one of ! THE MOST IMPORTANT CIVIL CASE IN AMERICAN HISTORY!

1:25-CV-112, now in Appeal as 25-5259.

What are they; They are two issues, The first is a petition for redressing's of grievance's, Submitted to the elect (the Biden\Harris and the Trump/Vance White houses, The Judiciary committee's of the US house and Senate and their members as well as several more elect). The elect (except for the Biden\Harris administration) were served notice of the petition filed in the D.C. superior court (page 64 of the document of the link) and the D.C. federal court, The notices were sent by mail and email and can be seen in the appendix of the D.C. federal appeal (page 64). None replied, calls and vm's were not returned and its been a year.

But the issues are simply explained, The state and federal civil (and criminal in some instances) courts have a long practice and precedent of hindering and preventing the poor and unestablished (anyone without at least a thousand dollars or usually more in savings) of America from understanding the laws and using the courts to obtain compensation when injured or

The Issues presented are these:

I. COURT LAW LIBRARY INACCESSABILITY PREVENTING AND HINDERING LAW RESEARCH AND LITIGATION. (FEDERAL AND STATE) [asking access be an entitlement of law]

II. RESTRICTED DOCKET ACCESS PREVENTING LAW RESEARCH AND LITIGATION. (FEDERAL AND STATE) [ asking for waivers of fees preventing the poor from effective litigation.]

III. LACK OF A STANDARD AND PROVIDED EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS TO FACILITATE LITIGATION PRACTICE BY PRO SE LITIGANTS. (FEDERAL AND STATE) [asking for creation of a standard and required holdings of legal texts for all federal and state) Court jurisdictions, to ensure fair effective litigation.]

IV. DEPOSITION ACCESS FOR PRO SE LITIGANTS. (FEDERAL) Fed. civil rules have made deposing a costly matter inaccessible to poor pro-se litigants, [asking for court rule changes to ensure depositions are an accessible litigation tool.]

V. THE UNSEALED INFORMA POPERUS FORM. A demeaning endangering exposure of private personal info. Bank Accounts, Amounts, VI. Credits, Debts, property owned by pro-se litigants and their work / private affairs. (FEDERAL AND STATE) [asking these forms are required to be filed under seal]

VI. VICTIMS SERVICES: Current shortfalls to heal the injured and future possibilities. (FEDERAL AND STATE) [ Explaining to the public, that victims services doesn't assist at a set level of standards or provide civil representation.]

VII. LACK OF REPRESENTATION FOR CIVIL LITIGANTS OF SEVERE INJURY AND MENTAL\ DISABILITY. (FEDERAL AND STATE) [asking for research and law to establish a right to justice for those who are ill beyond ability to protect themselves and obtain compensation when injured.]

VIII. QUALIFIED IMMUNITY WITHOUT INSURANCE: Easing burdens, repairing injury, retaining respect, [asking for research to determine what areas of law enforcement insurance can be offered to repair injuries and damages occurring during the performance of duty.]

IX. A LACK OF PUBLIC FORUM TO DISCUSS AND RESOLVE ISSUES OF 6 PUBLIC WORRY AND CRIME OVERFLOW UNADDRESSED. [asking for consideration that research be considered, for government or private entities to create an orderly open public forum for people to address issues of government, crime, need and wishes.]

========================================================================================

The second is the question of the right to petition in the several courts of the nation. The assertion of the petition being dismissed by several D.C. federal court judges, Its now in appeal and since there were some hacking issues and the judges reluctance to either read the documents or\and the judges reluctance to acknowledge the controversial issues of the petition and the right to file petitions in the court.

That is the question, the most important case in U.S. history where the people once had a right to publicly notice their grivances (even to the King) and early congress, discussed the matters also recording them, The right to present the government with a public documented request and allow urging for response. So in events where US elect at Town Hall meetings in front of their constituents promise to act and then ignore the constituents without reason, and when generic replies to genuine issues are repeatedly given without acknowledgment the matters can be escalated to the public to scrutinize and expect of their elect servants.

So how did the three panel judiciary respond, with a response so bare it requires clarification before reconsideration can be asked a testless bald assertion of denial of the civil argument (which was written on a deadline)...

They have denied the American people of this right and done so as to insult the right by giving an unformed opinion, or they are simply avoiding me in a judiciary practice where they say were wearing nities please go away we do not want to deal with the duties of office... Well Im not giving up so easily and expect the treatment of the American peoples rights to be given the high regards its owed... so look for the clarification and reconsideration motion to appear on the docket and court listener and an edit to this article...