Press release: Motion to reopen the case and recuse herself due to conflict of interest, was filed with Judge Hollander in MD

Posted on | July 19, 2014 | 17 Comments

Press release: Motion to reopen the case and recuse herself due to conflict of interest, was filed with Judge Hollander in MD

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

29839 Santa Margarita, ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688

ph. 949 -683-5411 fax 949-766-7603

orly.taitz@hushmail.com

IN THE US DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ                                                ) Civil Action 13-cv-1878

Plaintiff                                                                         )Hon. Ellen Lipton Hollander

v                                                                              ) Presiding

Carolyn Colvin,                                                       )

in her official capacity as Acting Director                )

of Social Security Administration                            )

MOTION FOR JUDGE HOLLANDER TO REOPEN THE CASE AND RECUSE HERSELF AS SOON AS POSSIBLE UNDER 28 USC §455(a), (b)(5)(iii) DUE TO DIRECT ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WHICH WAS NOT DISCLOSED BY JUDGE HOLLANDER.

MOTION FOR JUDGE HOLLANDER TO TRANSFER THE CASE TO ANOTHER DISTRICT JUDGE TO REVIEW THE CASE INCLUDING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WHICH PREVENTED JUDGE HOLLANDER TO REVIEW THIS CASE WITH IMPARTIALITY.

SECOND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION UNDER RILE 60 B

Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the prior filings in this case, including, but not limited to, Second Amended complaint, First Motion for Reconsideration, Notice of Treason, filed previously.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The case at hand was filed by Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ. Plaintiff, seeking SS-5, Social Security application for Connecticut Social Security number xxx-xx-4425, which was assigned to Harrison (Harry) J. Bounel (ECF20, Second Amended Complaint and exhibits). Taitz provided the court with the report from Merlin information systems, which showed that the number was issued to Harry Bounel, as well as results of the 1940 Census, which showed that Bounel was 50 years old in 1940, whereby he was born in and around 1890. (ECF 20, ECF 20-6). Taitz provided the court with November 16, 2012 letter from SSA, which stated that SSA refused to provide Bounel’s SS-5, application for the Social Security number under USC 552 FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) due to privacy concerns.  (Complaint, First Amended Complaint, Second amended Complaint (SAC)).   According to 120 year rule of SSA, Social Security Administration had no right to claim privacy exemption for an individual born over 120 years ago and it had an obligation to release requested SS-5. (ECF 20)

At the same time Barack Obama posted his tax returns and did not flatten the PDF file. (ECF 20-3) The tax returns showed that Obama is using CT Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 of Harry Bounel. (ECF 20-3).  E-Verify and SSNVS are official government systems, setup to identify illegal aliens and identify individuals who are using stolen and fabricated Social Security numbers. Both E-Verify and SSNVS, showed that Barack Obama, aka Barry Soebarkah, aka Barry Soetoro is using a Connecticut Social Security, which was never assigned to him. (ECF 20-20-4. ECF 20-5). Further, Obama admitted that he was not able to sign up on line for Affordable Care Act insurance, aka Obamacare,  as on line exchange was not able to verify Obama’s identity based on the paperwork provided.

Plaintiff, Taitz, filed current action seeking SS-5, original paper  application for Connecticut Social Security number  xxx-xx-4425 which was assigned to Harry Bounel and which was later fraudulently assumed by Obama. Taitz provided a printout from SSA 120 year rule, which stated that SSA is obligated to release the SSN application for extremely aged individuals born over 120 years ago. Taitz argued that SSA fraudulently withheld this information.

SSA responded claiming that they cannot find the application in the computerized database. Taitz argued that November 2012 later stating that the record cannot be released due to privacy, indicates that the record exists and defendant commissioner of Social Security Carolyn Colvin and her Senior FOIA officer Dawn Wiggins are   either lying and defrauding the court and the whole nation by claiming that there is no record in the computerized system or the computerized record was recently falsified or spoliated. Further, Taitz demanded release of the original aforementioned paper record, SS-5 application for Social Security    xxx-xx-4425 and argued that computer record can easily be changed or deleted, however original paper record cannot be easily changed, as paper and ink tests of the record and other similar records created at the same time, can identify forgery.

Judge Hollander refused to order production of the original paper record, even though the hardship for SSA would be minimal in producing one paper record, while the hardship for Taitz and the rest of the nation in living under the occupation and usurpation of the U.S. Presidency by a foreign criminal with bogus IDs, is immense.

Recently Taitz read a decision by another Federal Judge, Judge Henry Wingate  in True the Vote v Hosemann 14-cv-00532 USDC Southern District of MS, where Judge Wingate recused himself in a case with a potential conflict of interest. (Exhibit 1 Order to Recuse himself by Judge Wingate in True the Vote v Hosemann). The case was brought by a public advocacy group, “True the vote”, which sued Senator Cochran and Secretary of State of MS, alleging elections fraud. Judge Wingate recused himself, as Senator Cochran recommended him to President Reagan for appointment for federal judgeship.

Plaintiff in this case, Taitz, decided to check who appointed Judge Hollander to the Federal bench and found out that Judge Ellen Hollander was appointed to the bench by Barack Obama, so if Judge Hollander were to order the release of the Social Security number in question and it would confirm that Obama is indeed committing fraud and asserting his identity based on a stolen CT Social Security number of Harry Bounel, Obama’s election would be rendered invalid, null and void and his appointment of Judge Hollander would be rendered null and void, as such Judge Hollander had not a potential, but an ACTUAL serious conflict of interest and had a duty to advise Taitz of this conflict of interest and had a duty to recuse herself from presiding over this case. Judge Hollander failed to disclose the conflict of interest and failed to recuse herself and covered up Obama’s use of a stolen Social Security number and covered up the usurpation of the U.S. presidency by refusing to order production of the original paper application for SSN of Harry Bounel, while knowing that it was fraudulently later assumed by Obama.

After Defendant, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Carolyn Colvin,  de facto committed treason and covered up Obama’s identity theft, fraud, Social Security fraud, Obama decided to repay her and reward her by appointing her to become the actual commissioner of Social Security and her nomination   is about to be confirmed by the Congress, which is an exigent circumstance justifying an expedited handling of this motion to recuse.

Further, lately Obama released the most dangerous Muslim terrorists from GITMO and is about to release more terrorists. This is a second fact justifying expedient reopening of the case and recusal of Judge Hollander, as the evidence of the fact shows that a foreign national, Barry Soebarkah, aka Soetoro, aka Obama, a Sunni Muslim citizen of Indonesia is aiding and abetting fellow Sunni Muslim terrorists by releasing them from GITMO and shipping them to friendly Sunni Muslim Qatar.(  ECF 40 MOTION to Expedite Motion for Reconsideration, MOTION to Forward to the Federal Grand Jury, Notice of Treason , ECF 20-10 ECF 20-19.)

Additionally,    Obama has signed DACA, a 2012 and 2014 memorandum   staying deportation of minor illegals, which became a magnet for a flood, an invasion of hundreds of thousands of illegals. Obama is conducting and orchestrating assault on the US borders and the U.S. sovereignty by refusing to deport hundreds of thousands of illegals and he is busing them all over the nation and dropping them at bus stations and on the shoulders of overburdened communities. Additionally, based on reports by the U.S. Border Patrol and medical professionals, these illegals carry multiple infectious diseases and there are recorded outbreaks of Swine Flu, Tiberculosis, Measles, Bacterial Pneumonia, Scabies, Lice and others. Moreover, multiple gang members and suspected terrorists are crossing the US-Mexican border and the Obama regime is allowing them to travel all over this nation using commercial air carriers without any IDs. Obama is exposing this nation to the next 9/11 which makes production of the original IDs which he is fraudulently, using a necessity and an emergency. (Exhibit 2 Taitz v Jeh Johnson at al 14-cv-00119 USDC Southern District of TX).

ARGUMENT

JUDGE HOLLANDER WAS OBLIGATED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PLAINTIFF THE ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST

JUDGE HOLLANDER IS OBLIGATED TO REOPEN THE CASE, RECUSE HERSELF AND HAVE ANOTHER DISTRICT JUDGE, WHO IS NOT AN OBAMA APPOINTEE AND DOES NOT HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, REVIEW THE WHOLE CASE.

28 U.S. Code § 455 – Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:

(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;

(2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;

(3) Where he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy;

(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

(i) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;

(ii) Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;

(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(iv) Is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

As stated previously, Plaintiff Taitz sought an order from Judge Hollander  to release a paper original application for Social Security number xxx-xx-4425, which, according to Merlin information systems was issued to Harry Bounel, born in 1890, but later, according to Obama’s own tax returns, was fraudulently used by Obama and according to SSNVS and E-Verify was never assigned to Obama. (ECF 20 Exhibits 3-7). At all times, Judge Hollander knew that if she were to order the release of the aforementioned application, it would expose Obama as a fraud and a criminal, who is using a stolen Connecticut  Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 of Harry Bounel, it would render his presidency and election null and void. Not only Obama’s election would be considered null and void, but Obama’s subsequent appointment of Judge Hollander, herself, to the Federal bench would be considered null and void. (Shell Oil Co. v. U.S.  United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.March 07, 2012672 F.3d 12832012 WL 751951

Judge’s failure to recuse herself on ground of financial interest was not harmless error. …Recusal statute requires judge’srecusal whenever financial conflicts of interest exist, regardless of whether those conflicts affect the outcome of the case.  28 U.S.C.A. § 455(b)(4) ).

Supreme Court ruled: A judge’s failure to recuse himself from a case in which one of the parties donated a substantial amount of money to his political campaign violates the due process clause. Caperton v. A.T. Massey coal co. Duquesne law review fall, 2010 48 duq. L. Rev. 929.

The United States Supreme court held that a judge’s failure to recuse himself from a case in which an interested party had donated a substantial amount of money to the judge’s political campaign violated the due process clause because of the innate probability of bias. Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co Supreme Court of the United States June 08, 2009 556 U.S. 868 129 S.Ct. 2252.

In case at hand, the conflict of interest is even more substantial than one in Capeton v AT Masey Coal inc Supreme Court of the United States June 08, 2009 556 U.S. 868 129 S.Ct. 2252. Here, Obama did more than donate for a campaign of a judge, he put Judge Hollander on the bench and her appointment might be null and void if indeed she were to order production of the aforementioned application for Social Security and it shows that Obama asserted his identity by fraud, with a stolen Social Security number and he was never legally eligible for Presidency and as such was never eligible to appoint Judge Hollander on the bench. Judge Hollander would lose her position, her judgeship and her lifetime high salary and  benefits.

…the circuit court recognized only three situations where due process required recusal: 1) when the judge has a pecuniary interest in the outcome of the case; 2) when the judge has been a target of personal abuse or criticism; 3) and when the judge also acts as investigator….

As such Judge Hollander had a clear conflict of interest, further, she had a pecuniary interest, her position of a federal judge, threatened by a decision to release CT SSN xxx-xx-4425, which was stolen by Barack Obama,  and she was obligated to disclose this actual conflict of interest to the plaintiff and she had a duty and still has a duty to reopen the case, recuse herself, transfer the case to another judge and have another judge review the motion for reconsideration at hand and the whole case. Failure to do so represents judicial misconduct and, possibly, treason against the United States of America, as Judge Hollander is aiding defendant,  acting Commissioner of Social Security Carolyn Colvin, in the cover up of the most egregious case of identity theft, identity fraud, Social security fraud and treason in usurpation of the US Presidency with a stolen Social Security number as a proof of identification. She is aiding and abetting a citizen of Indonesia, Barry Soebarkah, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Obama’s use of stolen and fabricated IDs.

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GRANTED UNDER USC 60 (B) (6) AND USC60(B)(2) DUE TO FAILURE BY THE PRESIDING JUDGE TO DISCLOSE CONFLICT OF INTEREST

RULE 60. RELIEF FROM A JUDGMENT OR ORDER

(a) Corrections Based on Clerical Mistakes; Oversights and Omissions. The court may correct a clerical mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or omission whenever one is found in a judgment, order, or other part of the record. The court may do so on motion or on its own, with or without notice. But after an appeal has been docketed in the appellate court and while it is pending, such a mistake may be corrected only with the appellate court’s leave.

(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:

(1) Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;

(2) Newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59 (b);

(3) Fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;

(4) The judgment is void;

(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or

(6) Any other reason that justifies relief.

As stated previously, Judge Hollander had an obligation to disclose to the plaintiff the conflict of interest and had an obligation to recuse herself. She did not do so. Refusal by the presiding judge to recuse herself due to conflict of interest satisfies Rule 60 (b)(6) and interest of justice would require the case to be reconsidered by another judge.

Further, revelation of a conflict of interest by a judge represents a new evidence, which satisfies Rule 60(b)(2).

APPOINTEMENT OF DEFENDANT, CAROLYN COLVIN TO THE POSITION OF THE PERMANENT, CONFIRMED COMMISSIONER OF SSA, MAKES RECONSIDERATION A NECESSITY

As stated, defendant in this case, acting (temporary, not confirmed) commissioner of Social Security Carolyn Colvin, covered up the original application to CT Social Security number of Harry Bounel, which Barack Obama is currently using. In June, Barack Obama decided to repay Ms. Colvin by appointing her to become a permanent Commissioner of Social Security https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/06/20/president-obama-announces-his-intent-nominate-carolyn-watts-colvin-commi.

This recent appointment shows that there was a conflict of interest, whereby Carolyn Colvin had a particular pecuniary interest in defrauding the court and claiming that she could not find requested record or interest in spoliation of record. As stated previously, there is a pattern in Obama administration, where a number of records were destroyed. Specifically, when requested, incriminating records and e-mails of Los Lerner and other officials within Obama administration disappeared. There is a modus operandi of fraud, obstruction of justice and falsification and spoliation of evidence.   As such, a mere claim of lack of records is not sufficient and there has to be reconsideration and an order to produce the paper record.

Currently there is an invasion of Illegal aliens into this country. (See attached Exhibit 1 Motion for stay and exhibits Taitz v Jeh Johnson et al 14-cv-00119 USDC Southern District of TX).  If Colvin covered up use of a stolen Social Security number of a person who is occupying the position of the U.S. presidency, she is likely to cover up fraudulent use of hundreds of thousands of stolen and fabricated Social Security numbers by hundreds of thousands of illegals. As Colvin may be confirmed any day now, there is an urgency in reconsideration of the matter and granting this Second Motion for Reconsideration.

Current crisis of invasion of nearly 300,000 of illegal aliens and Obama administration’s actions of transporting them all over the nation without any IDs, transporting of illegals carrying infectious diseases, gang members and suspected terrorists, demands immediate reconsideration of the case, to see if Obama, himself, is an illegal using a stolen SSN of Harry Bounel.

Attached Exhibit 2, Application for Stay Taitz v Jeh Johnson et al  14-cv-0119 Judge Hanen USDC Southern District of TX, provides reports of actions by Barack Obama in refusing to deport minor illegals and transporting them from Texas border all over the nation. Not only Obama is transporting illegal aliens, he is transporting multiple infectious diseases and crime. A number of illegal aliens are shown to be members of crime syndicates and violent gangs with a history of torture, murder, kidnapping and other crimes. Illegals are allowed to travel without any identification papers.

This nation is now facing a crisis and latest polls show that this is the number one issue for the U.S. citizens. At issue is: who is the person who releases violent criminals from GITMO, who is the person releasing multiple illegal aliens into communities?

Obama’s identity and his use of a stolen Connecticut Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 of Harry Bounel is of paramount importance. If this case is indeed reconsidered by a different judge, who was not  appointed by Obama and who does not have a personal pecuniary interest in covering up Obama’s use of a stolen SSN, it is certain to show that CT SSN xxx-xx-4425, issued to Bounel, was indeed fraudulently used by Obama, then immediate action can be taken by both judiciary, legislature and law enforcement in not only expeditiously removing Obama from office and prosecuting him, proper actions can be taken by all of aforementioned agencies and branches of the government in nullifying his executive orders, as unlawful and issued by an individual, who was never eligible to issue such orders. Such expedient actions   will protect the public and prevent both public health crisis, as well as national security crisis.

CONCLUSION

Due to all of the above Judge Hollander should:

1. Reopen the case at hand.
2. Recuse herself and transfer the case to another judge, who was not appointed by Barack Obama and who does not have a conflict of interest, for reconsideration.
3.  The case at hand in its’ entirety should be reconsidered by another judge in an expedient manner.

Respectfully,

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

07.18.2014

Comments

• Search for:
• Tweet

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — Indiana Trial of Obama, 2nd Copy

• Evidence on Barack Obama

  Obama File with Exhibits
  Affidavit of Paul Irey
  Obama file Exhibits 1 - 7
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 1
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 2
  Obama file Exhibits 9-13
  Obama file Exhibits 14-21
  Request for Docs under FOIA and Emergency Motion for Reconsideration
  Exhibits sent to Inspector Generals and Congress

• RSS Feed: Subscribe for Free RSS Feed

  

• ---

  PETITION TO CONGRESS:
  Ban importation of 200,000 Syrian migrants into the US

  

  ---

• Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day

  

• URGENT! PLEASE SIGN PETITION TO CONGRESS

• OrlyTaitzEsq.com

  • Untitled

• TAITZ REPORT

  Subscribe today to stay in touch with our progress. Send this channel out to your email lists. Thank you for your support. CHANNEL (Google Plus) SUBSCRIBE TO YOUTUBE
• 

• Official Facebook

  
  

• Recent Posts

  • (no title)

• IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!

  Historic DVD Now Available! DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling. --------- To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.

• Advertisement / Sponsors

  
  29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
  Ste 100
  Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
  orly.taitz @gmail. com
  (949) 766-7687
  
  
  --------------------------------------
  
  Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
  --------------------------------------
  
  

  Bumper Sticker
  $9.99 thru PayPal

  --------------------------------------
  
  
  --------------------------------------

  Orly Taitz Photo Collections

  
  

• November 2024

  M	T	W	T	F	S	S
  				1	2	3
  4	5	6	7	8	9	10
  11	12	13	14	15	16	17
  18	19	20	21	22	23	24
  25	26	27	28	29	30

• Pages

  • #409755 (no title)
  • …Defendant Obama defaulted in Grinols et al v Obama et al
  • …Grinols Subpoenas
  • ..Grinols Order, Summons, TRO, Complaint
  • .Affidavit of Mike Zullo
  • 1. Judd v Obama
  • 2. Farrar v Obama
  • 3. Taitz v Sebelius
  • 4. Taitz v Indiana, IN Judge Orders Trial
  • 5. Taitz v Astrue
  • 6. Mississippi Filed Complaint Update
  • 7. Taitz Walters v Sec of State Kansas
  • Videos
  • Video: Orly before NH Election Committee