Whether conspiring against and failing to defend a copyright holder in his own Federal Jurisdiction is a violation of US Code Title 17 (Copyrights), a violation of US Code Title 15 (Monopolies Restricting Trade), and violates legal precedence of 'Rossi_V. Motion Picture Association Of America Inc., 391 F.3d_1000, 1007 (9th Cir. 2004)?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The question is “Whether conspiring against and failing to defend a copyright holder in his own Federal Jurisdiction is a violation of US Code Title 17 (Copyrights), a violation of US Code Title 15 (Monopolies Restricting Trade), and violates legal precedence of ‘Rossi_V. Motion Picture Association Of America Inc., 391 F.3d_1000, 1007 (9th Cir. 2004)? Or whether the US Supreme Court wants additional . criminal charges to the conspirators like perjury (US Code Title 18, § 1621), tampering with evidence (18 U.S. Code § ; 1519), fraud (18 U.S. Code § 1341) and other criminal charges?”. The choices presented are between politely forcing the Federal Judges to do their “Umpire” jobs, or clean their own Judicial System by jailing conspirators and retiring Fallen Judges. Below are the questions that the 5th Circuit Judges were supposed to be answer: “Why do the Conspirators just buy the Pro Se Party’s US copyrights via royalty agreement and depublished or monetize at will?”; ; ii “Why are our TXSD Federal Judges failing to protect the resident copyright holders who entitled to any Motion for Summary Judgment (FRCP 56)? “Why are our TXSD Federal Judges choosing to violate docket sequences, violate chronology, and legal precedence?”; “Why are our TXSD Federal Judges pretending that the Appellee(s) do not operate in the TXSD Jurisdiction?”; “Why are our TXSD Federal Judges allowing an Unsigned Magistrate (No Consent Form) to openly violate 28 U.S.C. § 636(0)?) “Why are our TXSD Federal Judges choosing late incomplete motions without proposed orders that violate FRCP 12 (Time to Serve a Responsive Pleading.’(A)(i)’s 21-day deadline) and FRCP 15 (1st Amended Complaint as ‘Matter of Course’)?”; “Are the TXSD Federal Judges determining venue choices for total strangers without any legal contracts without any Change of Venue?”; “Are the TXSD Federal Judges part of the unnecessary conspiracy to restrict trade and stalled the copyright holder’s US Code 17 rights?”. | li LIST OF PROCEEDINGS US Court Of Appeals For The Fifth Circuit 22-20084 , Alejandro Evaristo Perez, Pro Se Appellant. The Walt Disney Company, Appellee Date of Final Opinion: April 26 2023 a Texas Southern District (TXSD) Federal Court 4:21-cv-00765 ; Alejandro Evaristo Perez, Pro Se Plaintiff v. “Disney Corporation, The Walt Disney Company, et la”, Defendant Date of Final Opinion: February 09, 2022 a a California Central District (CACD) Federal Court 2:21-ev-03490-J FW-E Alejandro Evaristo Perez, Pro Se Plaintiff v. The Walt Disney Company, Defendant Date of Final Opinion: July 01, 2021 |