No. 21-1200

Sherif A. Philips v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital, Inc.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-03-03
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: civil-rights diversity-jurisdiction due-process equal-protection federal-question-jurisdiction fifth-amendment first-amendment fourteenth-amendment fraud-upon-the-court personal-jurisdiction
Latest Conference: 2022-05-12
Question Presented (from Petition)

Unrecognized Transfer The Case From Guam Superior Court To Guam District Court , even with lack of Jurisdiction lead To Default Judgement And Levi on Petitioner valuable Properties.

And The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal Abuse Petitioner in Discriminatory manner as being Pro Se.

I- Petitioner Pursuant To Federal Question Jurisdiction (Due Process- Equal Protection Under the Law); Diversity Jurisdiction; Personal Jurisdiction (State of Domicile) and the disputed amount is over $75,000.

II- Petitioner Pursuant to First Amendment, Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment

III- Petitioner Pursuant To Title 42 U.S Code & 1983 Appellant had been treated in discriminatory manner as being Pro Se.

IV- Petitioner Pursuant To Fraud Upon The Court And Fraud in the Court (North Carolina order was a default Judgement entered without any judicial assessment or Trial on The Merit of the Action. This judgment wasn 't final, where N.C rules and regulations guarded legal fees never been followed nor Rule 54 (2). Appellee was trying to enforcement in his favorite Court.

V-Petitioner Pursuant To Rooker- Feldman Doctrine

VI- Petitioner Pursuant To 28 TJ.S.C Section 1407, Rule 42 (a) and 28 U.S.C Section 1404 (a) (For Consolidation and Transfer)

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the unrecognized transfer of a case from the Guam Superior Court to the Guam District Court, despite a lack of jurisdiction, led to a default judgment and levy on the petitioner's valuable properties, and whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals abused the petitioner in a discriminatory manner as a pro se litigant

Docket Entries

2022-05-16
Petition DENIED.
2022-04-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/12/2022.
2021-10-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 4, 2022)

Attorneys

Sherif A. Phillips
Sherif Philips — Petitioner