A. whether the Eleventh circui+ court of Appeals has so
Far departed from the accepted and usual course of
Judicial pvoceedings and/ox sanctioned Such departuse by
the lower coust concexning summary judgement Nstion.
Of Petitianer(s)based on fed. B. Civin 36 (b) admissians as
te Call foran exercise of this court's supenisory
Powers to correc÷ i+lo

I. The panel has committed an obvious error concerning the facts conclusively
established, pursuant to Fed.R.Cjvi.P.36(b), concerning Sivanadiyan's
property and Annamalai's Liberty interests.

II. The Panel has made an obvious error in calculation of 7o 'non-excludable'
days of the indictment concerning Annamalai .

III. The Panel has made an error by misunderstanding the judicial facts surrounding
egregious misconduct of government's agent Mr.Stephan Langamandel concerning a
referral to treasury Inspector General for Tax administratian ( TIGTA ).

Iv. The Panel has made an error by denying Annamalai's request to dismiss the
bank fraud indictment, as if Annamalal is raising the ' insufficient of evidence'
to suport his conviction of bank fraud, and such erroneous decison shall be
vacated to stop and prevent the 'fundamental miscarriage of justice' and the
'continuing prejudice'.

A. ANNAMALAI's conviction on bank Fraud counts 1-8 are tainted by lack of
Federally insured victims, and also 'lack of federal jurisdiction', hence based
on the binding precdents of this circuit, those counts shall be
vacated and.dismissed.

v. The panel has made an obvious error in, by not noticing that, the Appellee has
'tacitly acquiescesed' to various claims of the appellants', and as a matter
of law, the appellants' are entitled to relief on such tacitly agreed claims.

VI. Annamalai at least deserves a new trial on the balance 12 counts.

issues-being-raised