ROBERTA HILL <firstname.lastname@example.org> 11/12/2022 10:23 PM
Clerk was wrong to send back the petition for writ of certiorari, this is being sent in writing to prevent arguing
email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> • email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> • email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> Copy
Lin Wood <email@example.com> • Lin Wood <firstname.lastname@example.org>
PIO of U.S. Supreme Court,
Note: Please notify the Clerk about the mistake of sending my son's petition back which wasted $20 from my son on postage, and my son will call on Monday to discuss the issue about the rule not requiring the order to be a final order in the appendix. It doesn't actually say those words. This email is necessary as my son wasted $20 for mailing his petition and other pleadings to your office, just to have to resend them again when the reason for not filing my son's petition seems to be erroneous here. My son does not wish to waste more postage until the Clerk admits to wrongfully sending back his petition on an erroneous basis. My son is already upset and may start arguing over the phone. So this email is being sent to explain why the Clerk was wrong, and the rules as clear as day do not mention anything about the word "final order" but just orders. My son could send a paper letter but then by the time the Clerk may admit mistake, the diesel shortage will prevent my son from mailing back his petition to your Court. My son wishes this to be filed before the diesel shortage that illegitimate President Joe Biden had caused.
My son Brian David Hill does not believe there is a deficiency in the attempted filings of the petition for writ of certiorari and emergency application. My son rather I email you rather than him arguing with the Clerk over the phone for minutes and minutes, so it is in writing, and nothing can be manipulated or misconstrued. My son wasted $20 of postage from UPS and now his filings were returned and on an erroneous basis. My son asks for postage to be covered to resend for wrongfully returning his pleadings, and for his petitions to be accepted before the diesel shortage predicted on November 19, 2022, where it may be impossible to mail the Supreme Court.
My son feels that there is no error in his appendix. He rather me send an email, in writing, and that the Clerk be forwarded this email to explain that there was no deficiencies. The clerk is asking for a final order which does not exist. The only orders Brian is asking for relief from at issue are already in his appendix, and his petition for rehearing was only regarding those two orders. Brian is seeking no relief from anything else other than what was filed.
The only basis the Clerk is claiming for refusing to file such pleadings was based on: "The appendix to the petition does not contain the following documents required by Rule 14.l(i): The opinion of the United States district court must be appended (final order)."
That is not true that a "final order" is required by the rules, as the rules does not say the term "final order". Why would the clerk block appealing to SCOTUS from two dismissed interlocutory appeals from the U.S. Court of Appeals when even this Court had made rulings on interlocutory appeals? We checked the rules and it said nothing about requiring that it be a final order. Are you suggesting a rule that doesn't exist or specifying a criteria that does not say such in the rule as to why the petition and emergency application is being rejected from filing???
The rule says from your own rules of the court: "the opinions, orders, findings of fact, and conclu-sions of law, whether written or orally given and tran-scribed, entered in conjunction with the judgment sought to be reviewed".
It does not mention the term "final order". The appendix was complete. There is no other opinion or order other than what was appealed from and what was in the appendix. Brian is only seeking relief from two orders, and both were all that was. There was no "final order" as it was two interlocutory appeals, but involving federal judges being possibly blackmailed with child rape and murder, and my son was asking for a Special Master to review over the alleged blackmail tapes to determine if two federal judges involved in his case may or may not had raped and murdered a child on videotape to be blackmailed by that, as was alleged by Attorney L. Lin Wood from the state of Georgia.
You are asking for a final order other than the orders Brian is requesting review over which does not exist, and the rule the Clerk specified mentioned nothing about only final orders. Your Court has accepted decisions from the U.S. Court of Appeals in the past regarding interlocutory appeals concerning certain specific issues.
My son has submitted all orders at issue, and there are no orders not at issue here. If there was an order you assumed may have been at issue, it was not argued in the entire petition and was not mentioned in the petition. The only orders Brian is challenging before your Court are the ones in the appendix.
Can this issue be corrected as the only orders at issue in the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court are the two orders in the appendix and was referenced in the petition?
The basis for rejecting the petition does not appear to be correct. This court has entertained interlocutory appeal cases from the U.S. Courts of Appeals prior to my son's case.
What order was not included in the appendix? If you do not know of any than no other order exists or is necessary (if there is any order you feel needs to be included, if it exists) and my son's petition must be accepted and he wishes to mail them back to the Clerk for the erroneous decision to mail them back to my son.
Was that rule not being complied with? Does that rule specifically require only final orders of an entire case? What about Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949)? Does this not apply to my son's certiorari petition?
Please advise on whether my son should mail the petition, emergency application, and copies back to your Court? If this was an error or misunderstanding by the Clerk, can my son be reimbursed for the $20 postage for mailing the correct filings which were assumed to be not correct?
How exactly was the rule not being followed with the appendix when the rule does not specify the term "FINAL ORDER" but only mentions about orders and opinions. Is there something my son is missing and I am missing here regarding a rule that doesn't actually specify the certain words or terms to justify blocking my son's petition from being filed and asking for final orders which may not exist when those were dismissed interlocutory appeals?
on behalf of: Brian David Hill
310 Forest Street,
Martinsville, VA 24112