Sunday, August 10, 2014

[Victims of Court Corruption] From Don Bird - The Ninth Circuit Reply from Don Bird

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: From Don Bird - The Ninth Circuit Reply from Don Bird
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 15:06:25 -0700
From: <>
To: Ron Branson <>

                                                          copy                                                 FILED

                                                                                                     jUN 11 2014

                                                                                                                                               Molly c. dwyer clerk

                                                                                                                                                                                    u.s. court of appeals




DONALD M. BIRD                            No. 14-15449

          Plaintiff - Appellant,                  D.C. No. 2:13-cv-02549-MCE-CKD

v.                                                         Eastern District of California, Sacramento

COUNTY OF TEHAMA;                  

ARTHUR J. WYLENE                        ORDER

          Defendants - Appellees



Before:  GOULD and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges

          The district court has certified that this appeal is not taken in good faith and  has revoked appellant's in forma pauperis status.  We deny appellant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis because we also find the appeal is frivolous. See

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a.).

          If appellant wishes to pursue this appeal despite the court's finding that it is frivolous then, within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall pay $505.00 to the district court as the docketing and filing fees for this appeal and file proof of payment with this court.  Otherwise, the appeal will be dismissed by the Clerk for failure to prosecute, regardless of further filings.  See 9th Cir. R. 42-1.

          No motions for reconsideration, clarification, or modification of the denial of appellant's in forma pauperis status shall be entertained.

          Because the court has found that this appeal is frivolous, the district court judgment may be summarily affirmed even if appellant pays the fees. This court can affirm on any basis supported by the record.  See, e.g., Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 f.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008). If appellant pays their fees and files proof of such payment in this court, appellant therefore shall simultaneously show cause why the judgment challenged in this appeal should not be summarily affirmed. See 9th Cir. R. 3-6.  If appellant pays the fees but fails to file a response to this order, the court will determine whether to summarily affirm the judgment in this appeal based on the opening brief filed on April 23, 2014.

          If the appeal is dismissed for failure to comply with this order, the court will not entertain any motion to reinstate the appeal that is not accompanied by proof of payment of the docketing and filing fees.

          Briefing is completed.


July 14, 2014        

          The paid "fee" appears to be the priority condition for this court to rule a decision. Unfortunately, you Judges never mentioned my demand to remand my case to the lower court.  I made it very clear that the 9th circuit is unable to grant my demand.  I would refuse to accept your opinion. Even if I had the $505.00 fee, I wouldn't pay it.  My fee was waived with the Eastern District Court when I filed in the ninth circuit in two (2) previous cases, that waiver was honored.  This is a "frivolous" excuse to deny me justice.  This court is terrified to allow a "jury" of 8 to hear and decide this issue.

                                        Donald M. Bird, Plaintiff - Appellant



          The appellant Donald M. Bird, states the two judges failed to honor the Constitutional "Oath".  They refused to accept the well-defined wording of the Right to a Jury.

Article III - Sec. II - Paragraph III - United States Constitution:

Trial of Crimes:

3.  The Trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.

          See also Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Amendments.

          These two judges are spineless, cowardly liars.  I consider these two judges and all other judges who violate the "Oath" are the real "Terrorists" to be feared.  The dismissal of this case threatens the Liberty of all the Citizens of California.

          Our Founding Fathers (not Mothers) were all European Caucasians who created a perfect Contract for our New Republic.  I was again stuck with Tweedledum and Tweedledee - Judges who refused to accept the Constitution, Article III, as it is clearly written.  The attached statement on Summary Judgments, when read and understood, should convince both of these Judges that they are wrong in ruling any order that dismisses my case.

          Our Founding Fathers (Not Mothers) did have one serious flaw.  They trusted all future judges would obey their Oath to the Constitution.  Big Mistake, a simple perjury clause with a penalty in today's courts, would lock up all of the
"Liars".  Maybe?

          If the language stated in this Declaration offends Tweedledum and Tweedledee or any of the clerks, then the appellant has been totally Satisfied.  In case Clerk Molly A. Dwyer decides to withhold this Declaration from the Judges, I'll never know.  However, sometime in the future, I will be at the Ninth Circuit Court with my signs.  The media will be invited.


           It is my belief one or both of you Ninth Circuit Judges were "Bought" to make sure this case was never heard by any Jury.  The question for me is Who?  Fish and Wildlife"  A Legislator?  We can only speculate.

          We have our Military dying protecting our Liberty and Constitution while in our Courts, we have traitors called Judges denying a Citizen's Constitutional Rights.  A Point to Ponder Folks, There is No Justice.

                                        Donald M. Bird, Appellant

Enclosures (19)


For those who are interested, send your snail mail to me and I will mail the enclosures to you.

                                        So Long for now,

                                        Don Bird

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

It's time People hold Judges accountable to our Grand Juries

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.


Post a Comment

<< Home