No. 21-6365

Anthony A. Patel v. Patricia Miller, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-11-22
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights congress-executive congressional-oversight due-process executive-branch judicial-authority judicial-discretion separation-of-powers standing vexatious-litigants vexatious-litigation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity
Latest Conference: 2022-01-21
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does a judge have the authority to deem the interests of Congress and the Executive Branch to be vexatious?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Does a judge have the authority to deem the interests | of Congress and the Executive Branch to be vexatious? | 2. How severely ill are judges in America to consider | support for Congress and the Executive to a medical disorder? | 3. What should be the penalty and appropriate level of punishment for a judge treating mental intelligence as illness? | 4, How many United Nations inspector(s) should be | installed to supervise the work of each judicial officer in America? 5. Do men in the U.S. permanently lack the ability to keep up with men outside of America due to same-sex marriage? | 6. How can any American ever trust a judge who is/was | opposed to Obergefell v. Hodges (such as the Chief Justice)? 7. What remedies do Congress and the Executive possess against judges after impeachment and disbarment? 8. Why has every federal judge in America still not | resigned after The Wall Street Journal published a recent cover | story that more than 130 judges violated their oaths of office? 9. How else should vexatious litigants, known as | Congress and Executive, discipline members of the Judiciary? | 10. Why was/is President Biden mentally ill for running for Congress 50 years ago rather than working as a lawyer/judge? | 11. What other penalties exist for judges who fail to | comply with the United Nations starting September 12, 2001? 12. How soon can every judge in America tender his or her resignation to the United States Congress and the Executive Branch for still wasting people’s time and not following the law? . 2 Petition for Writ Certiorari (Mandate from Congress)

Docket Entries

2022-01-24
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/21/2022.
2021-12-07
Waiver of right of respondents The Regents of the University of California, Gregory Hendey, Patricia Miller, Johanna Klohn, Atilla Uner, et al. to respond filed.
2021-12-01
Waiver of right of respondents Buter Buzard Fishbein & Royce LLP to respond filed.
2021-11-29
Waiver of right of respondent Lukas Alexanian, M.D. to respond filed.
2021-11-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 22, 2021)

Attorneys

Anthony A. Patel
Anthony A. Patel — Petitioner
Anthony A. Patel — Petitioner
Buter Buzard Fishbein & Royce LLP
Mark SchaefferNemecek & Cole, Respondent
Mark SchaefferNemecek & Cole, Respondent
Lukas Alexanian, M.D.
Kenneth R PedrozaCole Pedroza LLP, Respondent
Kenneth R PedrozaCole Pedroza LLP, Respondent
The Regents of the University of California, Gregory Hendey, Patricia Miller, Johanna Klohn, Atilla Uner, et al.
Mary-Christine SungailaBuchalter. A Professional Corporation, Respondent
Mary-Christine SungailaBuchalter. A Professional Corporation, Respondent