED and UNOPPOSED FRAUD on the COURT
claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3);
9. Refusing 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 and Judicial Oath;
10. Refusing to address identified DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS, including (but not
limited to) refusing a TRIAL BY JURY;
11. Ignoring requests for a GRAND JURY;
12. Refusing to address the clearly evidenced IMBALANCE OF HARDSHIPS;
13. Refusing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color
of Law;
14. Refusing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 Conspiracy Against Rights;
15. Refusing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1001 Fraud and False Statements;
16. Refusing to address Title 42 Sec. 1983, Civil action for Deprivation of Rights;
17. Refusing to address the Plaintiff’s/Appellant’s REPEATED concerns for his personal
SAFETY AND SECURITY;
18. Refusing to promptly reimburse accruing Legal (and other) Fees due to the Appellant, as
stated within the record;
19. Refusing to address DEMAND(S) for CLARIFICATION HEARINGS, with the
presence of an INDEPENDENT COURT REPORTER;
20. Failing to address evidenced argument(s) as FACT – PRIOR to moving to
DISCOVERY and PREMATURELY moving for Dismissal.

Based on my interpretation of the Law and the job description of the Court Clerk, I fail to
understand how this clerk’s performance is void of any infraction - and I want to make
sure that I am understanding you correctly. Are you stating for the record that Clerk
Margaret Carter has personally reviewed ALL of the filed court documents that include
these evidenced claims? Are you further stating that based on her job performance, there is
NOT A SINGLE INFRACTION by this Court Officer? Please articulate for the record
exactly how you could possibly have reached your conclusions. A timely response is
respectfully requested on or before Friday, July 6, 2018.

Since you have acknowledged reviewing the entire record(s), you are aware that on June 8,
2018, SCOTUS acknowledged this entire list of extraordinary circumstances warranting a

2
timeline extension for filing a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. You are also aware that the motion
to SCOTUS stands as UNOPPOSED.

Please be advised, based on the content of your June 22, 2018 correspondence, there appears to
be a similar PATTERN OF CORRUPT CONDUCT within the Office of the Circuit Executive.
Therefore, it becomes necessary to take the following legal action:

1. A Copy of your 6/22/18 Correspondence (See Exhibit 1), the original complaint (See
Exhibit 2) and this response will now be forwarded to: (1) Director James Duff –
Director, Administrative Office of US Courts; (2) POTUS; (3) The FBI; (4) DOJ; and
(5) House/Senate Judiciary Committees. An additional copy will be made available to
the Public, out of continued concerns for my personal safety and security;
2. A Criminal complaint will now be filed with the FBI against you as it appears that you
MAY be conspiring with other Court Officers to reach a corrupt and pre-determined
outcome that includes (but is not limited to) a scheme to DEFRAUD The United States -
18 U.S.C. § 371 (See Exhibit 3). It is my intention to bring criminal charges against you
with the assistance of Federal Prosecutors;
3. In addition to criminal charges, I intend to file a motion with the US District Court to
amend the newly filed civil complaint – HARIHAR v. CHIEF JUDGE JEFFREY R.
Howard, et al, Docket No. 18-cv-11134, to add you as a Defendant.

If after a MORE THOROUGH review of the complete record, you feel that your assessment of
Clerk Carter’s job performance has changed (or remains the same), please articulate for the
record by the requested timeline of July 6, 2018. Based on your answer, there MAY be
consideration with regard to the incremental legal action referenced above.

For documentation purposes, after sending a copy of this correspondence to the attention of The
President, confirmation of its receipt is attached (See Exhibit 4) with the filed Circuit Executive
copy. If there is a question regarding ANY portion of this correspondence, the
Appellant/Complainant is happy to provide additional supporting information upon request, in a
separate hearing and with the presence of an independent court reporter.

Thank you for your attention to this very serious matter.

Respectfully submitted this 29th Day of June,

Mohan A. Harihar
Complainant/Appellant

3
Exhibit 1

4
5
Exhibit 2

6
Mohan A. Harihar - Complainant
7124 Avalon Drive, Acton, MA 01720 | 617.921.2526 (Mobile) | mo.harihar@gmail.com

May 15, 2018

Ms. Susan Goldberg


Circuit Executive
United States Courts For The First Circuit
1 Courthouse Way Suite 3700
Boston, MA 02210

RE: Formal Complaint Against First Circuit Clerk,


Margaret Carter

Dear Ms. Goldberg:


Per the direction of your office I am submitting to your direct
attention a formal complaint against First Circuit Clerk of the
Court – Margaret Carter. As Clerk of the Court, Ms. Carter is
aware first-hand, of the evidenced judicial misconduct
allegations raised against referenced officers of the Court.
These evidenced allegations have occurred within Court walls,
each action observed directly by the Court clerk.

The law clerks’ duty of confidentiality ends when a clerk


believes a federal judge(s) has done something wrong outside of
the deliberative process. The confidentiality guidelines for law
clerks are intended to preserve the judiciary’s integrity. The
fundamental goal of the confidentiality guidelines would be
subverted if the rules forced law clerks to be silent about
judicial misconduct. WHEN A JUDGE engages in illegal activities
or inappropriate behavior (as is the case here), that’s clearly
NOT what’s intended to be confidential.

It would appear (at least on its surface) that Ms. Carter has NO
INTENTION of reporting ANY incident of judicial misconduct,
including (but not limited to) evidenced acts of TREASON under
ARTICLE III, Section 3, for ruling WITHOUT JURISDICTION. As you
know, your office has been well informed and updated regarding

7
these evidenced judicial misconduct claims and I have complied
with the rules that address such misconduct. HOWEVER, this First
Circuit’s failure to initiate ANY corrective action thus far
indicates (at minimum) a broken process for addressing judicial
misconduct. Collectively, based on this Appellant’s
interpretation of the law, this broken process and failure(s) by
this First Circuit (District and Appeals) Court bears
responsibility for a wide variety of legal issues ranging (at
minimum)from: Due Process Violations to National Security
issues. Filing a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the US
Supreme Court SHOULD NOT be the ONLY remaining legal course of
action left to a PRO SE (or ANY) litigant, considering the
severity of these PUBLICLY evidenced allegations.

For Ms. Carter, her conscious decision to IGNORE evidenced


judicial misconduct including CRIMINAL claims of Treason shows
cause to:

1. Question her ability to perform her duties as Circuit


Clerk;
2. Question whether Ms. Clark is (at minimum) COLLUDING with
presiding Circuit Judge’s – Torruella, Kayatta and Barron
in order to reach a CORRUPT and PRE-DETERMINED outcome as
it relates to my related litigation; and
3. Initiate legal next steps for her removal as Clerk.

As Circuit Executive, you have personally been made aware of the


following:

1. The severity of judicial misconduct including evidenced


claims of TREASON has mandated informing the President
under Federal Law. Other informed offices/agencies include:
The DOJ, FBI, OIG, House/Senate Judiciary Committees,
Governor Charlie Baker, MA Congressional Leaders and the
Administrative Office of US Courts;
2. Criminal complaints are filed with the FBI against ALL
referenced officers of the Court, including Clerk Margaret
Carter;
3. A concerted effort is underway to legally REMOVE Circuit
Judge’s – Torruella, Kayatta and Barron from the bench. It
would appear (at least on its surface) that Clerk Carter is
attempting to interfere with that effort.

There have been two (2) incremental actions by Ms. Carter


warranting your immediate attention since filing the last
supplement to the (pending) Judicial Misconduct Petition on

8
April 16, 2018. Motions which were filed on 4/15/18 and 5/6/18
in response to a VOID order issued April 11, 2018 were returned
and are not considered as being filed with the Court. More
importantly, these actions by Ms. Carter shows (at minimum) a
continued failure to recognize jurisdiction issues associated
with this litigation. Ms. Carter has also refused to clarify her
position for the record. Your office already has a copy of the
motion filed 4/15/18. Attached, please find a copy of the 5/6/18
- DEMAND TO RE-FILE APPELLANT’S PLEA FOR CONGRESSIONAL
INTERVENTION TO REMOVE INFERIOR FIRST CIRCUIT JUDGES – TORUELLA,
KAYATTA AND BARRON.

Based on the evidenced claims of record before you, and under


the CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIARY EMPLOYEES, there appears to be
(at minimum), numerous infractions by Clerk Margaret Carter with
regard to the following Canons:

Canon 1: A Judicial Employee Should Uphold the Integrity and


Independence of the Judiciary and of the Judicial Employee's
Office

Canon 2: A Judicial Employee Should Avoid Impropriety and the


Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities

Canon 3: A Judicial Employee Should Adhere to Appropriate


Standards in Performing the Duties of the Office

I respectfully ask that you provide a documented (and timely)


response outlining any action being taken by your office to
address these evidenced infractions (alleged). A Copy of this
complaint will be delivered to the attention of Director James
C. Duff (Administrative Office of US Courts). Since the severity
of allegations against Ms. Carter include criminal claims, the
FBI, and DOJ will be updated. The Appellant will also seek a
temporary injunction from the US Supreme Court for filing his
Petition for Writ of Certiorari until these judicial (and other)
issues within the First Circuit have been properly addressed.

Finally, a copy of this complaint will be made available to the


PUBLIC, out of my continued (and STILL unaddressed) concerns for
personal safety and security.

Thank you for your attention to this very serious matter.

9
Respectfully Submitted,

Mohan A. Harihar
Complainant/Plaintiff

10
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

)
MOHAN A. HARIHAR, )
)
Appellant )
) Case No. 17-1381
v. )
)
US BANK, et al )
)
Defendants/Appellees )
)

DEMAND TO RE-FILE APPELLANT’S PLEA FOR CONGRESSIONAL

INTERVENTION TO REMOVE INFERIOR FIRST CIRCUIT JUDGES –

TORUELLA, KAYATTA AND BARRON

Notice to the Clerk of the Court, Margaret Carter – You have personally witnessed

numerous instances of judicial misconduct including (but not limited to) criminal Acts of

TREASON under ARTICLE III - evidenced by the Appellant, Mohan A. Harihar. You are

fully aware, that Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron have NO JURISDICTION

to rule here, yet you continue to act as if there has been no judicial infraction, OR as if they are

somehow EXEMPT from upholding their Judicial Oath and Federal Laws. The law clerks’

duty of confidentiality ends when a clerk believes a federal judge(s) has done something wrong

outside of the deliberative process. The confidentiality guidelines for law clerks are intended to

preserve the judiciary’s integrity. The fundamental goal of the confidentiality guidelines would

be subverted if the rules forced law clerks to be silent about judicial misconduct. WHEN A

11
JUDGE engages in illegal activities or inappropriate behavior (as is the case here), that’s clearly

NOT what’s intended to be confidential. Please NOW clarify your position for the record

exactly WHY you have remained silent after witnessing such egregious (and criminal)

judicial misconduct. Also, based on the evidenced judicial misconduct allegations that AT

MINIMUM impact JURISDICTION, please clarify exactly HOW you reached the conclusion

that considers the referenced April 11, 2018 Order (or any related order) to be valid. Your

assessment is INCORRECT. Please be advised – should you AGAIN fail to recognize and

document this Motion to remove INFERIOR Circuit Judges, there will be cause to expand upon

criminal complaints already filed against you. Right now, based on your evidenced actions and

this Appellant’s interpretation of the law, it appears that you are (at minimum) COLLUDING

with Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron to BRUSH ASIDE ALL MOTIONS IN

ORDER TO REACH A CORRUPT AND PRE-DETERMINED OUTCOME. This

continued pattern of corrupt conduct is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. You are

aware that evidenced allegations against you include (but are not limited to): 1.) MISPRISION

OF TREASON 18 U.S. Code § 2382; 2.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense

or to defraud United States; and 3.) ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE (Economic Espionage Act)

18 U.S. Code § 1831. The Office of the First Circuit Executive and the Administrative Office of

US Courts has also been updated regarding these evidenced allegations. Referenced

offices/agencies will be again updated once your response is documented. Should you fail (or

refuse) to provide the requested clarification, that too will be documented. As the Appellant

continues to prepare his Petition for Writ of Certiorari for the US Supreme Court, every

detail showing this Court’s repeated (and intentional) failures will be included. These

repeated failures also continue to be in FULL PUBLIC VIEW.

12
NOW - After reviewing the VOID order issued on 4/11/18 by Circuit Judges: Torruella,

Kayatta and Barron, the Appellant – Mohan A. Harihar shows cause to: 1.) Fear for his

personal safety and security, 2.) Interpret the VOID order as both MALICIOUS AND

CORRUPT, 3.) Interpret the order as a clear and present danger/threat to our Nation’s

Security and 4.) Inform Congress, the President and DOJ of these evidenced, criminal actions

that warrant removal from the bench. The Circuit Executive (First Circuit) and The

Administrative Offices of US Courts will additionally be updated of this recent activity.

To summarize, since August 2016, the Appellant has evidenced for the record (and in FULL

PUBLIC VIEW) judicial misconduct by TEN (10) Federal (District and Circuit) Court Judges

associated with this litigation and includes First Circuit Chief Judge - Jeffrey R Howard and

members of the First Circuit Judicial Council.2 The severity of these evidenced claims

includes (but is not limited to) ruling WITHOUT JURISDICTION (TREASON under

ARTICLE III), ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1832, and perceived

THREATS TO OUR NATION’S SECURITY.

HERE, it is CLEARLY INTERPRETED that Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and

Barron are INFERIOR JUDGES WHO HAVE NO JURISDICTION to rule in this (or ANY

RELATED) litigation. Based on the Appellant’s interpretation of the Law(s), their orders are

considered VOID. The historical record clearly shows that Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta

and Barron have failed to provide A SINGLE VALID ARGUMENT that suggests otherwise.

2
Aside from this Appeal, the Appellant references Appeal No. 17-2074, HARIHAR v THE
UNITED STATES (Lower Court Docket No. 17-cv-11109).
13
This Court AND the American Public have now witnessed the following acts of judicial

misconduct – bringing to this Appellant (and likely to ANY OBJECTIVE OBSERVER) a

heightened state of ALERT and OUTRAGE:

21. Continued REFUSAL to address/clarify JURISDICTION issues3;

22. Refusing to clarify the referenced Judgment;

23. Refusing to clarify the referenced Mandate;

24. Refusal(s) to RECUSE;

25. Continuing to issue orders after LOSING JURISDICTION - EACH constituting an act

of TREASON under ARTICLE III, Section 3 of the Constitution;

26. Refusing to address: a.) the Plaintiff’s Intellectual Property (IP) Rights, b.) Evidenced

ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE claims pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1832 and c.) matters

believed to impact National Security;

27. Refusing to exercise judicial discretion by wrongfully denying or unnecessarily delaying

WITHOUT VALID CAUSE - repeated requests for the Court to Assist with the

Appointment of Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915;

28. Refusing to address the EVIDENCED and UNOPPOSED FRAUD on the COURT

claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3);

29. Refusing 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 and Judicial Oath;

3
The record shows that the Appellant has filed over FIFTY (50) + court documents which raise
a JURISDICTION issue, ALL of which have been IGNORED by referenced Federal (District
and Circuit) Judges.
14
30. Refusing to address identified DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS, including (but not

limited to) refusing a TRIAL BY JURY;

31. Ignoring requests for a GRAND JURY;

32. Refusing to address the clearly evidenced IMBALANCE OF HARDSHIPS;

33. Refusing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color

of Law;

34. Refusing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 Conspiracy Against Rights;

35. Refusing to address Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1001 Fraud and False Statements;

36. Refusing to address Title 42 Sec. 1983, Civil action for Deprivation of Rights;

37. Refusing to address the Plaintiff’s/Appellant’s REPEATED concerns for his personal

SAFETY AND SECURITY;

38. Refusing to promptly reimburse accruing Legal (and other) Fees due to the Appellant, as

stated within the record;

39. Refusing to address DEMAND(S) for CLARIFICATION HEARINGS, with the

presence of an INDEPENDENT COURT REPORTER;

40. Failing to address evidenced argument(s) as FACT – PRIOR to moving to

DISCOVERY and PREMATURELY moving for Dismissal.

EVEN IF the 4/11/18 order (below) was somehow considered valid, its content shows critical

errors warranting further clarification and correction:

“Appellant has filed a series of motions and notices. Because mandate issued in this case on

March 23, 2018, we construe these filings as motions to recall mandate, and deny them. See

15
Kashner Davidson Securities Corp. v. Mscisz, 601 F.3d 19, 22 (1st Cir. 2010) (mandate will be

recalled "in only the most extraordinary circumstances") (footnote omitted).”

First, the Appellant identifies the referenced “motions and notices” as follows:

1. Appellant Notice RE: Letter Delivered to the Administrative Offices of US Courts;

2. Appellant Demand for Clarification of Judgment and Mandate;

3. Appellant Request for STAY of Mandate;

4. Appellant Motion to Bring Incremental Claims of Treason Against Circuit Judges

Torruella, Kayatta and Barron;

5. Appellant Notice RE: Intention to File Suit (against referenced Inferior Judges).

Based on the content of each of these referenced documents, it is unclear how these Circuit

Judges, who refuse to even address jurisdiction, could possibly have arrived at their

conclusion(s). Also, with regard to the Appellant’s - Notice to File Suit, it is interpreted that

Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron DO NOT wish to seek a mutual agreement

with the Appellant. Therefore, the Appellant declares that a civil lawsuit will be filed (at

minimum) against these three (3) Circuit Judges. The Appellant will wait to hear back from the

remaining Federal Judges until April 20, 2018, at which time their opportunity to seek mutual

agreement will expire.

Second, as with prior examples of record, the case reference here appears to be inappropriately

placed, and the Appellant questions exactly which documents of record were reviewed in order

to draw comparison to Kashner Davidson Securities Corp. v. Mscisz.

16
Third, Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron state, “mandate will be recalled "in

only the most extraordinary circumstances." Based on the historical record that includes

evidence supporting: 1.) lack of jurisdiction; 2.) claims of Treason; 3.) Economic Espionage; and

4.) perceived threats to our Nation’s security, it is unclear where exactly the threshold exists to

reach “extraordinary circumstances.”

Based on this egregious and continued abuse(s) of authority, the Appellant now initiates the

following legal next steps:

1. The Office of the Circuit Executive will be updated and will include a supplement to

the judicial misconduct petition which is still pending. There certainly is an expectation

for the Circuit Executive – Susan Goldberg to inform the Administrative Offices of US

Courts of these recent developments4;

2. An update will be provided directly to Director James Duff – Administrative Offices

of US Courts, considering the evidenced claims previously brought against the Clerk’s

Office and the Office of the Circuit Executive5;

3. The President will be updated, considering the insistence to continue ruling without

jurisdiction constitutes incremental acts of Treason under ARTICLE III. The

President will also be informed based on the Appellant’s perceived concerns to National

Security and evidenced claims of Economic Espionage6;

4. A letter will be delivered to the attention of: 1.) US Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA),

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

4 See Attachment A
5 See Attachment B
6 See Attachment C

17
MA) for the purpose of bringing this matter to the immediate attention of the

House/Senate Judiciary Committees. Parties additionally copied on this letter will

include: The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of the Inspector General (OIG),

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Governor Charlie Baker (R-MA)7.

5. A separate letter will be sent to update Assistant US Attorneys - Dina Michael

Chaitowitz and Mary B. Murrane, who are the representing attorneys for The United

States in the related Appeal No. 17-2074, HARIHAR v. THE UNITED STATES. In

this related Appeal, the presiding Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron are

again considered inferior judges, having demonstrated the SAME PATTERN OF

CORRUPT CONDUCT, including (but not limited to) ruling without jurisdiction, and

refusing to RECUSE. Assistant US Attorneys Chaitowitz and Murrane have therefore

witnessed this misconduct firsthand, and the Appellant is still waiting for the DOJ to

ACT UPON and bring charges for his filed criminal complaints of record.8

In closing, once Congress (or the appropriate legal authority) has appropriately removed Circuit

Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron from the bench, the Appellant (once again)

respectfully requests a TRANSFER to another Circuit WITH Jurisdiction – OR if appropriate

to appear before Congress, so that this litigation can proceed without any further

UNNECESSARY DELAY.

7 See Attachment D
8 See Attachment E
18
For documentation purposes, after sending a copy of the MOTION to the attention of The

President, confirmation of its receipt is attached (See Attachment F) with the filed Court copy.

If there is a question regarding ANY portion of this motion, the Appellant is happy to provide

additional supporting information upon request, in a separate hearing and with the presence of an

independent court reporter.

Respectfully re-submitted this 6th Day of May, 2018

Mohan A. Harihar
Appellant
7124 Avalon Drive
Acton, MA 01720
Mo.harihar@gmail.com

19
Attachment A

20
April 16, 2018

Ms. Anastasia Dubrovsky


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

RE: Supplement to Petition under Review of Judicial Misconduct


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

Dear Ms. Goldberg:

Since filing the referenced Judicial Misconduct Petition with


the Judicial Council (delivered March 19, 2018), continued and
deliberate actions by INFERIOR Circuit Judges: Torruella,
Kayatta and Barron warrant: 1.) this supplement to the original
judicial misconduct petition and 2.) initiating next legal steps
for their removal from the bench.
Attached, please find a copy of the following Motion filed
Sunday, April 15, 2018 - APPELLANT PLEA FOR CONGRESSIONAL
INTERVENTION TO REMOVE INFERIOR FIRST CIRCUIT JUDGES – TORUELLA,
KAYATTA AND BARRON (See Attachment A).
Please be advised, it has recently become necessary to file a
formal complaint(s) with the Administrative Offices of US Courts
- revealing an evidenced BREAKDOWN in the First Circuit’s
process for handling judicial misconduct complaints. Criminal
complaints are also filed with the FBI against ALL responsible
parties.9 The Complainant believes that there MAY exist an
opportunity here for the Office of the Circuit Executive to
initiate corrective action by re-affirming this referenced
breakdown in process with the Administrative Office of US
Courts. Conversely, any failure to do so will only add to
existing claims which include (but are not limited to): 1.)
MISPRISION OF TREASON 18 U.S. Code § 2382; 2.) 18 U.S. Code §
371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States;
and 3.) ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE (Economic Espionage Act) 18 U.S. Code
§ 1831.
While this Judicial Misconduct Petition is still pending, EVEN
IF jurisdiction were somehow re-established, the Complainant has
evidenced a PATTERN of CORRUPT CONDUCT warranting either: 1.) a
TRANSFER to a different Circuit WITH Jurisdiction, or 2.)

9 Parties include: 1.) referenced Federal (District and Circuit)


Judges who are considered INFERIOR; 2.) Referenced Officers of
the Court within the Clerk’s Office and the Office of the
Circuit Executive.
21
considering the severity of issues and perceived impact to
National Security, addressing directly before Congress.
The Complainant respectfully requests that the Circuit Executive
– Susan Goldberg, provide for the record: 1.) a written response
stating her intentions to inform the Administrative Office of US
Courts of this referenced breakdown (as required), and 2.) the
Circuit Executive’s intentions to inform ALL OTHER appropriate
offices/agencies moving forward.

Respectfully Submitted,

Mohan A. Harihar
Complainant/Plaintiff

22
Attachment B

23
April 15, 2018

Administrative Office of the United States Courts


Attn: Director James C. Duff
One Columbus Circle, NE
Washington, D.C. 20544

RE: FIRST CIRCUITS’ CONTINUED PATTERN OF CORRUPT CONDUCT WARRANTS


CONGRESSIONAL INTERVENTION

Dear Director Duff,

After filing a complaint with your office on 4/2/18, it becomes necessary to inform you of
NEW/INCREMENTAL criminal misconduct claims. In my original complaint, I brought to
your attention: 1.) An evidenced pattern of corrupt conduct within the First Circuit Judiciary
and 2.) A breakdown in the process of addressing AND holding accountable evidenced judicial
misconduct. On Wednesday, April 11, 2018, First Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and
Barron issued an order associated with Appeal No. 17-1381, HARIHAR v. US BANK et al.10

For reasons CLEARLY articulated within the record, Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and
Barron have NO JURISDICTION to rule here. They are considered INFERIOR Judges.
Their insistence to blatantly continue ignoring: 1.) their Judicial Oath, 2.) the Constitution and
3.) other Federal Laws has called for informing the Office of the First Circuit Executive and
filing a supplement to the (pending) judicial misconduct petition.

There are again red flags with regard to the Clerk’s Office, specifically with Clerk Margaret
Carter, whose signature is attached to the 4/11/18 order. Clerk Carter is well aware that inferior
Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron have NO JURISDICTION to rule here. Yet,
it appears (at least on its surface) that Clerk Carter MAY be colluding/conspiring with referenced
officers of the court in order to reach a corrupt and pre-determined outcome. Based on the

10 See Attachment A
24
historical record, it is UNLIKELY that Clerk Carter has reported this latest act of TREASON to
the Circuit Executive – Susan Goldberg, or to your office.

This egregious and continued abuse(s) of authority brings a perceived threat to me personally,
and to our Nation’s security. Legal steps MUST now be taken to remove these referenced
Inferior Judges from the Bench. Attached, please find a copy of the following motion filed
electronically with the Court on Sunday, April 15, 2018: “APPELLANT PLEA FOR
CONGRESSIONAL INTERVENTION TO REMOVE INFERIOR FIRST CIRCUIT
JUDGES – TORUELLA, KAYATTA AND BARRON.” 11

Please be advised, a copy of this letter will be included as an attachment with the FILED copy
of the above referenced motion.

If there is disagreement or question with ANY singular claim brought against the referenced
parties, please articulate exactly which documents of record were reviewed in order to reach your
conclusion. I am happy to provide you with additional supporting information upon request.
After review, I respectfully request that you provide a written response regarding your intentions
and legal next steps moving forward.

Thank you for your attention to this very serious matter.

Respectfully submitted,

Mohan A. Harihar

11 See Attachment B
25
Attachment C

26
A LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

April 16, 2018

President Donald J. Trump


The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

RE: FORMAL MEETING REQUEST – HARIHAR FCS PRESENTATION

Dear President Trump,

As you know, I have been updating the White House regularly regarding egregious abuses of
authority exemplified by First Circuit (District and Appellate Court) Judges associated with the
following litigation:
1. HARIHAR v. US BANK et al, Appeal No, 17-1381 (Lower Court Docket No. 15-cv-
11880); and
2. HARIHAR v. THE UNITED STATES, Appeal No. 17-2074 (Lower Court Docket No.
17-cv-11109)

These evidenced abuses include (but are not limited to) INFERIOR Judges who appear insistent
on issuing orders when they have NO JURISDICTION. By doing so, these actions constitute
act(s) of TREASON under ARTICLE III, Section 3. As required by Federal Law, I have
informed the White House following each evidenced act of treason. I have also followed the
process for filing a judicial misconduct complaint(s), to no avail. The same pattern of corrupt
conduct continues to be evidenced, indicating a BROKEN PROCESS that now warrants
communication directly with Director James Duff – Administrative Office of US Courts and
Criminal complaints filed with the FBI.
The most recent incident occurred just a few days ago on Wednesday, April 11, 2018, with an
order issued by Circuit Judges:
1. Juan R. Torruella;

27
2. William J. Kayatta, Jr.; and
3. David J. Barron

I’ve attached a copy of my response for your review, as I believe these continued abuses pose a
DOMESTIC threat to our Nation, warranting their immediate removal from the Bench.12
Since the removal of a Federal Judge can only be initiated by Congress, I have (as a matter of
record) regularly informed my Congressional leaders here in Massachusetts,
SPECIFICALLY – US Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), US Senator Ed Markey (D-
MA) and US Congresswoman Niki Tsongas (D-MA). Governor Charlie Baker (R-MA) has
also been regularly updated. There is a CLEAR EXPECTATION for these members of
Congress to show a sense of urgency in bringing this matter to the attention of the House/Senate
Judiciary committees. Any failure to do so will certainly raise more red flags.

Mr. President, there is much more at stake here. Aside from the obvious ramifications resulting
from a corrupt judiciary, there exists evidenced claims against these officers of the Court
indicating violations to: 1.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud
the United States and 2.) Economic Espionage, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1831.

You are certainly aware of the ongoing issues involving Intellectual Property (IP) Rights in our
Country. The referenced Intellectual Property/Trade Secret which I created, the “HARIHAR
FCS MODEL,” proposes a framework that addresses ongoing issues that continue to plague our
country – Illegal Foreclosures, Mortgage Servicing abuses and the resulting damages suffered by
millions of Americans, including myself. As recently as December 2017, you’ve expressed your
opinion towards “cheaters” such as (Defendant/Appellee) Wells Fargo’s for their evidenced
mortgage servicing (and other) abuses. In current headlines it appears the CFPB is preparing to
issue severe penalties against one of the biggest cheaters in banking.

But that isn’t enough. Mr. President, I am respectfully requesting to have a formal meeting with
you, and Attorney General Sessions to discuss the legal matter at hand, including an expanded

12 See Attachment A
28
presentation of the referenced Intellectual Property. Once properly implemented as intended,
the HARIHAR FCS Model is designed to assist the wrongfully foreclosed homeowner
WHILE (conservatively) delivering over $5T in economic growth to our Nation - ALL
without the need of a single tax dollar or new legislation.13 As the leader of our great Nation, I
certainly realize the many important issues you address on a daily basis and appreciate your
consideration.

Thank you, Mr. President. I look forward to your response with great anticipation.

GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

Respectfully,

Mohan A. Harihar
Appellant
7124 Avalon Drive
Acton, MA 01720
617.921.2526 (Mobile)
Mo.harihar@gmail.com

13
The HARIHAR FCS model has been previously presented with MERIT to: 1.) The EOP
(former Obama Administration) per the specific request of VP Joe Biden; 2.) Deputy Chief
Counsel (Former) – Gail Laster, House Financial Services Committee; 3.) Senior Economic
Advisor to US Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) – Bruno Freitas; 4.) The Office of US
Congresswoman Niki Tsongas (D-MA); 5.) The State AG offices of MA and NH; and to
CEO Larry Rasky (Rasky Partners, Inc.) who leads one of the largest and most respected
independent public relations and public affairs firms in the nation.
29
Attachment D

30
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mohan Harihar <moharihar@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 2:54 PM
Subject: Request for Congressional Intervention to Remove Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron
To: elizabeth_warren@warren.senate.gov, mark_bayer@markey.senate.gov,
mark_gallagher@markey.senate.gov, june.black@mail.house.gov
Cc: NewYorkComplaints Dojoig <dojoig.newyorkcomplaints@usdoj.gov>, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
christina.sterling@usdoj.gov, "Constituent.services@state.ma.us" <constituent.services@state.ma.us>,
mary.murrane@usdoj.gov

Dear Senator Warren, Senator Markey and Congresswoman Tsongas,

As a resident of the Commonwealth and an American-born citizen of The United States, the purpose of this
email is to inform you of: 1.) A continuing PATTERN of CORRUPT CONDUCT within the First Circuit
Federal Judiciary, and 2.) A BROKEN PROCESS for addressing judicial misconduct.

For several years now, your offices have been regularly updated on litigation that I am personally involved with:

1. HARIHAR v. US BANK et al, Appeal No. 17-1381 (Lower Court Docket No. 15-cv-11880); and
2. HARIHAR v. THE UNITED STATES, Appeal No. 17-2074 (Lower Court Docket No. 17-cv-1110

You are aware that the primary issues to these complaints involve: 1.) Illegal Foreclosure and 2.) The
Misappropriation of a Trade Secret/Intellectual Property (IP) Rights. This referenced IP was designed to
bring substantial economic benefit to the Nation while at the same time assisting the Illegally Foreclosed
Homeowner. Senator Warren, you are aware that I have personally presented this Trade Secret to your Senior
Economic Advisor - Bruno Freitas, who STRONGLY RECOMMENDED that I present to you directly. It is
unclear - especially considering your claimed stance against Wall Street, why you've IGNORED multiple
meeting requests. Congresswoman Tsongas - Similarly, you are aware that I favorably presented this
framework to your former - Director, Brian Martin, in OUR hometown of Lowell, MA. It is unclear why you too
have ignored repeated requests for assistance.

Now however - as evidenced by the record, the actions by Circuit Judges: Torruella, Kayatta and Barron,
pose a perceived and considerable threat to our Nation's security. At minimum, I have evidenced for the record,
claims supporting: 1.) TREASON under ARTICLE III, Section 3, for ruling WITHOUT JURISDICTION, 2.) 18
U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States and 3.) Economic
Espionage, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1831. Please note - these allegations, in their entirety, stand UNOPPOSED.

The severity of these evidenced claims has called for the following actions:

1. Informing the President of The United States, particularly with evidenced acts of Treason and
Economic Espionage;
2. Filing Criminal complaints with the FBI;
3. Updating the Office of the Circuit Executive;
4. Informing the Director to the Administrative Office of US Courts - James Duff;
5. Updating the DOJ and the US Attorney's Office (MA). Please be advised, in the litigation involving The
United States as an Appellee, representing counsel - Assistant US Attorneys - Dina Michael Chaitowitz and
Mary B. Murrane have personally witnessed these referenced allegations, including TREASON, firsthand.

As MY Congressional leaders, I am respectfully requesting that you bring this matter before Congress,
specifically, the House/Senate Judiciary committees for the purpose of removing these accused officers
from the bench. Attached, please find a copy of the Response to the April 11, 2018 (VOID)
order: APPELLANT PLEA FOR CONGRESSIONAL INTERVENTION TO REMOVE INFERIOR FIRST

31
CIRCUIT JUDGES – TORUELLA, KAYATTA AND BARRON. Please be advised, a copy of this email will
be attached in the FILED court copy of the response. A copy will also be made available to the PUBLIC,
for documentation purposes and out of concerns for my personal safety and security.

Thank you, in advance for your assistance with this urgent matter.

GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

Respectfully,

Mohan A. Harihar
7124 Avalon Drive
Acton, MA 01720
617.921.2526 (Mobile)
mo.harihar@gmail.com

cc

The Executive Office of The President (EOP)


US Inspector General - Michael Horowitz
US Attorney General - Jeff Sessions
Governor Charley Baker, (D-MA)
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

32
Attachment E

33
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mohan Harihar <moharihar@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 3:02 PM
Subject: Request for DOJ Timeline to Bring Referenced Criminal Charges
To: mary.murrane@usdoj.gov
Cc: NewYorkComplaints Dojoig <dojoig.newyorkcomplaints@usdoj.gov>, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
elizabeth_warren@warren.senate.gov, mark_bayer@markey.senate.gov,
mark_gallagher@markey.senate.gov, june.black@mail.house.gov, christina.sterling@usdoj.gov,
"Constituent.services@state.ma.us" constituent.services@state.ma.us

Dear Assistant US Attorney Murrane,

This letter is respectfully delivered to inform you of a development in the related Appeal No. 17-1381,
HARIHAR v. US BANK et al. As with this Appeal involving the United States, presiding Circuit Judges:
Torruella, Kayatta and Barron have ignored the evidenced claims of misconduct brought against them,
including jurisdiction issues. Their insistence to ignore these evidenced claims and continue ruling in BOTH
Appeals WITHOUT JURISDICTION has brought TREASON claims against them under ARTICLE III,
Section 3. As representing counsel for The United States, you have witnessed these acts of Treason,
Economic Espionage (and other related crimes) firsthand. Collectively, the PATTERN OF CORRUPT
CONDUCT exemplified by this First Circuit has become so egregious, Congressional intervention is warranted
out of concerns that include (but are not limited to) National Security, and a legal effort is being made to
REMOVE these referenced Judges from the Bench.

Attached, please find a copy of the filed RESPONSE to the (VOID) Court Order issued on April 11, 2018 for
Appeal No. 17-1381. In this filed response, please be sure to also review the attached correspondences
delivered to the following offices/agencies:

1. Office of the First Circuit Executive - to the attention of Circuit Executive Susan Goldberg;
2. Administrative Office of US Courts - to the attention of Director James Duff;
3. Executive Office of the President - to the attention of President Donald J. Trump;
4. Congressional Offices of US Senators - Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ed Markey (D-MA) and US
Congresswoman Niki Tsongas (D-MA)

Both you and co-counsel, Assistant US Attorney Dina M. Chaitowitz are well-aware that Criminal Complaints
are filed with the FBI against these referenced officers of the Court, and ALL related offenders. For the
record, please provide a detailed update as to when your office is expected to bring charges for these
evidenced criminal claims.

Please be advised, for documentation purposes, a copy of this email will be attached in the filed response
referenced above. A copy will also be made available to the PUBLIC, out of continued concerns for my
personal safety and security.

Thank you for your attention to this serious matter.

Respectfully,

Mohan A. Harihar
Appellant

34
Attachment F

35
36
37
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 6, 2018 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court
using the CM/ECF System, which will send notice of such filing to the following registered
CM/ECF users:

Jeffrey B. Loeb
David Glod
David E. Fialkow
Kevin Patrick Polansky
Matthew T. Murphy
Kurt R. McHugh
Jesse M. Boodoo

Mohan A. Harihar
Appellant
7124 Avalon Drive
Acton, MA 01720
Mo.harihar@gmail.com

38
Exhibit 3

39
40
THE TEXT BOX OF THE FILED FBI CRIMINAL COMPLAINT STATED THE
FOLLOWING:

I, Mohan A. Harihar, complainant in this case, state that the following is true to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
DEFENDANTS: Susan J. Goldberg, First Circuit Executive
CONTACT INFORMATION: John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse,1 Courthouse Way, Suite
3700, Boston, MA 02210, 617.748.9614
ALLEGATIONS AND SUPPORTING FACTS: The crimes alleged against referenced Circuit
Executive have occurred in the timeline associated with the 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 Docket No. 17-cv-11109); HARIHAR v CHIEF JUDGE
JEFFREY R. HOWARD, et al, Docket No. 18-cv-11134; and the formal complaint filed against
Circuit Clerk - Margaret Carter. Based on the publicly evidenced claims of Mohan A. Harihar
and the documented 6/22/18 response by Ms. Goldberg (referencing the formal complaint
against Clerk Carter), it would appear (at least on its surface), that there exists a related
PATTERN OF CORRUPT CONDUCT within the First Circuit Court - where referenced
Officers of the Court, including the Circuit Executive herself, intend to collectively reach a
corrupt and pre-determined outcome. By these collective actions (or lack thereof) these parties
are believed to have contributed to the Misappropriation of 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 claims against ALL parties is
likely. 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 indicating that (at minimum) the following crimes have occurred: (1)
MISPRISION OF TREASON 18 U.S. Code § 2382; (2) 18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to
commit offense or to defraud The United States; (3) ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE (Economic
Espionage Act) 18 U.S. Code § 1831; (4) FRAUD on the COURT (including judicial), pursuant
to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3) and clear violations to the Judicial Code of Conduct and Judicial
Oath;(5) 18 U.S. Code Chapter 96 - RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT
ORGANIZATIONS, and others.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS are part of the Court record(s) associated with the referenced
litigation and include judicial misconduct complaints/petitions filed with the Office of the Circuit
Executive. A separate complaint has also been filed with the Admin. Offices of US Courts and
Board of BAR Overseers (MA). 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: POTUS, the DOJ,
the OIG, the Administrative Office of US Courts and the House/Senate Judiciary Committees.
The PUBLIC has also been copied out of concerns for personal safety and security.

41
42
Exhibit 4

43
44
45