SCOTUS, Rule 12.6 Notice to Clerk, No Party Interest, No. 12-7747

7/29/2019 SCOTUS, Rule 12.6 Notice to Clerk, No Party Interest, No. 12-7747

1/22

No: 12-7747

_______________________

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

____________________

NEIL J. GILLESPIE, ET AL, - PETITIONERS

vs.

THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, FLORIDA, ET AL, - RESPONDENTS

________________________

PETITIONERS RULE 12.6 NOTICE TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT

RE: PETITION NO. 12-7747 FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

____________________

Submitted January 22, 2013

by

Neil J. Gillespie,

the petitioner appearing pro se, a nonlawyer,

adult man disabled with physical and mental impairments.

8092 SW 115th Loop

Ocala, Florida 34481Telephone: (352) 854-7807

Email: [email protected]


2/22

ii

LIST OF PARTIES

All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. A list of all parties

to the proceeding in the court whose judgment is the subject of this petition is as follows:

___________________

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, no. 12-11213

District Court no: 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-TBS

Civil rights and disability law.

Misuse and denial of justice under the color of law.

Plaintiff: (1)

Neil J. Gillespie

Defendants: (10 + 5 individually)Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida

Claudia Rickert Isom, Circuit Judge, and individually (Fla. Bar ID 200042)

James M. Barton, II, Circuit Judge, and individually (Fla. Bar ID 189239)

Martha J. Cook, Circuit Judge, and individually (Fla. Bar ID 242640)

David A. Rowland, Court Counsel, and individually (Fla. Bar ID 861987)

Gonzalo B. Casares, ADA Coordinator, and individually

Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.

Ryan Christopher Rodems, Attorney at Law (Fla. Bar ID: 947652)

The Law Office of Robert W. Bauer, P.A.

Robert W. Bauer, Attorney at Law (Fla. Bar ID: 11058)

___________________

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, no. 12-11028


Civil rights and disability law, civil RICO, antitrust, commerce, estate claims.

Misuse and denial of justice under the color of law.

Plaintiffs: (2)

Neil J. Gillespie

Estate of Penelope Gillespie (deceased)

Defendants: (4 + 1 individually)

Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida

James M. Barton, II, Circuit Court Judge, and individually (Fla. Bar ID 189239)

The Law Office of Robert W. Bauer, P.A.

Robert W. Bauer, Attorney at Law (Fla. Bar ID: 11058)

_______________________


3/22

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF PARTIES ......................................................................................................................ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS.............................................................................................................iii

RULE 12.6 NOTICE TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT ..........................................................1

INDEX TO APPENDICES ..........................................................................................................3


4/22

1

No. 12-7747

IN THE


___________________________

RULE 12.6 NOTICE TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT

_____________________________

Petitioner Neil J. Gillespie appearing pro se (Gillespie) gives notice under Rule 12.6 to

the Clerk of the Court in Petition No. 12-7747 for writ of certiorari, notice of the party interests

of Respondents Ryan Christopher Rodems (Rodems) and Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. (BRC).

Petition No. 12-7747 reviews judgments in the two cases below, identified as 1 and 2.

1. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, no. 12-11213

District Court no: 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-TBS (DAB)

2. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, no. 12-11028


No Legal Interest of Respondents in Case 1

Gillespie believes Respondents Rodems and BRC have no legal interest in Case 1.

Gillespie gave notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A) to Mr. Rodems and BRC

October 29, 2010 in Case 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB (Doc. 22). (Appendix A). By Order (Doc.

25), the Court directed the Clerk to enter judgment dismissing all claims against Rodems and

BRC without prejudice, and terminate as moot their pending motion to dismiss. (Appendix B).

The Court entered Judgment (Doc. 26) November 23, 2010. (Appendix C). Mr. Rodems did not

appeal the Courts Order entered November 22, 2010, or Judgment entered November 23, 2010.

On June 21, 2011 Respondents Rodems and BRC improperly, and unsuccessfully,

attempted to reenter the case. The Court henceforth did not respond to any of Respondents

Rodems/BRCs pleadings. Respondents Rodems and BRC took no other action at that time and


5/22

abandoned any alleged interest. The case was dismissed by the Court February 27, 2012. NeitherRespondent Rodems or BRC filed an appeal for any alleged interest in the Order of DismissalDoc. 64) entered February 27, 2012, or in the Judgment Doc. 65) entered February 28, 2012.

Respondents Not a Party n Case 2Respondents Rodems and BRC were not a party in case 2 at any time. As such Gillespie

believes they have no legal interest n the outcome of the Petition, which appears on the SupremeCourt docket page as the main case for Petition No. 12-7747.

Respondents Rodems and BRC - No Legal Interest in the Outcome of the PetitionRespondents Rodems and BRC appear in the Petition nominally, as voluntarily dismissed

Defendants n Case 1 only, but now have no legal interest in the Petition because Mr. Rodemsfailed to appeal any of the final orders or judgments required to preserve any alleged interest.

Respondents Rodems and BRC were not a party in Case 2 at any time, which isdesignated as the main case for the Petition. Therefore Gillespie believes Respondents Rodemsand BRC and do not have a legal interest in the outcome ofPetition No. 12-7747.

Suspension of Service Under Rule 29 - As to Nominal Respondents Rodems and BRCOn advice of the Clerk of the Court, Gillespie will suspend service under Rule 29 of

documents in this matter to nominal Respondents Rodems and BRC.No Other Respondents Filed A Waiver or Response

o other Respondents filed a response or waiver by the time set by the Court to do so,January 14, 2013. A list of the Respondents appears on page of this Rule 12.6 Notice.

Respectfully submitted, January 22, 2013.

2


6/22

3

INDEX TO APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Plaintiffs Rule 41 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB (Doc. 22), Oct-29-2010

Plaintiff gives notice of voluntary dismissal against Defendants RyanChristopher Rodems (Rodems) and Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. (BRC)

pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1)(A) in lieu of

an amended Complaint and states....

APPENDIX B Order, on voluntary dismissal, Hon. Wm Terrell Hodges, U.S. District Judge (Seni

5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB (Doc. 25), Nov-22-2010

This case is before the Court on thepro se Plaintiffs Notice of Voluntary

Dismissal as to Defendants Rodems & BRC in Lieu of Amended

Complaint (Doc. 22). Neither Defendant Ryan Christopher Rodems or

Defendant Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. have filed an answer or motionfor summary judgment in this case, and it does not appear that they have

been served with the Complaint. Accordingly, pursuant to the Plaintiffs

Notice, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1), the Clerk is directed to enter

judgment dismissing all claims against Defendants Ryan Christopher

Rodems and Barker, Rodems, & Cook, P.A. WITHOUT PREJUDICE,

each party to bear its own fees and costs. The Clerk is further directed to

terminate as moot the Defendants motion to

dismiss (Doc. 3).

DONE and ORDERED at Ocala, Florida this 22nd day of November, 2010.

Wm. Terrell Hodges (signed)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

APPENDIX C Judgment In A Civil Case, 5: 10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB (Doc. 26), Nov-23-2010

Decision by Court. This action came before the Court. The issues have been tried

or heard and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

Pursuant to the Court's order entered on November 22,2010 judgment isentered dismissing all claims against Defendant's Ryan Christopher

Rodems and Baker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. without prejudice, each party

to bear its own fees and costs.

Date: November 23, 2010

SHERYL L. LOESCH, CLERK


7/22

Case 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB Document 22 Filed 10/29/10 Page 1 of 8

Append


8/22



9/22



10/22



11/22



12/22



13/22



14/22



15/22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

OCALA DIVISION

NEIL J. GILLESPIE,

Plaintiff,

-vs- Case No. 5:10-cv-503-Oc-10DAB

THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,

FLORIDA, et al.,,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

O R D E R

This case is before the Court on the pro se Plaintiffs Notice of Voluntary

Dismissal as to Defendants Rodems & BRC in Lieu of Amended Complaint (Doc. 22).

Neither Defendant Ryan Christopher Rodems or Defendant Barker, Rodems & Cook,

P.A. have filed an answer or motion for summary judgment in this case, and it does not

appear that they have been served with the Complaint. Accordingly, pursuant to the

Plaintiffs Notice, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1), the Clerk is directed to enter judgment

dismissing all claims against Defendants Ryan Christopher Rodems and Barker,

Rodems, & Cook, P.A. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, each party to bear its own fees and

costs. The Clerk is further directed to terminate as moot the Defendants motion to

dismiss (Doc. 3).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Appendix


16/22

DONE and ORDERED at Ocala, Florida this 22nd day of November, 2010.

Copies to: Counsel of Record

Neil J. Gillespie,pro se

Maurya McSheehy

-2-



17/22


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTMIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

OC L DIVISIONNEIL J. GILLESPIE,

Plaintiff,-vs- Case No. 5:10-cv-503-0c-lODABTHIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,FLORIDA, et al.,

Defendants.

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASEDecision by Court. This action came before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard anda decision has been rendered.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGEDPursuant to the Court's order entered on November 22,2010 judgment is entereddismissing all claims against Defendant's Ryan Christopher Rodems and Baker,Rodems & Cook, P.A. without prejudice, each party to bear its own fees and costs.

Date: November 23, 2010SHERYL L. LOESCH, CLERK

L anninBy L. Fannin, Deputy Clerk

Copies furnished toCounsel of RecordUnrepresented Parties

Append


18/22

Case 5:1O cv 00503 WTH DAB Document 26 Filed 11/23/201 0 Page 2 of 2CIVIL APPEALS JURISDICTION CHECKLIST

1. Appealable Orders: Courts of Appeals have jurisdiction conferred and strictly limited by statute:(a) Appeals from final orders pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1291: Only final orders and judgments of district courts,

or final orders of bankruptcy courts which have been appealed to and fully resolved by a district court under 28U.S.C. Section 158, generally arc appealable. A final decision is one that "ends the litigation on the merits and leavesnothing for the court to do bu t execute the judgment." Pitney Bowes, Inc. V. Mestre, 70I F.2d 1365, 1368 (lIth Cir.1983). A magistrate judge's report and recommenda tion is not final and appealable until judgment thereon is enteredby a district court judge. 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c).

(b) In cases involving multiple parties or multiple claims, ajudgment as to fewer than all parties or all claims is nota final, appealable decision unless the district court has certified the judgment for immediate review underFed.R.Civ.P. 54(b), Williams v Bishop, 732 F.2d 885, 885-86 (lIth Cir. 1984). A judgment which resolves allissues except matters, such as attorneys' fees and costs, that are collateral to the merits, is immediately appealable.Budinich v Becton Dickinson & Co., 486 U.S. 196,201,108 S. Ct. 1717, 1721-22,100 L.Ed.2d 178 (1988);LaChance v. Duffy's Draft House, Inc., 146 F.3d 832, 837 (lIth Cir. 1998).

(c) Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(a): Appeals are permitted from orders "granting, continuing,modifying, refusing or dissolving injunctions or refusing to dissolve or modify injunctions..." and from"[i]nterlocutory decrees...determining therights and liabilities of parties to admiralty cases in which appeals from finaldecrees are allowed." Interlocutory appeals from orders denying temporary restraining orders are not permitted.(d) Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(b) and Fed.R.App.P.S: The certification specified in 28 U.S.C.Section 1292(b) must be obtained before a petition for permission to appeal is filed in the Court of Appeals. Thedistrict court's denial of a motion for certification is not itself appealable.(e) Appeals pursuant to judicially created exceptions to the finality rule: Limited exceptions are discussed in casesincluding, but not limited to: Cohen V. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541,546,69 S.Ct. 1221, 1225-26,93L.Ed. 1528 (1949); Atlantic Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Blythe Eastman Paine Webber, Inc., 890 F. 2d 371, 376 (lIthCir. 1989); Gillespie v United States Steel Corp., 379 U.S. 148, 157.85 S. Ct. 308, 312,13 L.Ed.2d 199 (1964).

2. Time for Filing: The timely filing ofa notice of appeal is mandatory and jurisdict ional. Rinaldo v. Corbett, 256 F.3d 1276,1278 (lIth Cir. 2001). In civil cases, Fed.R.App.P.4(a) and (c) set the following time limits:(a) Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(I): A notice of appeal in compliance with the requirements set forth in Fed.R.App.P. 3 must be

filed in the district court within 30 days after the entry of the order or judgment appealed from. Howe ver, if theUnited States or an officer or agency thereof is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed in the district court within60 days after such entry. THE NOTICE MUST BE RECEIVED AND FILED IN THE DISTRICT COURTNO LATER THAN THE LAST DAY OF THE APPEAL PERIOD - no additional days are provided formailing. Special filing provisions for inmates are discussed below.

(b) Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(3): " fone party timely files a notice of appeal, any other party may file a notice of appeal within14 days after the date when the first notice was filed, or within the time otherwise prescribed by this Rule 4(a),whichever period ends later."(c) Fed.R.App.P.4(a)(4): If any party makes a timely motion in the district court under the Federal Rules of CivilProcedure of a type specified in this rule, the time for appeal for all parties runs from the date of entry of thc orderdisposing of the last sueh timely filed motion.(d) Fed.R.App.P.4(a)(S) and 4(a)(6): Under certain limited circumstances, the district court may extend the time to filea notice of appeal. Under Rule 4(a)(5), the time may be extended if a motion for an extension is filed within 30 daysafter expiration of the time otherwise providedto file a notice of appeal, upon a showing of excusable neglect or goodcause. Under Rule 4(a)(6), the time may be extended if the district court finds upon motion that a party did not timelyreceive notice of the entry of the judgment or order, and that no party would be prejudiced by an extension.(e) Fed.R.App.P.4(c): If an inmatc confined to an institution files a notice of appeal in either a civil case or a criminalcase, the notice of appeal is timely if t is deposited in the institution's internal mail system on or before the last dayfor filing. Timely filing may be shown by a declaration in compliance with 28 U.S.C. Section 1746 or a notarizedstatement, either of which must set forth the date of deposit and state that first-class postage has been prepaid.

3. Format of the notice of appeal: Form I, Appendix of Forms to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedur e, is a suitable format.See also Fed.R.App.P. 3(c). A ill:Q notice of appeal must be signed by the appellant4. Effect of a notice of appeal: A district court loses jurisdiction (authority) to act after the filing of a timely notice of appeal,except for actions in aid of appellate jurisdiction or to rule on a timely motion of the type specified in Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(4).

2-


19/22

No: 12-7747IN THE


NEIL J. GILLESPIE, ET AL, - PETITIONERSVS.

THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, FLORIDA, ET AL. - RESPONDENTS

PROO O SERVICEI, Neil J Gillespie, do swear or declare that on this date, January 22, 2013, as required by

Supreme Court Rule 29 I have served the enclosed RULE 12.6 NOTICE TO THE CLERK OFTHE COURT on each party to the above proceeding or that party's counsel, and on every otherperson required to be served, by delivery to a third-party commercial carrier for delivery within 3calendar days.

The names and addresses of those served are as follows:David A. Rowland, Court Counsel Robert W. Bauer, Attorney at LawThirteenth Judicial Circuit Of Florida Law Office of Robert W. Bauer, P.A.Legal Department 2815 NW 13th Street, Suite 200E800 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 603 Gainesville, Florida 32609Tampa, Florida 33602 Telephone: (352) 375-5960Telephone: (813) 272-6843Ryan Christopher Rodems, Attorney at LawBarker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.501 E. Kennedy Blvd, suite 790Tampa, Florida 33602Telephone: (813) 489-1001I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.Executed on January 22, 2013.


20/22

Neil Gillespie

From: "UPS Quantum View" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 12:44 PMSubject: UPS Delivery Notification, Tracking Number 1Z64589FNW94832551

Page 1 of 1

1/23/2013

UPS My Choicecan help you avoidmissed homedeliveries.

Learn More

***Do not reply to this e-mail. UPS and Neil J. Gillespie will notreply.

At the request of Nei l J . Gil lespie, this notice is to confi rmfollowing shipment has been delivered.

Important Delivery Information

Delivery Location:RECEIVERSigned by:KOUROS

Shipment Detail

Ship To:Clerk of the CourtSupreme Court of the United States3035 V ST NEWASHINGTON

DC20018US

____2@@2@@2loiZ4Qj____

Tracking Number: 1Z64589FNW94832551Delivery Date / Time: 23-January-2013 / 12:22 PM

Number of Packages: 1

UPS Service: NEXT DAY AIR SAVER

Weight: 5.0 LBS

2013 United Parcel Service of America, Inc. UPS, the UPS brandmark, and the color brown are trademarks of United Parcel Servirights reserved.For more information on UPS's privacy practices, refer to the UPS Privacy Policy.Please do not reply directly to this e-mail. UPS will not receive any reply message.For questions or comments, visit Contact UPS.

This communication contains proprietary information and may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, the reading, copuse of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited and you are instructed to please delete this e-mail immediately.Privacy NoticeContact UPS


21/22

Proof of Delivery

Tracking Number: 1Z64589FNW94832551

Service: UPS Next Day Air Saver

Weight: 5.00 lbs

Shipped/Billed On: 01/22/2013

Delivered On: 01/23/2013 12:22 P.M.Delivered To: WASHINGTON, DC, US

Signed By: KOUROS

Left At: Receiver

Print This Page

Close Window

Dear Customer,

This notice serves as proof of delivery for the shipment listed below.

Thank you for giving us this opportunity to serve you.

Sincerely,

UPS

Tracking results provided by UPS: 01/23/2013 1:30 P.M. ET

Close Window

Tracking Information http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/processPOD?lineData=L

1/23/2013


22/22

January22,2013Clerkof theCourtSupremeCourtof theUnitedStates1FirstStreet,NEWashington,DC20543

RE:PetitionNo. 12-7747,G-illespiev. ThirteenthJudicialCircuit,FL,etal.DearClerkof theCourt:Pleasefindenclosedforfilingin PetitionNo.12-7747forwritof certiorari:1. Rule12.6NoticetotheClerkof theCourt,partyinterest;andRule29Proofof Service2. Rule 8 Notice, conduct unbecoming a memberof the Barof this Court, verified, withseparatevolumeappendix;andRule29ProofofService.3. SeparatevolumeappendixforPetitionNo.12-7747;andRule29 roofof Service.

ConstitutionalandStatutoryProvisionsInvolved UnitedStates; Stateof Florida; Constitutionallyquestionedof certainFloridaStatutes Thankyou.

Enclosurescc:JeffreyAtkins,Supervisorof NewCasescc:CounselfortheRespondents

Documents

SCOTUS, Rule 12.6 Notice to Clerk, No Party Interest, No. 12-7747