Whether Petitioners' filing was improperly removed and deleted from the public record

No question identified. : QUESTION(S) PRESSENTED | On the “OFFICIAL” Publics Domain of the : governments; United States Courts Cases. On PACER Service Center under FAQ’s, Question: I want to Delete or edit my filing: Answer: You cannot delete or edit filings after they have been submitted through . CM/ECF. A filing cannot be DELETED, cannot be EDITED and cannot be REMOVED from the PUBLIC RECORD after it has been submitted and docketed on . ] PACER. Question(s) of extraordinary circumstances: | I. Whether Petitioners filing on May 14, 2018; Id. in Ref. (Doc. r19) | CERTIFICATE(s) OF SERVICE for (Doc. r13), (Doc. r14), (Doc. r15), (Doc. r16), : (Doc. r17) and (Doc. r18); to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, General Counsel dated May 4, 2018; and a copy of the U.S.P.S. Priority Mail Receipt and Delivery Notice as Proof of Service was REMOVED and iy DELETED from the “OFFICIAL” Publics Domain of CIVIL DOCKET FOR | } CASE #: 4:18-cv-04034-LLP: for a reason? TI. Whether Petitioners filing on May 14, 2018; Id. in Ref. (Doc. r20) | } CERTIFICATE(s) OF SERVICE for (Doc. r11), (Doc. r12), (Doce. r13), (Doc. r14), a (Doc. r15), (Doc. r16), (Doc. r17) and (Doc. r18); to the Office of the Attorney General, United States Department of Justice; dated May 4, 2018; and a copy of the U.S.P.S. Priority Mail Receipt and Delivery Notice as Proof of Service was REMOVED and DELETED from the “OFFICIAL” Publics Domain of | CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:18-cv-04034-LLP: for a reason? | III. Whether the United States District Court and/or the (USA) United States Attorney “Office” knowingly, willfully and recklessly acted in bad faith and violated 1725. Protection Of Government Processes — Obstruction Of Pending Proceeding —18 U.S.C. 1505 Section 1505 with the intent to mislead the Public and fraudulently cover-up the wrongdoing to conceal the Merits of the | Case? | QUESTION(S) PRESSENTED On April 3, 2018; this valid (F.T.C.A.) Legal Malpractice Action was brought forward pursuant to 4-5.000 Tort Litigation of my Administrative Claims filed with the United States Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Complaints Investigations Division. Where the District Court’s deadline for the UNITED STATES Department of Justice, Executive Office for United States Attorney’s, General Counsel to answer the Summons and Complaint was June 8, 2018; Whereby, an Act of Congress, (F.T.C.A.) U.S.C. $ 2675(a): I. Whether the UNITED STATES did not dispute that a legal malpractice action is properly brought under the FTCA? II. Whether the UNITED STATES did not dispute that it had a duty to provide Loring with adequate legal representation in the Fair Housing Act case? | | | HI. Whether it was understood under the (F.T.C.A.) the United States Court | ORDER is FINAL JUDGMENT on the Merits of the Case? | IV. Whether the (USA) United States Attorney “Office” Assistant United States } Attorney’s while acting under the color of federal law, knowingly and willfully | violated 1-4.000 Standards Of Conduct, Conflicts of Interest and recklessly “claimed” Defendant, United States of America; and recklessly “claimed” Defendants, United States of America, United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for United States Attorney’s, General Counsel to “intervene” in this Administrative Proceeding with the intent to cover-up the wrongdoing | and conceal the (USA) Assistant United States Attorney's misconduct in their , handling of an earlier civil lawsuit filed under the Fair Housing Act? | V. Whether the United States District Court Judge while acting under the color | of federal law, whereby an Act of Congress, failed to be an Adjudicator to the | Rule of Law, then knowingly and willfully violated Code of Conduct for United } 2 } | States Judges Canon 1, Canon 2 and Canon 3 and recklessly Obstructed Justice with the intent to mislead and misrepresent the Material Facts of the case by making deceitful, ambiguous self-con