9th Circuit Court - Taitz - Citation of Supplemental Authorities

8/6/2019 9th Circuit Court - Taitz - Citation of Supplemental Authorities

1/16

Cases 09-56827 and 10-55084

Submitted on behalf of all40 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 05/16/2011 Page: 1 of 6 ID: 7752698 DktEntry: 48-1


2/16

CSB #223433

29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy

Ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

ph 949-683-5411

fax 949-766-7603

[email protected] for Plaintiffs-Appellants Attention clerk of the court :

On May 2, 2011 undersigned conducted oral argument in the abovecaptioned case in front of Honorable Justices Berzon, Fisher andPregerson. Please, see below additional information per FRAP 28 (j).

On May 11, 2011 Judge Joseph Wilkinson in Eastern District of Louisiana issued an

order granting leave of court to file my Reply to opposition to intervene in case

10-1663 Hornbeck v Salazar. (Exhibit 1)_Reply and exhibits were filed. Decision

regarding motion to intervene was issued on May 12, 2011. (Exhibit 2) This order

and exhibits bear vital importance in the case at hand and show the following:

1. Other courts and districts refrain from deciding the issue of Barack Obamas

legitimacy for US presidency, relying on the 9

th

Circuit to make a determinationin this matter.

2. Exhibits provided in Hornbeck v Salazar, particularly sworn affidavit of

typographic and scanning machines expert, Mr. Douglas Vogt, provide

irrefutable proof that Mr. Obama indeed posted on the official site White

House.gov a forgery and not a true and correct copy of an original birth

certificate, issued in 1961.

3. This fraud and uttering of a forged birth certificate, along with invalid Social

Security number, by an individual occupying the position of the President and

commander in chief of the US military, is so egregious and represents such aclear danger to US National Security, that this issue needs to be decided in the

most expedient matter and appeal should be granted expeditiously.

4. I believe that the forgery, submitted by Mr. Obama, possibly included a birth

certificate number, originally issued to one Virginia Sunahara, born August 4,

1961 in Wahaina hospital and transferred to Kapiolani hospital, due to medical

complications, and deceased at Kapiolani and around August 5, 1961. In

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/16

addition to vital records for Mr. Obama, previously requested in this

complaint, I am requesting a court order of discovery of vital records of

deceased Virginia Sunahara, as well as birth certificate for Mr. Obamas half

sister, Maya Soetoro, believed to be issued under statute 338-17 for a foreign

born child of a Hawaiian resident.

Respectfully submitted:

/s/ 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 servedon the:

Assistant US ATTORNEYSDAVID DEJUTEROGER WEST(SERVED ELECTRONICALLY VIA ECF)

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

Attorney for all 40 plaintiffs in case 10-55084.

US Commissionon Civil Rights624 Ninth Street, NW

Washington, DC 20425 C



4/16

Public Integrity SectionDepartment of Justice950 Pennsylvania Ave, NWWashington DC 20530-0001

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights DefendersThe Honorable Mrs. Margaret SekaggyaPalais des NationsCH-1211 Geneva 10, SwitzerlandInternational Criminal bar HagueBPI-ICB-CAPI

Head Office

Neuhuyskade 94

2596 XM The Hague

The Netherlands

Tel : 0031 (70) 3268070 0031 (70) 3268070

Fax : 0031 (70) 3353531

Email:[email protected]

Website:www.bpi-icb.org

Regional Office - Americas / Bureau rgional - Amriques / Oficinaregional - Amricas

137, rue St-Pierre

Montral, Qubec, Canada, H2Y 3T5

Tel : 001 (514) 289-8757 001 (514) 289-8757

Fax : 001 (514) 289-8590

Email:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.bpi-icb.org/http://www.bpi-icb.org/http://www.bpi-icb.org/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.bpi-icb.org/mailto:[email protected]


5/16

Website:www.bpi-icb.org

Laura Vericat FigarolaBPI-ICB-CAPISecretaria [email protected]: Avenida Diagonal 529 1208029 Barcelona, Espaatel/fax 0034 93 405 14 24

United Nations Commission forCivil Rights DefendersOrsolya Toth (Ms)Human Rights OfficerCivil and Political Rights SectionSpecial Procedures DivisionOffice of the High Commissioner for Human Rightstel: + 41 22 917 91 51email: [email protected]

Signed

/s/ Orly Taitz

http://www.bpi-icb.org/http://www.bpi-icb.org/http://www.bpi-icb.org/http://www.bpi-icb.org/


6/16

DrOrly Taitz, ESQ29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688



7/16

I :.,*r ;

tro Tr-r[t tJN$l'Et] s'rAT'[i5t) I $-t-R x {.'"t- {t{ }Lj R"t'

F{}t{ T}{[ EA5"*'HR5 f ]f $TRir_T{}F l-{}utsxANA$Fld)R\lrll{'*\ (}f FS}'tr{}!{a s{:ltVIt'i..s. I-1"{' lifll-,ltYt-lt F $ri\\q"sKEli\l,l'tr *t Ll..g ,'Kt'-\', sALAZAR. Ili Hts !rlr't.'t{'t,{t- {-',"{pA{'t1 }' AS $}.{tt{F-1"!R\ ^ st,5!l flf) s-t,\'l-ti$ tlF tlAR-t 1tF.I'I {iF

t\T,'-!{,lt}lt: R{}$t-.lt I "l}Oli" -+,tst}F_}, I5HMlf FIC'{,{1" CAPA{'iT} .{S "{a'f'}:\(;tli l"t l;{'"f {} R, rut I N l.- lt A L. lM ;t l{ AC E l\{ f \TSERVIt ll: .'1Nl! Mll{Fll{,{1,5113\,1{; Fi}I t..\ t- SIR\.I{'I{} r- f- t.. \ t}A Vr.'

{'11.'t l, A{-T'l{}l'{ #!{}-t rrrr3iF';{?}sF,{"1 t{t\ F

.:t l)a;l: !r;iLf)l1 t\}t.{{;t5 i't.i.\]! :

i\.tA{; isl't{A r' },: \,l'tr i,il I \5{ }\i\lofian fcr lcar e of rgurl l* tilc :,t I'r.';rl.r tr.ropp*sitir;n\l*;lion hearing ln interr cnrr {}rh 'l $itr.!:'5t)

llrl-r I l" ?{ll I I{i an:llagistrafe .f r;stph 11 ill,iinson

Scsiirin F

PR{}t $sgi} oRt}ERll*tialr ftlr k'avc ltt ct-rur'{ to file i} replr {ii $pp$sifi*n to m{}ti*n to in{err'*ne [1Sr" dlrl;,Taitrzo EliQ is herebl gr;rnt*d

NTACISTRATE JL;L}{;IJOTiT,PH WILKII{ST}H



8/16

IN THE UI.{ITEI} STATESDISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRTCTOF LOUISIANA

HORNBECK OFFSIIORE SERVICES, LLCPLAINTIFFv.KE|'{NETII LElt "KEII{" SALAZAR,IN HISOFFICIAT, CAFACITY AS SECRETARY,UI\IITED STATES DEPART}TENT OFII{TERIOR; ROBERT "B{}8" ABBEY, Il{EIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ACTL\GDIREfIO& eilNERA L $f,tNAcElIEr{TSERVICE; AND I\{INERAI,SNT{NAGEMENT SER}ICEI}BFENDAFfT.

cML ACTION #rS-r6fiFX2)SBCT'TOI{ F

.IUDGE FELDMAN1\.{AGTSTRATES

&,T4.GISTRATE IVILKII{SON}lotion hearing by intervener Orly Ttitz,EqQ

$Iay ll,2011 10amMagistrate Joseph lYilkinsonSection F

$$$$$$$$

REPI,Y TO OPPOSITION TO *,{OTTON TO INTERVENEIntervener respectfully opposes the opposition by the federal defend.ants on thefollowing groundsl. Federal defendants iru*properly characterized the case at haml. They

represented it as a case relating to the moratorium on drilling only, howeverthis case develcped into a more {:omplex matfer of continuous stonewallingand urueasonatrle interruption of normal business of oil and gas industry ofthe Gulf of &{exico by the aelministration of Barack Hussein Obama. AfcerHonorable jud-ee Feldrnan placed an injunction on moratoriur4 Obamaadministration placed roadblocks and is stcnewalling the process of grantingdriliing permits in the Gulf of &{exico. Ttris policy led to de fact dissipationof the oil and gas cxploration in the Gulf of b4exico. At the sarne r.imeBarack Obama travelled to Rio De Janeiro and gave speeches, *'here hepraised similar tvpes of sil explaration in Brazil and srated rhat US should bethe biggest customer of Brazil. At fhe sarne time Mr. Obarna respanded tothe consritutional and civil rights attorneys, intervener, being cRe of tlrem,bringing legal actions: stating that Obama is not eligible and not legitimatelo US preside.ncy due to lack of any vital records, tha.t wouid show him to bea natural born citizen" Obama responded by providing to the public a recordthat he claimed to be a true and correct copy af his original birth certificateHornbeck v Salazar Repiy to opposition to motion to intenene by Dr Orly Taitz, ESQI



9/16

and called such constitutional attomcys "carnival barkers"- This dor-:ument,prr:duced by Obama, was tbund to be a forgerv {Exhibits 1, 2). l-lis acrionstriggered persec.utions of Taitz, as a civil rights an


10/16

certilicate, which was supposed to be aligned to the left. Lastly, Exhibit 5,today's article in World Net Daily which reports a letter from EmmanuelKisombe, pe.ffnanent secretary in the ministry of immigration of rtreRepublic of Kenv-a. stating that fhere is a criminal investigation in regards toreporred birth of Barack Obarna in Kenya, and the fact that there wastampering and destructian of the pertinent birth records in the birth registry.This additional information is so damning, that it actually requires a furtheremergency hearing, as it slrows, that all the policies aft'ecting the plaintiffsand the intervener were masterminded by one involved in criminal fraud,elections fiaud, Social Security fraud, obstruction of Justice, uttering andpossibly forgery.Inten"ener attempted to satisfy requirernenl of Rule 7 -6 by calling the.attorneys for &e defendants, but did not he-ar baclcln re.sponse ta the jurisdictional challenge, intervener volunlarily availsherseH to the jurisdiction of this court. Mr. Barack Obama availed himself tothe jurisdiction of the Eastem district of Louisiana, when he tiaudulentlysubmitted his candidacli to run for the position of the U.S. president in thisstate and when he fraudulently masterminded policies aimed at desffuctionof the oil and gas industry in this district. Therefore, Taitz satisfiedjurisdictional requirement per Int'I Paper Co v. Jay, 88? F. 2d 338, 346 (1'tCir.1989)WTIEREFORE:L. Taitz respectfuliy seeks a leave of court to join the action at hand as atrinterv'ener.?. Tain seeks a declaratory reiief deeming Obama not eligible to issue anyexecutive orders, sign bills or perform any functions of the President orConrmander in Chief due to ineligibility per article 2, section 1 of the LSConstitution and due to his fraudulent election based on uttering of forged andinvaiid identification records.3. Taitz seeks a declaratory relief deeming Ken Salazar, secretary of the Interior,not eligible to perfonn any functions as a Secretary of the Interior, as hisappointment as the Secretary of the interior was not iegitimate, as an appointment

of the ineligible Pre.sident and ttrat moratoriums and policies by Mr, Salazar werenull and void due to ineligibility for office and due to his illegal appointment byMr. Barack Hussein Obama, ',vho is illegally usurping the position of &e LT.S.president by virtue of fraud and uttering of forged identification records.4. Taitz is seeking a declaralory relief that Presidential efigibility is not a politicalHornbeck v Salazar Reply to opposition to motion to interv"ene by Dr. Orly Taiu, ESQ

J

4.).



11/16

que$tion, bui a legal question, to be decided by the district court as a federal lawquestion based violation of the Constitution, specificallrv Artiele 2 question i of theU.S. Constitution.5. Taitz is seeking an injunction seeking to stop persecutions of her as a dissidentand as a civil rights and constitutional attorney, who brought forward evidence ofObama's liaudulent usurpation of the position cf the United States President andConrmander in Chief by use of fraud and uttering of forged identification receirdsand stop and reverse any retaliatory acticns and sanctions against her due to herlegal work in pursuit of ending usurpation of the U.S. presidency by BarackHussein Obama and ending the enorrnous clamage caused to the US industries andeconomy at large as a result of this usurpation.

Respectfully S u hmitted,05.11.2011-'{- 4 z--"F-\/$ Orly Taitz, BSQDr. Orly Taitz ESQ29839 Santa Margarita PKlryY, ste 100Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 9268Sphone 949-683-541 L fax 949-7 66-7 603orly,[email protected]

Di FllF9.cate of ServiceI hereby certify that orr$3dl#Ef above brief is being filed with the clerk ofthe court and and will be served electronically hy nCjry--CarlDavid Rosenblum c{osenblum@ione,swalker.com Y


12/16

Case ?:'l O-cv-01 *{j3-Mi-Cf'"JC:$/ Dacunrent 259-2 Filed 05111/11 Fage 5 of 5

Sharon Denise Smith [email protected]; Rosanne.alford @ usdoj. gov;ierrilvn.dufaJrchard @usdoj. qovI further certify that I am mailing ing document to the following non -ECF participantsJohn F. CooneyVenable, L["O575 7th gL,NWWashingeon, DC 2m04Marjoria Ann McKeithenJones WalkerPlace St. Charles201 St. Charles Ave., ste 5100New Orleans, LA 70170-5100/sl Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ?9839 Santa MargaritaPkwy ste 100Rancho SantaMargarita CA 92688ph 949-683-541 1 t 949-7 ffi-7 60g

Hombsck v Salazar Reply to opposition to motion to intervene by Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ5



13/16

Case 2:10-cv-01663-l\ILCF-JCW Document2S9-3 FiledTnnRsro$ffss.YmAncmlu lunex Svsrnvrs, INc.F{AGTN6 TECTS|oLOGIE.5 TO EXPAND IiilqS KilOWIEDGE

P-O- Eox t10135BLLEYUE WAsHHsrPtl lEff 5

{,*25) 6il3-1 1 3t; F N, {24o| 38/-7251Fo,r response to this leter diehold@ corncasi,net

A5111111 Page 1 of 211YEB P.{CESivwwrEfiivdndex-com

wr,crAl-srhdesalecf ied(scann ersJomRESELLERSoF

PFTODUCTiON DOCUMENT SCANhIEFSWIDE-MRMAT SGAT{NEFS

CHECI{ SCANNEREWE&BA'SEO OOCUMET{T IMAGIIIIG StrTWAffE

SCAiINING SOFTWAFIEMay 10, 201IAffidavit

I, Dcuglas B. Vogt, am over 18 years old, do not suffer from any mental impairment, have personalknowledge ir the following and attest undf,r penalty cf perjury that I have knowledge and expertisein dacuments, imagrng, sc{rn$ers and document imagiug Frogrtuns. Bosed on ury knowledge andel$ertise the following is true and correcttvty CredenfnliI have a unique background for analyzing this documenL I owned a typesetting company for 11years so I knaw type and form design very well. I curreirtly own Archive lndex Systems since 1993,which sells all types of document scanners worldwide and also developed document imagingsoftware (TheRepository). I know how the scanners work. I have also sold other dosument imagingFrograffs, such as Laser Fiche, Llberly and Alchemy. I have sold and installed document imagingsystems in city and county governments, so I know their procedures with imaging rystems andel'erything about the design of such prograffis. This will be irrporrant in understanding what hashappened with Obama's Certificate of Live Birth.

*'i#t#:.r#.s,4;;".rB ti iJlr iU^-,_ ; .,., -i* ,.- ).Figure 1. Tiff image of the Obama's Certilicate ol LiveBirth daied August 8, 1 961 , presBnted on TV 4/271201 1Whst I Dis{ouered dbout Obomdi Certili{ste of Llue Birth qnd whtr it il q Forgery'What the Obama adminisfation released is a PDF image that tbey are tlying to pass off as aCertificate Live Birth Long Form printed on green security paper by the County Health Department,The fann is a created forgery for the following reason$.

*s a.tdttt ."-E . --.*tii*:F T, ffi -r--^!*:r- rl;-14;i7jr{:*

Figure 2. Anolher Persons microlilrned Certificate of LiveBirth dated August 11,1961.



14/16

Case 2: 1 0-cv-01 663-MLCf -JCW Document 262 Filed 05/11/11 Page 1 of 3

MINUTE ENTRYWILKINSON, M. J.MAY ll,20l1LINITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUSIANA

HORNBECK OFFSHORE SERVICES, L.L.C.VERSUSKENNETH LEE SALAZAR ET AL.

CryIL ACTIONNO. 10-1663SECTION *F" (2)

APPEARANCES:HnARTNG AND ORDER ON MOTIqN

Dr. Orly Taitz, movant; Assistant United States Attorney PeterMansfi eld, representing defendants ; C arl Rosenblum, repres enlingplaintiffsMotion for Leave of Court to Intervene as an Additional Plaintiff,Record Doc. No. 252

MOTION:

ORDERED:XXX : DENIED. Local Rules 7 .2 and78.l provide that motions will be decided solelyon briefs, without oral argument, unless a party requests oral argument no later than"three days after receipt of opposition memorandum to a motion," and the court permitsit. No request for oral argument as required by the local rules was made in this case.Nevertheless, the proposed intervenor, Dr. Orly Twtz, proceeding pro se and havingtraveled to the court from California under the mistaken impression that a live hearingwould be conducted, was permitted to be heard orally. Opposing counsel were notified,appeared and presented argument. Having considered the oral argument, together withthe written submissions in connection with the motion, including the government's

MJSTAR 0 : 17



15/16

Case 2:10-cv-01663-MLCF-JCW Document 262 Filed 05111i11 Page 2 of 3

opposition, the record as a whole and the applicable law, IT IS ORDERED that themotion is DENIED for the following reasons.Movant concedes that she does ngt seek intervention ofright, but only permissiveintervention under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b). Record Doc. No. 252-2 at p. 7,.[f 25. As topermissive interventiono Rule 24(b) provides: "(1) On timel)' motion, the court malzpermit anyone to intervene who: (A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federalstatute; or (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common questionof law or fact. . . . (3) In exercising its discretion, the court must consider whether theinterventionwill unduly delay orprejudice the adjudication ofthe original parties' rights.Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(l), (3) (emphasis added).Intervention may be permitted only "on timely application," Fed. R. Civ. P.24(b)(l) (emphasis added). When determining whether a motion to intervene is timely,a court must consider: (1) how long the potential intervenor knew or reasonably shouldhave known of her stake in the case into which she seeks to intervene; (2) the prejudice,if any, the existing parties may suffer because the potential intervenor failed to intervenewhen she knew or reasonably should have known of her stake in that case; (3) theprejudice, if any, the potential intervenor may suffer if the court does not let herintervene; and(4) any unusual circumstances that weigh in favor of or against a findingof timeliness. In re Lease Oil Antitrust Litig., 570 F.3d 244, 247-48 (5th Cir. 2009)(citing Stallworth v. Monsanto Co., 558 F.2d 257,263-66 (5th Cir. 1977)); Effiohn Int'lCruise Holdings, Inc. v. A&L Sales. Inc. ,346 F .3d 552, 560-61 (5th Cir. 2003). ).In addition, "[i]f there is no right to intervene under Rule 24(a), it is whollydiscretionary with the court whether to allow intervention under Rule 24(b), and eventhough there is a common question of law or fact, or the requirements of Rule 24(b) areotherwise satisfied, the court may refuse to allow intervention. . . . If the would-beintervenor already is a party to other litigation in which the intervenor's rights can befully determined, . . . this may persuade the court to deny leave to intervene." 7C CharlesAlan Wright, ArthurR. Miller & Mary Kay Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure $ 1913at 476 and n.5 (citing Kneeland v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 806 F.2d 1285,1289 (5th Cir. 1987)) and 487-89 (3d ed. 2007) (emphasis added).Considering the foregoing factors in this instance, this court must exercise itsconsiderable discretion to deny intervention. I cannot conclude that the proposedintervention shares any common issue of law or fact with the main case. While theintervenor - like the original plaintiffs - asserts the invalidity of the moratorium actiontaken by defendants, the legal and facfual basis of intervenor's claim - i.e., thePresident's place of birth or citizenship - is entirely different from the legal and factualassertions ofthe original claimants. Evaluating the timeliness factors also weighs heavilyagainstpermittingthis intervention. The intervenor's actual stake inthe original litigationis negligible when compared to the stake of the original plaintiffs. The prejudice to the



16/16

Case 2:10-cv-01663-MLCF-JCW Document 262 Filed 05/11111 Page 3 of 3

existing parties in permitting the intervention would be extreme, given the whollyextraneous nature ofthe proposed intervenor's legal and factual assertions to the claimsand defenses raised by the original parties. It appears from the proposed intervenor'ssubmissions that her claims have already been the subject of similar efforts by her in a"pending civil suit in the United States District Court for the Central District ofCalifornia. Record Doc. No. 252-3 at p.36, u's 17 and 18, which she advised at oralargument is now pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,where she recently made an appearance before that court. This is a strong indicator thatany prejudice to intervenor in denying the motion to intervene in this case would beslight, since her claims have already been asserted in another lawsuit in her home venueand any decision by that court may well have res judicata or collateral estoppel effect inthis court. Finally, the o'unusual circumstances" of the timing of the assertion ofintervenor's claims and the President's recent public postings contesting those claims,which the proposed intervenor and her experts assert in the reply papers are forgeries,weigh against any exercise of this court's discretion to permit this intervention in adifferent existing case.

For all ofthe foregoing reasons, the motion is DENIED. This intervention shouldnot be permitted.

JOSEPH C. WILKINSON, JR.LINITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Documents

9th Circuit Court - Taitz - Citation of Supplemental Authorities