No. 18-8919

In Re Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2019-04-19
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-law appellate-procedure appellate-review civil-procedure court-order due-process equal-protection judicial-discretion judicial-review legal-review mandamus procedural-due-process standing
Key Terms:
Antitrust FifthAmendment FirstAmendment DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2019-06-13
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does any Court have a legal right to issue a dispositive Order without a detailed explanation about why this decision was reached?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Questions presented: . 1) Does any Court have a legal right to issue a dispositive Order without a detailed explanation about why this decision was reached? 2) Does any Court have a legal right to prohibit a Plaintiff to file a Motion for Clarification, a Motion for Reconsideration, etc.? 3) Does any Court have a legal right to refuse to entertain the Plaintiff's subsequent filings without the explanation? 2 Petition for a Writ of Prohibition, Mandamus, and other appropriate relief . Il. A list of all Parties in the proceeding in the court whose judgment is sought to be reviewed. 1) Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva Pro Se. I was a Plaintiff at the District Court, and I was a Plaintiff-Appellant at the Court of Appeals for the 9" Circuit. Tatyana E. Drevaleva, 1063 Gilman Dr., Daly City, CA, 94015 415-806-9864; tdrevaleva@ gmail.com 2) The United States Court of Appeals for the 9" Circuit Respondent. 95 7th St, San Francisco, CA 94103. 3) The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Mr. Robert Wilkie in his official capacity as an acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs — Real Parries in Interest. They were Defendants at the District Court and at the Court of Appeals for the 9" Circuit. The Assistant U.S. Attorney Ms. Kimberly Robinson 450 Golden Gate Ave., Box 3605, San Francisco, CA, 94102-3495 Telephone: (415) 436-7298; FAX: (415) 436-6748 kimberly.robinson3 @usdoj.gov . 3 Petition for a Writ of Prohibition, Mandamus, and other appropriate relief

Docket Entries

2019-06-17
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
2019-05-20
Waiver of right of respondent UNITED STATES to respond filed.
2019-04-16
Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 20, 2019)

Attorneys

Tatyana E. Drevaleva
Tatyana E. Drevaleva — Petitioner
Tatyana E. Drevaleva — Petitioner
UNITED STATES
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent