Evidence of Cheating by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Post 14/23

Below is a copy of a motion for reconsideration I filed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 23, 2016 that is proof of cheating by the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals and the US District Court during the litigation of two lawsuits I filed against the City of San Jose. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Frederick Bates                                                                                                9th Cir Case Nos. 16-16094

Appellant, In Pro Per

                                                                       

Originating Court Case No. 5:15-cv-05729 NC

                        vs.

City of San Jose, et al

Appellees.

APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

            Appellant (Bates) moves this court to reconsider its decision to grant Appellees’ motion for summary affirmance of the district court judgment. Bates argues that this court’s decision is inconsistent with the precedent of this court that is relied upon in granting Appellees’ motion, United States v. Hooten, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9^th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). This court’s opinion in Hooten states that a motion to affirm a final judgment should be filed only where “it is manifest that the questions on which the decision of the cause depends are so insubstantial as not to need further argument.” The opinion goes on to state that motions to affirm should be confined to appeals obviously controlled by precedent and cases in which the insubstantiality is manifest from the face of appellant’s brief.

            In his opening brief and supplemental brief, Bates states the issues he is raising on appeal; 1) the district court erred by denying Bates due process and equal protection claims; and 2) Bates was not allowed to amend his complaint. As is required by the Hooten standard, this appeal is not obviously controlled by precedent. The district court relied on cases cited by Appellees, Carlson v. Cty. Of Los Angeles, 2015 WL 365994, at * 11 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2015) (internal citations omitted) and Lacy v. Cty. Of San Diego, 2012 WL 4111507, at *7 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2012) in granting Appellees’ motion to dismiss under FRCP Rule 12(b)(6). These are district court cases that are unpublished. They do not set precedent for courts in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

            Even if Carlson and Lacy were Ninth Circuit precedent, they benefit Bates and not Appellees. As Bates argued in his opening brief, the Carlson and Lacy cases establish unequivocally that the individual defendants (San Jose Mayor and Councilmembers) have a legal duty to investigate Bates’ complaints against City Attorney Richard Doyle because they are his direct supervisor and they control City policy. Additionally, in both cases, the plaintiffs were allowed to amend their complaints liberally. It defies logic to say that the issues Bates raise are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. Furthermore, this court in Hooten held that it does not ordinarily entertain a motion to affirm where an extensive review of the record of the district court proceeding is required. The court stated that it had denied a number of motions based on such considerations. The order of this court clearly indicates that the court completed an extensive review of the record because it cannot be argued credibly that insubstantiality of Bates’ appeal is manifest from the face of his opening brief.

            Therefore, the standard for summary affirmance as set by Hooten is not met because Bates’ appeal is not obviously controlled by precedent, and the insubstantiality is not manifest from the face of Bates’ brief. The order of this court granting Appellees’ motion for summary affirmance is clearly erroneous and is an abuse of discretion.

            Bates rejects the order of this court outright. The order is a farce just as the other dispositive rulings related to Bates’ two lawsuits. Bates again reminds the court of its Mission Statement:

“The mission of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is to provide an impartial forum for the just and prompt resolution of cases through the uniform and coherent application of the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America.”

The court should also take notice of a statement made by U.S. Representative Adam Schiff during the impeachment proceeding of former U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous: “Litigants have the right to expect a judge hearing their case will be fair and impartial and avoid even the appearance of impropriety.”

How is it fair and impartial when this court affirms the district court judgment granting Appellees motion to dismiss based on cases cited as precedent that actually prove Bates’ claims and disprove Appellees’ claims? At the very least, this has the appearance of impropriety. This does not even look like justice. This looks like cheating; because it is cheating.

It is now, without question, that this court and the district court have conspired to obstruct justice by protecting the defendants-appellees in Bates’ two lawsuits against the City of San Jose by making rulings that favor the defendants-appellees that are irrational and tainted by fraud. It is clear that the decisions of this court and the district court are meant to bully Bates into giving up his pursuit of justice. Bates will not be bullied or intimidated by this court, the district court or any other court relative to his two cases because the law, the facts and evidence is on his side. The substantial fraud that has been committed by Appellees and the courts during the litigation of Bates’ lawsuits has defiled the temple of justice. Bates promises he will address this misconduct in a different forum.

CONCLUSION

Bates requests that the court rescinds its order granting Appellees’ motion for summary affirmance and allow a full hearing on his appeal or enter an order of summary reversal.

Dated: December 23, 2016                                                      __________________

                                                                                                Frederick Bates           

                                   

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals - No Honor and No Integrity

Post 13/23 - January 9, 2017  

On October 31, 2016, I made a post targeting former US District Judge Ronald M. Whyte. Judge Whyte is at the center of this cheating scandal I am exposing that involves Judge Whyte and the San Jose City Attorney's Office. I referred to Judge Whyte's ruling in my case as conjuring up memories of Jim Crow. Today, I will take aim at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for their role in this scandal. With this post, I am also keeping a promise I made to the Ninth Circuit that I would make a strong public protest because of their unlawful rulings. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is as equally corrupt as Judge Whyte and operates on the same level as courts in many totalitarian states (nations) that our government is quick to criticize. I believe that most federal courts in the South during Jim Crow treated blacks better than the Ninth Circuit treats many of the litigants that have the misfortune of having their appeals decided by the court. It is clear that their role is to cover up misconduct by the federal district courts in the Ninth Circuit. Just as it says in the title, many of the judges in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have no integrity and no honor.

As I noted in my post about Judge Whyte, he and attorneys for the City of San Jose engaged in very serious misconduct during the litigation of my first lawsuit against the City that amounts to a criminal conspiracy and obstruction of justice (I will address a second lawsuit I filed against the City later in this post). It appears that Judge Whyte was paid off by the City. Judge Whyte should have been impeached for the crimes he committed just as disgraced former federal district judge Thomas Porteous. Yet, the Ninth Circuit affirmed all of the crooked decisions by Judge Whyte when I appealed them. During my appeal of Judge Whyte's order granting the City's fabricated motion for summary judgment, the panel hearing my appeal was openly hostile towards my case despite the Ninth Circuit's mission statement stating the following: "The mission of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is to provide an impartial forum for the just and prompt resolution of cases through the uniform and coherent application of the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America."

How is it being impartial when a judge (presumably Judge William Fletcher) on the panel asks why is he making this a federal case? He then goes on to ask why I didn't just drop my case after I had filed a small claims action against the City. If Judge Fletcher had a record from my small claims case as is required by preclusion law and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' precedent, he would have known the answer to that question. He would have known that there was no litigation in my small claims case because the Small Claims Court Commissioner ruled that he had no authority to hear my case. But Judge Fletcher and the other judges on the panel, Judge John Noonan and Judge Kevin Duffy, did not care about laws relative to my case. The comments by Judge Fletcher are indisputable evidence that these judges were predisposed to rule against me; and they did. They were only interested in protecting the crooked Judge Whyte.

The same thing happened with my appeal of Judge Whyte's order denying my Rule 60 motion for relief from judgment. As I noted in my post about Judge Whyte on October 31, 2016, he staged a phony hearing on my motion after court officials misrepresented my motion in court dockets as pertaining to court costs. There were forbidden ex parte (secret) communications between court officials and the attorney for the City. Judge Whyte entered two conflicting judgments on my motion in order to justify denying it. Folks, this is true. You can't make this stuff up. Yet again, a panel of judges from the Ninth Circuit affirmed the crooked ruling of Judge Whyte. The judges on this panel were William Canby, Carlos T. Bea and Mary H. Murguia.

The latest disgraceful act by the Ninth Circuit is the summary affirmance of Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins' ruling dismissing my second lawsuit filed in US District Court against the City of San Jose, Mayor Sam Liccardo and the City Council. What is so despicable about the ruling of Judge Cousins is that he relied on cases cited as precedent by the City in dismissing my case that actually prove my claims and disproves the defenses of Mayor Liccardo and the City Council. This is the absolute truth. Yet, the Ninth Circuit affirmed Judge Cousins' order. The panel of judges that are alleged to have made this ruling are Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas, Circuit Judges Edward Leavy and Barry G. Silverman. However, it is apparent that the order was written by some motion's attorney with the initials "KML." 

Folks, our great democracy is being threatened by public corruption from many of our judges, as is evident in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the US District Court-San Jose Division. Many of these judges engage in outright cheating. This unabashed cheating "stains the nations' honor" to borrow words from Senator John McCain in referring to the VA waiting list scandal. Even though public corruption in our courts appears to be widespread, it has gotten very little attention form the media and other government officials. What a shame. Because a true test of democracy is how disputes are settled between the government and its citizens in the courts. If the playing field is not level for citizens, you do not have democracy; you have totalitarianism. There is no public corruption worse than that of federal judges because of their positions of trust and honor, and because of their lifetime appointments with little or no oversight. It is incumbent upon ordinary citizens like you and me to stand up against these crooks or we will lose our basic freedoms.

More Hypocrisy by San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo

Post 11/23

A few days ago a local San Jose Metro Newspaper (San Jose Inside) reported on a letter by San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo "blasting" campaign promises by president-elect Donald Trump. Mayor Liccardo made promises to protect residents of San Jose from Trump's policies, mostly relating to immigration. Mayor Liccardo made two promises in that letter that really got my blood boiling. He stated: We will Not Tolerate "Hate Crimes" in San Jose and We Will Protect the Constitutional Rights of San Jose Residents. Mayor Liccardo makes these vows as he and the City Council are covering up bigoted, retaliatory and hateful acts against me by the City Attorney's Office and three former police administrators. These City officials flagrantly violated my constitutional rights. Mayor Liccardo and the City Council refused to investigate my complaints against these bigoted officials as is required by state law and city policy. The letter by Mayor Liccardo shows that he has no integrity, and that he is is a big hypocrite. Here is the link for the article from SJI that contains Mayor LIccardo's letter.

http://www.sanjoseinside.com/2016/11/14/san-jose-mayor-blasts-trumps-campaign-promises-in-statement-vowing-to-protect-residents/

 

Below are comments I made to Mayor Liccardo's letter that SJI refused to post:

The citizens of San Jose should be less concerned about what Trump might do as president and more concerned about the corrupt elected officials over at City Hall. A few months ago I posted comments on SJI regarding a cheating scandal involving the City Attorney's Office and the federal courts relative to a lawsuit I filed against the City for civil rights violations. This scandal is for real. It’s just being covered up by the Mayor and City Council. SJI and the local media are cowards with no journalistic integrity because they refuse to inform the public about what's going on. So far, two attorneys for the City that were assigned to the case are suspiciously no longer with the City. The federal judge assigned to the case, Ronald M. Whyte, suddenly retired. As I stated in other social media posts regarding this matter, I'm black and I lived in the South during Jim Crow. So I know a little bit about racism and discrimination. The way I have been treated by Mayor Liccardo and the other City officials involved was flagrantly bigoted and discriminatory and was done with the intent to inflict emotional distress because of my race. The letter by Mayor Liccardo supporting diversity and promising to protect the constitutional rights of the citizens of San Jose is insincere. As to who is better at protecting my rights, I have more confidence in Donald Trump than Mayor Liccardo. For Josh Koehn to pretend he is so offended by Trumps comments while refusing to report on the bigoted and discriminatory conduct of Mayor Liccardo and the City Council is insulting. See my blog for more:

http://crnctz.blogspot.com/2015/08/exposing-cover-up-of-cheating-scandal.html

Fred Bates, retired SJPD

US District Judge Ronald M. Whyte Violation of My Rights Conjures Up Memories of Jim Crow

 Monday, October 31, 2016

If you have read any of my prior posts, you should know that the purpose of this blog is to expose cheating by the federal courts and the San Jose City Attorney's Office during litigation of a federal lawsuit I filed against the City of San Jose in 2006 for racial and disability discrimination. I am black/African American. US District Judge Ronald M. Whyte presided over the lawsuit. Judge Whyte is also at the center of another big corruption scandal as well. Judge Whyte is a renowned intellectual property jurist, and he holds many distinguished positions relative to his profession. However, it is unmistakable that Judge Whyte is corrupt and has very little respect for civil rights and the rule of law. His lack of regards for my civil rights, a black person, draws comparison to the lack of regard for civil rights of black people during Jim Crow. This comparison might seem hyperbolic, but I think it is a fair one. My comparison of Judge Whyte's conduct to that of segregationists during Jim Crow is about the moral equivalency of the blatant civil rights violations of blacks during that era and the blatant violation of my civil rights by Judge Whyte.  

As noted in a prior post, Judge Whyte granted the City of San Jose a motion for summary judgment in my lawsuit that was a total fabrication, pure fiction, a complete hoax. He also allowed the City to conspire with my attorney to dismiss a defendant in that lawsuit without my knowledge or permission. That defendant, Tuck Younis, was the most important defendant in my case because he violated my rights knowingly. Younis also committed perjury in a deposition and in a declaration to the court. The law is perfectly clear that only I, the plaintiff, had the right to dismiss Younis from my lawsuit. My attorney, Stuart Kirchick, committed a serious ethical violation by agreeing to the dismissal of Younis from my lawsuit without my consent and without a settlement agreement. There is evidence that Kirchick was bribed by City officials and that the court approved of his misconduct as well. 

Younis was also in contempt of court because he refused to appear twice after being subpoenaed in a prior small claims action I filed against the City. It just so happens that the judgment in that small claims action from the state of California is critical to the judgment of Judge Whyte in my federal lawsuit. There was no litigation in the small claims action because the Commissioner made a ruling implying that the small claims court lacked authority to grant the compensation I was seeking without allowing any testimony from me or the City. Judge Whyte dismissed my federal lawsuit against the City based on the collateral estoppel effect of the small claims judgment despite the fact that there was no litigation and no record of what occurred in small claims court. The law is well settled that collateral estoppel, aka issue preclusion, does not apply to judgments rendered in California's small claims courts. When determining the preclusive effect of state court judgments, the full faith and credit act, 28 USC Section 1738 requires federal courts to follow the preclusion law of the state where the judgment was rendered. Judge Whyte failed to do so. Therefore, his judgment dismissing my lawsuit on the basis of collateral estoppel is unconstitutional and is void by law. 

Furthermore, the intransigence of Judge Whyte has shown in refusing to change his clearly erroneous and discriminatory judgment in my case mirrors the intransigence of white government officials in the South during Jim Crow in refusing to abandon their discriminatory policies against blacks. I have filed three motions with Judge Whyte seeking relief from his discriminatory judgment in my case, all to no avail. Judge Whyte and District Court officials went as far as staging a phony hearing on one of my motions after I was told there would be no hearing. Court officials falsified docket entries falsely stating that my motion pertained to "Costs Taxed" when it actually pertained to fraud on the court by the City's attorney and Judge Whyte's violation of the full faith and credit act. During the hearing, the City was granted a secret or ex parte motion to dismiss because I followed the court's instructions and did not appear for the hearing. The clear intent of Judge Whyte and court officials were to obstruct justice, a felony offense.

As far as I am concerned, Judge Whyte is a disgrace to the bench. It is reasonable to conclude that he was paid off by the City of San Jose. All of his prior cases should be examined because of his corruption. It is laughable that he won an award in 2009 for unquestioned integrity and commitment to the rule of law. Judge Whyte is taking inactive status (retiring) on November 1st of this year. The timing of his retirement is somewhat suspicious considering the scandals linked to him. As a result of his retirement, many of Judge Whyte's colleagues are falling all over themselves saying nice things about him on the US District Court website.

Here are some of the things being said about Judge Whyte. Judge Whyte is a great judge and a great man. Those who appeared before him saw how smart and fair and wise he is. He is intensely devoted to doing justice. Really?! He treated everyone with respect and dignity. One colleague of Judge Whyte stated that he possesses a model judicial temperament - an endearing blend of modesty, patience, intellect, and even-handedness. Another of his colleagues stated that for over two decades Judge Whyte has exemplified many of the best qualities of the judges of the Northern District: diligence, fairness, humility, modeling and inspiring the treatment of everyone involved in the justice system with courtesy and respect, and above all practicality. The common sentiment throughout these comments seems to be that Judge Whyte is fair or even-handed and that he is fair and just. This is comical because Judge Whyte refused to follow laws in my case that were mandatory; and he ruled in favor of the City, even though all of the facts and evidence favored me. This claim by me is corroborated by the record in my case. It's the absolute truth. The complimentary comments about Judge Whyte by his colleagues are total baloney. They are nothing more than propaganda in order to make Judge Whyte look good. However, nothing is going to make Judge Whyte look good because of his egregious conduct in my case, and apparently several other cases. Judge Whyte may have made several important decisions relating to intellectual property litigation, but his best and most important decision has been to retire because he no longer has any integrity or honor. 

About Donald Trump's Claim That The Election Is Rigged

Post 10/23

In today's post, I'm going to do something different and focus on the presidential election. Much talk has been made about Donald Trump's claim that the election is rigged. Here's my take on this matter. I'm not sure if it's rigged or not. But based on my experience with government based on this cheating scandal I'm exposing, I believe our government is corrupt and, in concert with the media, is capable of anything. Not almost anything, but anything; and that's at the local, state and federal level. For me it's not a matter of whether the presidential election is rigged or not. What troubles me is that the processes of government are corrupt and rigged against regular citizens like you and me. It is absolutely shocking the number of government officials in this country that have no integrity or a conscience and will do anything they are asked to do, including committing criminal acts. It's true folks! I have experienced this firsthand. At the end of this post, I will list some links for you to check out.

Folks, the one thing we should learn very quickly is that our government officials do not give a dam about us or our rights guaranteed by the Constitution. If you think you have any rights, wait until you come into a conflict with the government like I have. I do not like bringing up the past, but in order to get a perspective as to how bad things are in this country today, I'm compelled to look back to some of the dark days in our nation's history. As I stated in a prior post, I'm black and I grew up in the South during Jim Crow. None of those Confederate Flag waving segregationist government officials I encountered treated me with with the total lack of respect and dignity as did the current San Jose mayor (Sam Liccardo), the City Council and the federal courts, during the litigation of my lawsuit against the City for civil rights violations. I will address the conduct of these officials in future posts and I will not pull any punches. My first target will be US District Judge Ronald M. Whyte who presided over my lawsuit. Judge Whyte committed acts worthy of impeachment. He has been allowed to go into retirement without being held accountable.An absolute disgrace!

Back to the issue of the presidential election, it is no secret that both candidates have serious character flaws and in my opinion are not worthy to hold the office of POTUS. I will not vote for either candidate. For me it's not a matter of which one is the lesser of two evils. In my opinion, these two evils are equal. One candidate, Hillary Clinton, appears to have placed herself above the law. The other candidate, Donald Trump, seems to be totally unhinged. However, the character flaws of these two candidates are not the primary reason I will not be voting in this election or future elections for that matter. I will not be voting in this election or any election in the foreseeable future because I believe widespread public corruption has deprived government of its credibility or legitimacy. Government has no credibility when elected and appointed officials have no respect for citizens or the Constitution which is our rule of law. I have absolutely nothing planned for election day except to not go out and vote. That is how disgusted I am with our government.
Here are the links I promised:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/624131267713226/

www.opnlttr.com/letter/open-letter-san-jose-mayor-sam-licardo-and-city-council

http://crnctz.blogspot.com/2015/08/exposing-cover-up-of-cheating-scandal.html

 Google these topics: CORRUPTION BETWEEN CALIFORNIA STATE JUDICIARY AND THE FEDERAL COURT JUDGE(S)?

9^th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS CONDONES “JIM CROW” ACTS 

A Missed Opportunity - Donald Trump's Attack On Judge Curiel

Post 9/23

I think it is safe to say that most people in this country have heard about Donald Trump's recent media meltdown attacking Judge Gonzalo Curiel. Judge Curiel is a US District Court Judge presiding over a lawsuit involving, the now defunct, Trump University. As we all know, Mr. Trump said that Judge Curiel made rulings that were biased against him because of Judge Curiel's "Mexican" heritage. Mr. Trump did not provide a single piece of evidence to support his allegation. Rightfully so, there has been a great deal of criticism of Mr. Trump for his clearly racist statements. The purpose of this post is not to pile on with more criticism of Mr. Trump. The purpose of this post is to focus on the issue that has been lost in all of this madness, the very real issue of bias by federal judges in this country, particularly the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and district courts within the circuit. It just so happens that Judge Curiel is assigned to a district court within the Ninth Circuit. I do not know anything about Judge Curiel or the lawsuit involving Trump University. It is also not my intent to imply that Judge Curiel is biased or corrupt. I only want to emphasize what has been the focus of this blog. Nearly all of my posts in this blog, which began in July 2015, have been devoted to corruption and bias in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the US District Court - San Jose Division relative to a lawsuit I filed against the City of San Jose. What pisses me off greatly is all of the high profile politicians that were so quick to come to the defense of Judge Curiel after Mr. Trump made his unfortunate comments. Yet, they have done absolutely nothing in defense of average citizens who have been the victim of bias and corruption at the hands of the lower federal courts. The list of those criticizing Mr. Trump include, VP Joe Biden and Senator Elizabeth Warren from the Democrat side; Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich on the Republican side, just to name a few. However, the list is much longer than these four. I only mention them because they were the first to come to mind. But my point is that politicians, as well as pundits, that stood up in defense of Judge Curiel missed a great opportunity to address a real problem with our federal courts. This was not an oversight. This was intentional and political. It is no secret that there is corruption and cheating in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the US District Court in San Jose. Just as I stated in my prior posts, the courts in my case committed flagrant violations of the Constitution and several federal statutes. Politicians have turned a wilful blind eye to this issue rather than address it head-on and risk a total collapse of our judicial system. Americans ought to know that the politicians who were so quick to criticize Donald Trump have no courage to stand up for their basic rights or protect and uphold the Constitution as they sweared to do under oath. When it comes to complaints against judges, politicians run and hide behind the separation of powers doctrine and the need for an independent judiciary. While an independnet judiciary is necessary for government to function properly, it does not mean that judges have the right to base their rulings on their subjective feelings and not on the rule of law, just as many seem to be doing. Complaints I made to the FBI, the US Attorney's Office, the House Judiciary Committee, the California Attorney General's Office, the Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office and the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury relative to criminal misconduct by federal court officials and San Jose city officials during the litigation of my lawsuit have not resuled in an investigation, not even an interview, even though the evidence of misconduct is indisputable and overwhelming. In addition to this blog, you can view my facebook page listed below for more details.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/624131267713226/