Case: 10-55084 05/05/2011 Page: 1 of 3 ID: 7742216 DktEntry: 44

Cases 09-56827 and 10-55084

Submitted on behalf of all 40 Plaintiffs in Barnett et
al v Obama et al 10-55084 Attorney Taitz represents all plaintiffs in 10-
55084 Barnett, Keyes et al v Obama et al

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

____________________

Pamela Barnett, Alan Keyes et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

vs.

Barack Obama, et al.,

Defendant-Appellee.
__________________

Supplemental brief under rule 28(J)

__________________
 Case: 10-55084 05/05/2011 Page: 2 of 3 ID: 7742216 DktEntry: 44

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

CSB #223433

29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy

Ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

ph 949-683-5411

fax 949-766-7603

orly.taitz@gmail.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants

Attention clerk of the court:

On May 2, 2011 undersigned conducted oral argument in the above captioned case in
front of Honorable Justices Berzon, Fisher and Pregerson. Justices were trying to
ascertain, what would be the correct timing in filing a legal action, questioning legitimacy
of the President of the United States.

FRAP 28 (j) Citation of Supplemental Authorities

Third District Court of Appeals of CA, in Keyes et al v Bowen et al C 062321 Third

District Court of Appeals of CA which was based on a prior decision in Robinson v
Bowen 567 F. Supp. 2d at p1147 from U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of CA. Both Robinson and Keyes dealt with the challenge of presidential eligibility.
Robinson dealt with the challenge of the eligibility of senator McCain in light of his
birth in the city of Colon, Panama and Keyes challenged eligibility of senator
Obama in light of lack of long form birth certificate. Both cases were filed against
the Secretary of State of CA Debra Bowen. Both the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of CA and the Third District court of Appeals in Ca concurred
that the proper time to challenge presidential eligibility, is after the election and
after the congressional confirmation.

"Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the
Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial
review--if any--should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run
 Case: 10-55084 05/05/2011 Page: 3 of 3 ID: 7742216 DktEntry: 44

their course. [Citation.]” (Robinson v. Bowen, supra, 567 F.Supp.2d at p. 1147.) (emphasis
added)

Undersigned would like to remind this court that she filed this action on the Inauguration day.
Defendant, Mr. Obama, could not memorize the oath of office and Chief Justice Roberts had to
come back to the White House and give Mr. Obama a make up oath. By that time Taitz already
filed this legal action. As such, the timing was perfect: it was executed after the legislative
process ran its course and before the defendant, Mr. Obama, was sworn in..

Respectfully submitted,

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

Attorney for 40 plaintiffs in case 10-55084.

Certificate of Service

Applicant attests and certifies that a true and correct copy of the above was served
on the:

Assistant US ATTORNEYS

DAVID DEJUTE

ROGER WEST

(SERVED ELECTRONICALLY VIA ECF)

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

Attorney for all 40 plaintiffs in case 10-55084.