Whether the Supreme Court should intervene to reverse the district court's orders that denied discovery, depositions, hearings, and investigations into alleged mail fraud and cover-up of crimes by the defendants and the court

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1.In this pro se case Petitioner respectfully requests . the US Supreme Court to intervene in this case, which is the eighth petition to this Court. Petitioner, Dr. Yuri J. Stoyanov was at all times relevant to this action employed as a Scientist GM-13, ND-1310-IV in the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (NSWCCD) (the “Agency”), department 70, in Bethesda, MD. Petitioner worked in that capacity since 1987 until removed by fraud in March 2010. Prior to that since 1986 he worked as the Office of ; Naval Technology Postdoctoral Scientist at the same department. Since 2002 Petitioner and his brother Dr. Aleksandr Stoyanov filed disclosures with the chain of . naval command, with the US Special Counsel and : EEO discrimination complaints with the agency /CDNSWC EEO office, and then, since 2005 with the USS. District Court. 7 2.The instant case 09-cv-03479 was reactivated and assigned to District Court Judge Blake in 2018. Since 2019, the District Judge C. Blake denied motions for discovery, deposition of witnesses, court hearing, jury trial and the investigations of 2019, 2020 and 2021 mail fraud committed by the agency representatives defendants Kessmeier and Caron with defendants’ representative Marzullo that conspired and organized criminal schemes of mail fraud to dismiss Petitioner’s : lawsuits. Petitioner respectfully requests that this court intervene and reverse Judge Blake’s orders and organized fraud with defendants’ representative Marzullo and defendant Kessmeier’s continuous federal crimes of mail fraud, escalated violations of laws and the cover-up of crimes and criminals. Judge Blake’s conduct amounts to a deliberately planned and . i ; carefully executed criminal schemes and the cover-up . of crimes and criminals to defraud not only Petitioner but also the proper administration of judicial business. : : After the seventh petition 19-1179 for writ of certiorari ; was not considered by this Court, Judge Blake had become so emboldened to harm Petitioner, that she willfully and persistently escalated and committed : fraud on the court in 2020 and 2021 This case is the continuation of Petitioner’s prior i.e. seventh petition 19-1179 for writ of certiorari to this court. In the 19: 1179 petition Petitioner asked. this court to vacate : : Blake’s 4/16/19 Order granting defendants 3/26/19 ; . motion to consolidate five separate cases after defendants’ representatives with defendant Kessmeier committed January 2019 Mail Fraud and Wire Fraud : ; with certified mail containing summons and Plaintiffs . complaint for 15 defendants. Plaintiff discovered and : timely disclosed these federal crimes in the 1/18/19 motion to investigate fraud. To cover-up defendants’ . . federal crimes, Judge Blake organized criminal ; : schemes with defendants to dismiss lawsuits by fraud. In the 4/16/19 Order Blake denied 1/18/19 motion to investigate fraud and granted defendants’ motion to consolidate. Plaintiff opposed the consolidation and . filed motions, appeals and also the petition 19-1179 , with this court (see details disclosed in the petition 191179). 3.Soon after this court 2020 decision was announced, in July 2020 Marzullo committed Mail Fraud and perjury with defendants’ mail addressed to Petitioner, (see Petitioner’s/P’s Exhibits B and C in Appendices : 9A and 10A). Then in August 2020, Marzullo with Judge Blake and deputy court clerk committed Mail Fraud with court mail addressed to Petitioner, mail containing summonses with the court seal to be served : on defendants in five added lawsuits, was maliciously incomplete, was without summonses for the 16 most crucial defendants /witnesses so that Petitioner would not receive summonses and would not timely serve on 16 defendants, then by using fraudulent pretext “for Plaintiffs failure to serve with summons” the consolidated case to be dismissed by mail fraud. Plaintiff caught these criminals and timely served on™ all 40 defendants and in his motion di