No. 23-6059

Michelle A. Ferrell v. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2023-11-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: administrative-law civil-rights due-process employment-discrimination federal-agency federal-agency-bias judicial-review pro-se pro-se-litigation retaliation standing whistleblower-protection
Key Terms:
Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2024-03-01 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Why did the Federal Circuit Court ignore Petitioner's MSPB case regarding her IRA

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Why did the Federal Circuit Court ignore Petitioner's MSPB case regarding her IRA. Instead MSBP case No. DA-1221-21-0228-W-1 was decided by AJ Mehan on January 24, 2022. 1. Why did FC not allow Petitioners rehearing/rehearing en banc; due to the fact that the Defendar have been discriminating against employees for years and this case affects all employees. 2. Why didn't the FC Court allow Petitioner, Ferrell, to have MSPB as a Defendant. 3. Why was MSPB AJ allowed to suspend, cancel, and change documents which was illegal; yet FC Court ignored the facts. 4. Why did FC disregard most of Petitioner's proof the same as the MSPB AJ ignored evidence? 5. | proved Retaliation in my Briefs; June 27, 2022, October & November 2022, yet it was ignored IAW 5 USC. 1221 (e) Chavez v Dept of Veterans Affairs, 120 M.S.P.R. 285 27 (2013) 6. Why didn't FC follow their own rules and give Ferrell a fair review of her case instead of siding with the Federal Agency? 7. Every Agency who reviewed Ferrell's case sided with HUD regardless if HUD was lying; Why didn't FC review Ferrell's briefs etc., IAW Rules of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit? 8. Why do MSPB, EEOC, District Court of Columbia and the US. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit all favor the Federal Agencies? Although a person is pro-se, they should be given a chance to prove themself. 9. Why won't the above Agencies appoint pro-se Petitioner with a Lawyer? 10. Can the Supreme Court review Petitioner's 2022-1487 documents? Especially see the Affidavit of Ferrell's Supervisor, Kimone Paley, Document 71-2 April 11, 2023. \

Docket Entries

2024-09-12
Case considered closed.
2024-03-12
Application (23A733) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until April 1, 2024.
2024-03-04
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2024-02-29
Application (23A733) for a further extension of time within which to comply with the order of January 8, 2024, submitted to The Chief Justice.
2024-02-14
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2024.
2024-02-08
Application (23A733) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until February 29, 2024.
2024-01-29
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2024-01-29
Application (23A733) for an extension of time within which to comply with the order of January 8, 2024, submitted to The Chief Justice.
2024-01-08
The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Petitioner is allowed until January 29, 2024, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
2023-12-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
2023-12-04
Waiver of right of respondent HUD to respond filed.
2023-08-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 20, 2023)

Attorneys

HUD
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Michelle A. Ferrell
Michelle A. Ferrell — Petitioner
Michelle A. Ferrell — Petitioner