No. 18-5551

In Re Rafael A. Joseph

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2018-08-10
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: administrative-law administrative-procedure civil-procedure court-of-appeals due-process judicial-discretion judicial-misconduct judicial-oversight jurisdiction malfeasance mandamus nonfeasance oversight
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2018-10-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can the Circuit & Court of Appeals Executive refuse to refer my petition for reconsideration; Clerk Court of Appeals refuse to docket my motions to show cause; and the Judicial Counsel Ninth Circuit refuse to answer to my complaint?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Petitioner in seeking this writ is aware that SCOTUS cannot control judicial ; discretion, it can only force the lower court to perform its duties, exercise it _ judgment, perform its judicial functions follow the clear statement of the law, or . preventing the lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction or abusing its discretion. ‘ Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137; Where a specific duty is assigned by law and individual right depend upon the performance of that duty, it seems equally clear that the individual who considers himself injured has a right to resort to the laws of his country for remedy. The Ninth Circuit Judicial Council failed in their duty to supervise the judicial officers and employees of the Ninth Circuit for abusing their authority. Jurisdiction 28 U.S.C 332 (d) (2) (4); public admonishment of Judge (2011). 2) Can the Circuit & Court of Appeals Executive refuse to refer my “petition for reconsideration; Clerk Court of Appeals refuse to docket my motions to show cause; and the Judicial Counsel Ninth Circuit refuse to answer to my complaint? 3) Did the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council & Molly Dwyer, Clerk Court of Appeals a Ninth Circuit commit nonfeasance and malfeasance when the Judicial Council did & not respond to petitioner’s complaint as established in their judicial rules and the + Clerk refusing to docket my motion to show cause? -2 PARTIES : Parties in the proceedings of this case are: | . ; 1) Circuit & Court of Appeals Executive, et al , 2) Cathy A. Catherson, Circuit & Court of Appeals Executive . ~ 8) Marci Mills, Assistant Circuit and Court of Appeals Executive : ‘ , 4) Robert Rucker, Act. Circuit and Court of Appeals Executive . 5) Taninh Chanchaleun, Legal Affairs . . 6) Molly Dwyer, Clerk U.S. Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit : 1) Ninth Circuit Judicial Council , Pursuant to Rule 29.6, petitioner states that no parties are corporations. -3

Docket Entries

2018-10-09
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of mandamus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.
2018-09-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-06-15
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 10, 2018)

Attorneys

Rafael A. Joseph
Rafael A. Joseph — Petitioner
Rafael A. Joseph — Petitioner