All of Obama's Legal Cases

US Courts System ^ | 2/10/2009 | US Courts

[BP2]

338 Total Party matches for selection OBAMA, B
for ALL COURTS

Mon Feb 10 7:57:00 2009

Selections 1 through 54 (Page 1)

	Next 54

Civil Cases
	Name	Court	Case No.	Filed	NOS	Closed
1	OBAMA, B	ilcdce	3:2008cv03169	08/04/2008	440	08/15/2008
Armstead v. HSBC Card Services et al
2	OBAMA, B.	ilndce	1:2008cv04487	08/08/2008	550	09/23/2008
Luevano v. Obama et al
3	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2009cv00006	01/06/2009	441	01/27/2009
Roy v. Bush et al
4	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2009cv00041	01/29/2009	441
Roy v. Obama
5	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2008cv00362	08/11/2008	440	08/27/2008
Roy vs. USDC
6	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2008cv00424	09/22/2008	441	10/22/2008
Roy v. USA Govt et al
7	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2008cv00580	12/22/2008	441
Roy v. Obama et al
8	OBAMA, B.H.	hidce	1:2009cv00048	02/03/2009	440
Roy vs. Obama
9	OBAMA, B.H.	hidce	1:2008cv00448	10/08/2008	440	10/27/2008
Roy v. Federal Election Commission et al
10	OBAMA, BARACK	dedce	1:2009cv00014	12/29/2008	550
Gadson v. Obama et al
11	OBAMA, BARACK	nhdce	1:1997mc00024	12/04/1997	0	12/09/1997
WILSON MASTER FILE v. ALL DEFENDANTS, et al
12	OBAMA, BARACK	kyedce	3:2008cv00028	06/10/2008	530	07/11/2008
Becker v. Mukasey et al
13	OBAMA, BARACK	tnmdce	3:2008mc00036	02/01/2008		02/05/2008
Ervin v. Bush et al
14	OBAMA, BARACK	ilndce	1:2007cv00053	01/16/2007	550	01/16/2007
Awala v. Norgle et al
15	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2009cv00079	01/14/2009	550	01/14/2009
HYLAND v. OBAMA et al
16	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00088	01/14/2005	550	11/25/2005
RIVERA v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
17	OBAMA, BARACK	candce	3:2007cv00109	01/09/2007	440
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. et al v. Bush et al
18	OBAMA, BARACK	nddce	3:2008cv00126	12/16/2008	330
Gleeson v. McDonald
19	OBAMA, BARACK	tnmdce	3:2008cv00146	02/12/2008	440	02/12/2008
Ervin v. Bush et al
20	OBAMA, BARACK	txwdce	5:2008cv00159	02/28/2008	440	03/18/2008
Smith v. University of Texas At Austin et al
21	OBAMA, BARACK	nhdce	1:2008cv00185	05/09/2008	530	06/10/2008
Becker v. Blightler et al
22	OBAMA, BARACK	flndce	1:2007cv00187	09/28/2007	440	10/06/2008
MORRIS v. BUSH et al
23	OBAMA, BARACK	caedce	1:2006cv00195	02/22/2006	530	04/10/2006
(HC) Thomas v. Federal Congress et al
24	OBAMA, BARACK	flndce	1:2008cv00208	09/26/2008	440	12/12/2008
MORRIS v. LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO et al
25	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00270	02/04/2005	530	04/09/2007
EL-MASHAD et al v. BUSH et al
26	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2008cv00284	03/20/2008	441
Bloom et al v. The Democratic National Committe et al
27	OBAMA, BARACK	mndce	0:2008cv00360	02/11/2008	440	03/19/2008
Sinclair v. Obama et al
28	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00492	03/10/2005	530	04/09/2007
AZIZ et al v. BUSH et al
29	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00569	03/18/2005	530	04/09/2007
SALAHI et al v. BUSH et al
30	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00748	04/11/2005	530	05/30/2007
ABOASSY et al v. BUSH et al
31	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00765	04/15/2005	530
HABASHI et al v. BUSH et al
32	OBAMA, BARACK	ilndce	1:1996cv00823	02/13/1996	440	03/04/1996
Ewell v. Bd of Elect Comm, et al
33	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00877	05/03/2005	530	04/09/2007
KHIALI-GUL v. BUSH et al
34	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	8:2008cv00948	03/20/2008	441	05/28/2008
Bloom et al v. The Democratic National Committe et al
35	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2007cv00964	10/11/2007	440	11/26/2007
Herbert v. United States of America et al
36	OBAMA, BARACK	paedce	2:2006cv01055	03/09/2006	550	07/26/2006
RICHES v. BUSH et al
37	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01124	06/07/2005	530	05/30/2007
MOUSOVI et al v. BUSH et al
38	OBAMA, BARACK	miwdce	1:2008cv01154	12/08/2008	440	01/06/2009
Hyland #228879 v. Levin et al
39	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2008cv01164	12/04/2008	440
Herbert v. Obama et al
40	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01189	06/14/2005	530	04/09/2007
KHALIFH et al v. BUSH et al
41	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2008cv01201	12/15/2008	440	01/21/2009
Herbert v. United States of America et al
42	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01224	07/17/2008	530
GUL v. BUSH et al
43	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01228	07/17/2008	530
HADI v. BUSH et al
44	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01232	07/17/2008	530
BIN ATEF v. BUSH et al
45	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01237	07/17/2008	530
AL WADY v. BUSH et al
46	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01353	07/05/2005	530	05/09/2007
SAIB et al v. BUSH et al
47	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01430	08/18/2008	550	09/11/2008
THORNTON-BEY v. OBAMA
48	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01487	06/13/2008	530
SADKHAN v. BUSH et al
49	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01497	07/29/2005	530
AL WIRGHI et al v. BUSH et al
50	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01506	07/28/2005	530	05/15/2007
SHAFIIQ et al v. BUSH et al
51	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01592	08/09/2005	530
ATTASH et al v. BUSH et al
52	OBAMA, BARACK	moedce	4:2008cv01757	11/12/2008	550	01/08/2009
Towne v. Obama
53	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2006cv01758	07/31/2008	530
SULIMAN et al v. BUSH et al
54	OBAMA, BARACK	candce	M:2006cv01791	08/14/2006	440
In re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation

Next 54 ALL of Obama, Soetoro Court Cases on Scribd

[mlo]

"Watch this tape. She contradicts herself."

OK, I watched it. She didn't contradict herself. She said, according to the translated subtitles, "Barrak is a son of this village".

"Son of this village" is not a typical way of expressing that someone is born there. "Son of this village" is a way of expressing that someone has roots in the village. Which he does. His father was from that village, and that would make him a "son of the village".

[mlo]

"If proof of birth isn't the point of it why does it say "This is a more complete record of your birth...?"

Because it is. Nobody disputes that.

For that program they have to go deeper than your own birth and look at your parents and their ancestry. There is more data on the long form. It says nothing about the short form not being proof of your own birth.

In fact it doesn't even say don't send it. It only says sending the long form will save you time and money.

[TigersEye]

They don't say that the Certification doesn't contain the information they need they say it requires "further verification." That goes directly to its reliability not its content.

Spin on though you are amusing me with your convoluted concatenations.

[BP2]

What the Hawaiian Home Lands page says is that to qualify for that program you also have to prove *ancestry*. Not just your own Hawaiian birth

I wonder why they WON'T accept the CertificaTION of Live Birth then? They specifically state the "Certification requires additional verification by DHHL." Now, why would that be?

On the other item, under "Documents Acceptable for Proof of Citizenship", right there at item "b." it says, "Certificate of live birth, birth certificate". The COLB is a birth certificate.

The Navy Shipyard requirements are VERY specific. They are willing to accept a LOT of things:

b. Certificate of live birth, birth certificate
i. Delayed birth certificate
j. Hawaii certificate of foreign birth
k. Hospital birth certificate

... but for SOME strange reason, that pesky CertificaTION of Live Birth is NOT listed, even though it's been around since Nov 2001 and this Navy Reg was updated last in Oct 2008. I wonder why THAT is? It comes down to one word -- WITNESS. Please tell me where you see a witness listed on the CertificaTION?

But, hey, don't take MY word for it... contact Steve McHale at Homeland Defense -- (888) 464-4182. He'll clarify things for ya ;)

I love the smell of burning trolls in the mornin'

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

"Son of this village" is not a typical way of expressing that someone is born there. "Son of this village" is a way of expressing that someone has roots in the village.

And you don't have to be born in Italy to join the Sons of Italy

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

I wonder why they WON'T accept the CertificaTION of Live Birth then? They specifically state the "Certification requires additional verification by DHHL." Now, why would that be?

Because it's a land giveaway program for persons of Native Hawaiian ancestry, which you need to prove.

[BP2]

>>> Because it’s a land giveaway program for persons of Native Hawaiian ancestry, which you need to prove.

... and ... a Hawaiian land giveaway program has a higher threshold of proof than is required for the man who holds the nation’s “Nuclear Football” and is the “leader of the Free World”...

I’m sorry... I don’t understand...

[mlo]

"They don't say that the Certification doesn't contain the information they need they say it requires "further verification." That goes directly to its reliability not its content."

Read the whole page. It clearly explains what the program is, and what the requirements are. There's no mystery about what they need to verify. They are verifying ancestry, not just Hawaiian birth. The "further verification" is the verification beyond your own birth, your ancestry.

"Spin on though you are amusing me with your convoluted concatenations."

The convolution is your own. That site is very clear about the program and its requirements. You guys are trying to twist anything you can into supporting an idea you've already decided to believe in. That is spin.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

The problem, of course, is that there’s no mechanism or documentation actually specified for Obama to prove eligibility, not to mention the whole issue of what constitutes “natural born,” while the Hawaiian land program spells out very specifically what documentation is required.

[mlo]

"I wonder why they WON'T accept the CertificaTION of Live Birth then? They specifically state the "Certification requires additional verification by DHHL." Now, why would that be?"

I JUST TOLD YOU WHY.

Geez. They have to verify your ancestry. Read the page. They tell specifically what they have to check for and how much of a native Hawaiian you have to be.

"... but for SOME strange reason, that pesky CertificaTION of Live Birth is NOT listed"

A "birth certificate" is listed. The COLB is A birth certificate. The term "birth certificate" is not one specific form. It is a term that applies to the forms from all jurisdictions that issue documentary proof of birth, whether it is Hawaii's, California's, or whatever. The COLB is a birth certificate for Hawaii.

[mlo]

"a Hawaiian land giveaway program has a higher threshold of proof than is required for the man who holds the nation’s “Nuclear Football” and is the “leader of the Free World”..."

Thanks for demonstrating that you are only interested in sparring points, not in the facts.

[trumandogz]

Odds are that you have no doubts whatsoever that Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon ... Bush were all natural born citizens. But by your answer you are indicating that you do have doubts that Obama is a natural born citizen.

There is no evidence that Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon and Bush were/are not natural born citizens and there is no evidence that Obama is not a natural born citizen.

And as far as I can tell, the people leading the Obama is not a natural born citizen conspiracy are; Phil Berg who believes that President Bush was responsible for the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks, Leo Donorfrio, who believes that black helicopters are flying over his house and Joseph Farah, who believes that pterodactyls are flying over his head.

[Red Steel]

You're lying. It says you have to have a "Certificate of Live Birth because a Certification of Live Birth requires further verification." You dishonestly changed 'Certification' with 'Certificate.'

It's par for the course for him. I showed mlo the words of two Senators who wrote the 14th Amendment specifically the words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" meant. He contradicted the meaning of what the those two Senators said in plain language.

[headsonpikes]

"And as far as I can tell, the people leading the Obama is not a natural born citizen conspiracy are; Phil Berg who believes that President Bush was responsible for the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks, Leo Donorfrio, who believes that black helicopters are flying over his house and Joseph Farah, who believes that pterodactyls are flying over his head."

Now that's funny, I don't care who you are!

[Red Steel]

... and ... a Hawaiian land giveaway program has a higher threshold of proof than is required for the man who holds the nation’s “Nuclear Football” and is the “leader of the Free World”...

Correct. Hawaii says they won't accept that COLB which Obama says is "his proof" of birth in Hawaii. They need more information like we do.

[Red Steel]

The COLB is A birth certificate.

No it's not. Obama's COLB is nothing but a computer generated form with truncated information that is suppose to represent the birth certificate in some cases. Hawaii issues this document because it saves time and money...except Obama's COLB is a forgery.

[Cyropaedia]

The problem is that there's really nothing additional listed on the Certificate of Live Birth that really helps them actually determine "ancestry". All of the necessary information is also listed on the Certification of Live Birth (parents and the race of the parents). The only additional information that a Certificate could help them would be the general location of a parent's birth. This could be simply a general area like a state or even foreign country. The Certificate itself doesn't list the grandparents, great-grandparents, any other relatives or even other siblings.

Even with the Certificate of Live Birth the Department still wants to see certified copies of your parents' CoLB's and even grandparents' CoLB's to independently verify where they were actually born.

That is what the extra work and charges involved with the Certification are about; to fully corroborate that you actually were born in Hawaii (for starters). The Certificate lists the name of the hospital, the address of the hospital, the name of the physician that performed the delivery, etc.

[TigersEye]

I can see that. At least there’s no need to waste effort with someone who shoots their own credibility in the foot so easily.

[Red Steel]

bp2: I wonder why they WON'T accept the CertificaTION of Live Birth then? They specifically state the "Certification requires additional verification by DHHL." Now, why would that be?

BP

mlo: I JUST TOLD YOU WHY.

Geez. They have to verify your ancestry. Read the page. They tell specifically what they have to check for and how much of a native Hawaiian you have to be.

And he told you why mlo. He said Hawaii needs more information.

BP2: Now, why would that be?

BP2 is probably being rhetorical. However, There are two reason why Hawaii does not except that computer generated form:

1) There's not enough info on it to determine native origin, which Hawaii says plainly.

2) It's a document that can be easily forged.

[TigersEye]

Indeed. When they say it requires “further verification” it is quite obvious that they are looking for reliability not content. To say otherwise is nothing other than complete dishonesty or illiteracy.