Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

Post Reply
User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#1

Post by Tesibria » Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:21 pm



Today, April 17th, Hollister/Hemenway/Berg must file a bunch of materials related to their appeal, including (but not limited to):



* Entry of Appearance Form ---This will tell us whether Hemenway, Berg, or .. ? .. is/are now representing Hemenway on appeal



* Procedural motions, if any



*Statement of Issues to be Raised ---This Statement will confirm whether they're appealing (or trying to appeal) the Rule 11 Sanction



*Underlying Decision from Which Appeal or Petition Arises ---What they attach should also tell us whether they're appealing the Rule 11 Sanction (if they only attach the dismissal memo/order, then they're not appealing the Rule 11 Sanctions)



=======

Obama/Biden's attorneys also must file appearance papers and related documents today. (In the 3rd Cir., they didn't file on the "due date," apparently waiting to see whether Berg would really go through with appeal (total speculation). Will be interesting to see whether/what they file today.


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34550
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#2

Post by realist » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:07 pm



Thanks, Tes. I had a tickler on my calendar for today but did not know what all would be due.It'll be interesting to see what all is filed. I hope Lisa didn't have to pull another all-nighter, poor thing. Clarification on Berg v Obama, 3rd Circuit...Last time I looked at the file, which was admittedly some time ago, Berg had filed his initial appeal, Obama had answered, some or all had been sent to the mertis panel, and Berg had not filed any response to Obama's answer, and I am reasonably sure that time has passed now, though not certain. Are you saying Obama has not filed something that was due, pending whether he's sure Berg is going through with the appeal? What has Berg done/not done that would make one think he is not following up on the appeal? He's been blowing smoke that oral argument is scheduled for late May (which I could not find anything in the file supporting such and really don't believe it will happen, but I suppose anything is possible).Just wondering what if anything I'm missing here. As always, I appreciate your and other attorneys help on these matters.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#3

Post by Tesibria » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:27 pm



Clarification on Berg v Obama, 3rd Circuit...Are you saying Obama has not filed something that was due, pending whether he's sure Berg is going through with the appeal? ***No. I'm just saying that back in November, both Appellant and Appellee's appearances were due the same day- Nov. 14th, as I recall. Obama/FEC/DNC did NOT file their appearance on that initial due date. They got a "follow-up" letter telling them that appearance must be filed by 12/2. As soon as they got that letter (and after Berg had filed his appearance), they entered their appearance. So - I was just saying that we may not see Obama/Biden attorney appearances in the Hollister appeal docket today, even though the scheduling order says that it should be filed today. Assuming that [--?--] files papers on behalf of Hollister/Appellant today, we can expect Bauer's appearance. It just MAY not be today.


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#4

Post by Tesibria » Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:54 pm



I guessed wrong Obama/Biden's counsel DID file their appearance and related info todayDocket:04/17/2009 Modified Docket Text - ENTRY OF APPEARANCE filed [1176337] by Ms. Kate Ellen Andrias and Mr. Robert F. Bauer for Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [09-5080] --[Edited 04/17/2009 by JMC] 04/17/2009 CERTIFICATE as to Parties, Rulings and Related Cases FILED [1176338] by Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [service Date:04/17/2009 ] [09-5080]


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34550
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#5

Post by realist » Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:46 pm



I guessed wrong Obama/Biden's counsel DID file their appearance and related info todayDocket:04/17/2009 Modified Docket Text - ENTRY OF APPEARANCE filed [1176337] by Ms. Kate Ellen Andrias and Mr. Robert F. Bauer for Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [09-5080] --[Edited 04/17/2009 by JMC] 04/17/2009 CERTIFICATE as to Parties, Rulings and Related Cases FILED [1176338] by Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [service Date:04/17/2009 ] [09-5080]Great. And thanks again for the clarification on Berg v Obama. I greatly appreciate it.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7764
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Edmonds. WA
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#6

Post by PatGund » Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:16 pm



I guessed wrong Obama/Biden's counsel DID file their appearance and related info todayDocket:04/17/2009 Modified Docket Text - ENTRY OF APPEARANCE filed [1176337] by Ms. Kate Ellen Andrias and Mr. Robert F. Bauer for Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [09-5080] --[Edited 04/17/2009 by JMC] 04/17/2009 CERTIFICATE as to Parties, Rulings and Related Cases FILED [1176338] by Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [service Date:04/17/2009 ] [09-5080]Crap. You REALIZE the birthers are going to cite this docket as *proof* that President Obama's real name is "Barry Soetoro", right???



User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#7

Post by Tesibria » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:06 pm



I guessed wrong Obama/Biden's counsel DID file their appearance and related info todayDocket:04/17/2009 Modified Docket Text - ENTRY OF APPEARANCE filed [1176337] by Ms. Kate Ellen Andrias and Mr. Robert F. Bauer for Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [09-5080] --[Edited 04/17/2009 by JMC] 04/17/2009 CERTIFICATE as to Parties, Rulings and Related Cases FILED [1176338] by Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Barry Soetoro [service Date:04/17/2009 ] [09-5080]Crap. You REALIZE the birthers are going to cite this docket as *proof* that President Obama's real name is "Barry Soetoro", right???Well, they were all over that when the same thing happened in District Court -- the Docket showed an appearance for Soetoro. But, as was explained to them then ...the Docket descriptions are based on the caption (set by the Plaintiff). The actual defendants' documents have the same caption (as required) but always use "President Barack Obama" in their own title. E.g., the District Court docket entry for Bauer's appearance also used "Soetoro," but the actual filed document was crystal clear: "NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Robert F. Bauer .... will appear as counsel for President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden in the above captioned matter." The Dockets shows parties based on the caption - which is established by the Complaint. The Hollister Appeal docket does not provide links to the actual appearance/certificate docket, so I can't confirm that the same thing happened there, but I strongly suspect that is the case.


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#8

Post by Tesibria » Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:37 pm



On 4/17, Hollister submitted the following in the Hollister Appeal



DOCKETING STATEMENT

CERTIFICATE as to Parties, Rulings and Related Cases

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE ... by Mr. John David Hemenway for Mr. Gregory S. Hollister

STATEMENT of intent as to deferring the appendix

STATEMENT of Issues

UNDERLYING DECISION IN CASE submitted

TRANSCRIPT STATUS REPORT: Initial Status of Transcript: No transcripts are necessary for this appeal



On Edit: Because the underlying documents are not available, it's not possible to determine who (Hemenway, Berg, other?) actually submitted/uploaded the materials. Given that Hemenway is on the Entry of Appearance, it's reasonable to assume that he is the one who submitted them.



However, reasonable assumptions have been wrong in this case in the past ...


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34550
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#9

Post by realist » Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:49 pm



On 4/17, Hollister submitted the following in the Hollister Appeal



DOCKETING STATEMENT

CERTIFICATE as to Parties, Rulings and Related Cases

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE ... by Mr. John David Hemenway for Mr. Gregory S. Hollister

STATEMENT of intent as to deferring the appendix

STATEMENT of Issues

UNDERLYING DECISION IN CASE submitted

TRANSCRIPT STATUS REPORT: Initial Status of Transcript: No transcripts are necessary for this appeal



On Edit: Because the underlying documents are not available, it's not possible to determine who (Hemenway, Berg, other?) actually submitted/uploaded the materials. Given that Hemenway is on the Entry of Appearance, it's reasonable to assume that he is the one who submitted them.



However, reasonable assumptions have been wrong in this case in the past ...Thanks, Tes.



So Berg/Joyce still have not been admitted to practice in the appeals court. Regardless of what Lisa said, who knows if they're even trying to obtain their documentation. They obviously did not submit it to the lower court.



Or maybe they are just going to let Hemenway continue to bite the bullet on this entire fiasco? No wonder he has now sided with Orly. Maybe he'll even represent her in Berg's and Lisa's suit against her.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

allison
Posts: 2220
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:28 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#10

Post by allison » Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:59 pm



Maybe Berg has simply decided to turn his efforts back to getting himself elected, and leave all this birther crap behind? He is running for Judge of Mont Co Court of Common Pleas as noted in another thread...maybe he has moved on? Seems odd that he'd have any extra time to devote to getting HIMSELF elected when he is supposedly fighting against the "biggest hoax in history"?? Maybe he just thinks it ain't so important anymore?? Maybe the pay-pal button isn't getting so much traffic anymore?? Poor OC House Elves! Can't imagine they'll take it well when they learn their leader is now gonna be spending his time trying to get himself elected instead of trying to get Obama out...Sucks to be thrown under the bus like that!



User avatar
rikker
Posts: 1205
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:52 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#11

Post by rikker » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:17 pm



Rikker,Do you ever come up with anything postitive? Do you know for sure that Hemmenway is working with Orly, Do you know for sure Berg and Hemmenway are not working together?Thats all you guys do is make foolish assumptions you can not back up to save your soulDon, Anything that makes me laugh is positive. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.As far as saving my soul is concerned, the guy in charge of that has rolicking sense of humor, too!!! He loves YOU, Donny. You provide more belly laughs than a closet full of Herman Goerings.



User avatar
Epectitus
Posts: 3669
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 2:55 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#12

Post by Epectitus » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:20 pm



Don... why do you love Berg so much? This is not a rhetorical question.


"Hell, I would wear a dress and ruby red slippers all year if we can prove this" - Mike Zullo

User avatar
Epectitus
Posts: 3669
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 2:55 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#13

Post by Epectitus » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:23 pm



Don... why do you love Berg so much? This is not a rhetorical question.Who said I loved him? Hmmmm? Who said I loved Berg???Since there was no answer there, I will ask again.Don... why do you love Berg so much?


"Hell, I would wear a dress and ruby red slippers all year if we can prove this" - Mike Zullo

User avatar
rikker
Posts: 1205
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:52 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#14

Post by rikker » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:25 pm



Rikker,Do you ever come up with anything postitive? Do you know for sure that Hemmenway is working with Orly, Do you know for sure Berg and Hemmenway are not working together?Thats all you guys do is make foolish assumptions you can not back up to save your soulDon, Anything that makes me laugh is positive. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.As far as saving my soul is concerned, the guy in charge of that has rolicking sense of humor, too!!! He loves YOU, Donny. You provide more belly laughs than a closet full of Herman Goerings.My name is Don, what part of that does everyone have a problem with. As far as I make you laugh, you make the other side laugh too, so whats your point?Yeh, but the other side laughed when Obama was led away in bracelets back in January, then they slinked back into their hovels and grieved overnight, then they came back the next day and made up brand new lies. The other side laughed at Copernicus when he denied geocentricity, then slinked off and prayed when they were proven wrong.The other side is the lunatic fringe, Donny. Their laughter is usually a badge of honor for us, because history has shown that usually the smart people are right. We always get the last laugh, Don. The main problem the other has with us is that we're smug about being right all the time.



User avatar
rikker
Posts: 1205
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:52 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#15

Post by rikker » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:28 pm



Don... why do you love Berg so much? This is not a rhetorical question.Who said I loved him? Hmmmm? Who said I loved Berg???My question is not whether you love Berg. My question is: How often? That really is the measure of a NAMBLA relationship.



editorkorir
Posts: 1221
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:51 am

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#16

Post by editorkorir » Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:47 pm



Don... why do you love Berg so much? This is not a rhetorical question.Is that Berg as your avatar? Nice.why not the

Phil dragged off a lifeboat after three days look, or the http://farm1.static.flickr.com/216/4772 ... def.jpgman of the people at the courthouse Phil, or thehttp://americamustknow.com/images/bergpic.bmpgreeting the media (i.e. a single microphone) Phil,or evenhttp://api.ning.com/files/t0n2ybvjg7d*wZQt*LAzewhDp-yy9e1wvGjAvSROc7ZtiSRajUVVUTjslgVfctJ2vC*oYBsRjy9pulzty7kAJfTTd0youGdx/philandbrooke.jpgthis guy, whose name is Phil Berg, pops up on Google Image search under "phil berg" and seems to be a hit with the ladies.



MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5298
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#17

Post by MaineSkeptic » Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:06 pm



HEMENWAY FILES NOTICE OF APPEAL OVER REPRIMAND[/break1]justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2008cv02254/134576/28/]http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/di ... 134576/28/Who the hell is bankrolling this guy?



User avatar
Butterfly Bilderberg
Posts: 7646
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#18

Post by Butterfly Bilderberg » Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:26 pm



Hemenway wants two reported decisions detailing his failings as a lawyer? Because that will be the result of this appeal -- a second ruling against him, affirming the District Court's reprimand, and probably awarding fees on the appeal. What kind of masochist is he?


"Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero,
and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful."
- Kahlil Gibran, The Garden of The Prophet

MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5298
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#19

Post by MaineSkeptic » Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:32 pm



What's the procedure now? Is there necessarily a hearing?



User avatar
Res Ipsa
Posts: 2294
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:31 am

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#20

Post by Res Ipsa » Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:39 pm



HEMENWAY FILES NOTICE OF APPEAL OVER REPRIMANDAh, that's great. I was hoping the circuit court would get a crack at that part of the festivities.My question is whether an appellate court, finding that the sanction was manifestly insufficient to deter further behavior of the same type, would remand for further proceedings consistent with that view.


Thanks pal.

Post Reply

Return to “Phil Berg”