No. 23-7282

Jeff Baoliang Zhang v. County of Los Angeles, California, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-04-19
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: access-to-courts civil-rights constitutional-violations deprivation-of-rights discrimination due-process equal-protection federal-courts judicial-misconduct
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity
Latest Conference: 2024-06-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether federal courts can take serious civil rights violations as frivolous

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (A) willfully refused to help a seriously wounded man at county jail, but the US District Court for the Central District of California and the Nineth Circuit all took such violations as frivolous. Why do these federal court judges behave so inhumanly as to take horrible human rights violations as nothing? (B) did not allow Petitioner to have a different attorney for the criminal case and blocked all my communication at county jail throughout my detention time. These federal courts also took such violations as frivolous. What kind of bizarre laws do they practice at the federal courts? (C) Why can the Central District Court of California and the Nineth Circuit openly violate the Bill of Rights in the US constitution and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to use double standards in ruling a case based on race, national origin, political belief, social-economic status, and age? Who allowed them so inhumanly to deal with the less advantaged class?

Docket Entries

2024-06-24
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
2024-06-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2024.
2024-05-24
Reply of petitioner Jeff Baoliang Zhang filed.
2024-05-16
Brief of respondent County of Los Angeles, California in opposition filed.
2024-04-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 20, 2024)

Attorneys

County of Los Angeles
Melinda CantrallHurrell Cantrall LLP, Respondent
Melinda CantrallHurrell Cantrall LLP, Respondent
Jeff Baoliang Zhang
Jeff Baoliang Zhang — Petitioner
Jeff Baoliang Zhang — Petitioner