Docket entries, Berg v. Obama Third Circuit Court of Appeals (SEND TO MERITS PANEL)

ecf.ca3.uscourts.gov ^ | 2/3/2009 | rxsid

[rxsid]

Current status of Berg's case pending in the 3rd dist. court of appeals (same case the SCOTUS denied the two emergency stay requests)

12/09/2008 Open Document ORDER (SCIRICA, Chief Judge and AMBRO, Circuit Judges) denying Appellant's Motion an Immediate Injunction to Stay the Certification of Electors, to Stay the Electoral College from Casting any Votes for Barack H. Obama on December 15, 2008, and to Stay the Counting of any votes in the House of Representatives and the Senate on January 6, 2009 Pending Resolution of Appellant's Appeal. Panel No.: ECO-16. Scirica, Authoring Judge. See Order for complete text. (CH)

12/10/2008 RECORD available on District Court CM/ECF. (CH)

12/10/2008 Open Document BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED. Brief on behalf of Philip J. Berg due on or before 01/20/2009. Appendix due on or before 01/20/2009. (CH)

01/16/2009 Open Document ENTRY OF APPEARANCE from Steve N. Hajjar on behalf of Appellee(s) Federal Election Commission. (SNH)

01/16/2009 Open Document Motion filed by Appellee Fed Election Comm to summarily affirm. Certificate of Service dated 01/16/2009. SEND TO MERITS PANEL.--[Edited 01/28/2009 by CH] (SNH)

01/20/2009 Open Document ELECTRONIC BRIEF with Volume I of Appendix attached on behalf of Appellant Philip J. Berg, filed. Certificate of Service dated 01/20/2009 by email. (PJB)

01/20/2009 Open Document ELECTRONIC APPENDIX on behalf of Appellant Philip J. Berg, filed. Manner of Service: electronic. Certificate of Service dated 01/20/2009. (PJB)

01/27/2009 Open Document Response filed by Appellant Philip J. Berg to Motion for summary action. Certificate of Service dated 01/26/2009. (PJB)

01/28/2009 Open Document CLERK ORDER referring Motion by Appellee Federal Election Commitee For Summary Affirmance to the merits panel. It is noted that Appellant filed his brief and appendix on January 20, 2009, counsel for Appellee Federal Election Committee, is directed to inform this office in writing within seven (7) days from the date of this order if they intend to file a brief or rely on the Motion for Summary Affirmance in lieu of a formal brief, filed. SEND TO MERITS PANEL. (CH)

02/02/2009 Open Document CLERK ORDER referring the Response of Appellant to Appellee Federal Election Committee's Motion for Summary Affirmance to the merits panel, filed. SEND TO MERITS PANEL. (CH)

[hoosiermama]

It's sort of like a game:

First the plaintiff (that's us) presents their arguments.

Then the defendants respond. (so far the only defendants I've seen respond are the FEC.....Obama et al didn't chose to respond earlier, and I'm wondering what's up. There is one point that if the defendant doesn't respond then the court assumes that they are in agreement with the plaintiffs.

Then the plaintiff respond to the defendants response.

Then the court decides.

Right now they are doing this with paper before the case is presented in oral argument. The purpose of doing this on paper is to determine if the case qualifies to actually go before the court.

If the court decides all the criteria is met and there is no decision based on the paper work, then the sequence will be repeated orally using the same game plan.

[BrerLion]

FEC! Did we know for sure they were in the mix before this? I know we talked about it.

[BrerLion]

Brer you dope, that was the sealed case.

[hoosiermama]

The DNC, FEC, Howard Dean, Nancy P are also named as defendants in the case and charged with perpetuating the fraud.

Berg went after the whole bunch...I'm not sure I've named all that he included.

[hoosiermama]

The FEC has been named from the git go....Nancy P was added later.

[canaan]

“my interest is anthropological”
“Then might I suggest that unobtrusively observing, rather than interfering with your subjects, would be much more scientific? “

Excellent retort!

[Aurorales]

“I am sick of your spamming. You post the same thing over and over and over.

I am certain that everyone has seen it by now. Please stop now.”
___________________________________
I too am sick of FreeManN’s spamming. Posting what we “need” to do. Or as he sometimes calls it “action”.
Same thing over and over. I don't understand why others get called on it, but he is allowed to post it and most take it in like “Gospel”.
Never any info, just name calling, and spamming.

[OldTCS]

Nice translation! Thanks :)

[real_patriotic_american]

Yes, Orly will be very convincing in court. If ZERO had any respect for his country, he would produce his original birth certificate (or is ZERO hiding it because he is not a natural born American citizen?).

[FreeManN]

“The lady is supposedly getting 3 hours of sleep a night fighting to save the Constitution.

Meanwhile most Americans are too busy fooling around with the clicker. Others supposedly on our side even call us “birthers.”

I am hoping other Americans see what Orly sees. We take for granted all of our freedoms and Obama is already going after the Second and every other one. Thank goodness for the military judge who smacked Dear Leader down on stopping the Gitmo cases.

Ditto to Petraus who is also not going o put up with sending our soldiers to get killed to play “catch & release” to make the NY Times and the Saudis happy.”

Amen!

[FreeManN]

Berg's instant case will never be heard by SCOTUS. It is fatally flawed.

[hoosiermama]

WHich case is “Berg’s instant case”? Hollister?

[FreeManN]

Hoosiermama,

Good question? As Polarik said he has so many “irons in the fire” that it is hard to tell which of his cases is instant?

Could be Berg's lawsuit against President Bush, in which he alleged that “W” caused 911? You never know with Berg?

But not to be too unkind, Berg's problem is he fails to focus. I have had the same problem, but sometimes at 3 or 4 am, I get focused and jot some thought down. Then I talk to Orly and she puts the laser point to the plea.

[FreeManN]

http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html

Top Ten Things That You Should Know About Barack H. Obama’s, (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) US Citizenship

[pickyourpoison]

mark

[little jeremiah]

Heheh - here’s a real life example. I did okay in math until 7th or 8th grade when they taught algebra. I learned what the later letters of the alphabet looked like, on my report cards. And then I dropped out of high school after 10th grade.

So I am not “exaggerating”.

Legalese might as well be calculus.

[little jeremiah]

Thank you, hooisermama. If I can understand it, anyone can! ;-)

[little jeremiah]

Some of his comments have been pulled, here and there. Mods will take action as needed if people hit abuse, otherwise they won’t notice.

[BP2]

This may help -- it's hard sometimes to differentiate the 3 cases:

Berg vs. Obama, Third Circuit Court of Appeals No. 08 – 4340
Berg filed Brief on 1/20/09. NOTE: THIS CASE IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THIS THREAD.

Berg vs. Obama, U.S. District Court for the ______________
Case filed under seal on 11/07/08 – cannot be discussed

Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 08-cv-0225
Interpleader case by Col. Hollister against Soetoro/Obama and Biden