more on Keys at al v Obama et al
Posted on | June 13, 2009 | 3 Comments
|
Submitted on 2009/06/12 at 11:38pm
Hungry, I didn’t see the clerks comment, but he is right in saying 4E isn’t the same as 4I . The point is 4I DOES NOT apply in this case. 4I calls for : (2)Agency; Corporation; Officer or Employee Sued in an Official Capacity. (3) Officer or Employee Sued Individually Now under (3): To serve a United States officer or employee sued in an individual capacity for an act or omission occurring in connection with duties performed on the United States’ behalf He is not being sued for an ACT in connection with DUTIES PERFORMED on the United States ‘behalf nor is he being sued in an official capacity as in (2) He is being sued as an individual itself. Therefore, only Rule 4e applies. Alan Keyes, PhD., Wiley S. Drake, and Markham Robinson, Plaintiffs v. Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barack H. Obama, II a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro; Condoleeza Rice, in her capacity as Secretary of State; Robert Mueller, in his capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and Michael W. Hager, in his capacity as Acting Director, Office of Personnel Management; and DOES 1-100 Notice he is NOT being sued in his official capacity. The lawsuit is based on the executive order issued by President George w. Bush on the 01.16.09. The executive order provides for Reciprocity and Reinvestigation of Individuals in positions of public trust. THEREFORE, the Clerk once again is FULL OF IT. This clerk should actually READ the lawsuit he is making judgements on. |
Comments
3 Responses to “more on Keys at al v Obama et al”





June 13th, 2009 @ 6:14 pm
Is this a favorable ruling of some kind, or is the clerk trying to dismiss the case?
June 13th, 2009 @ 9:27 pm
Orly,
Why don’t you post the judges orders placed on the docket 6-12-09?
June 14th, 2009 @ 12:24 am
Sue ,look at the 10 page motion I just posted+ I do have a family and a business. Believe me, I have a few more things to ado aside from posting on the blog.