Re: GIL: Klayman
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 5:01 pm
So...northland10 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 8:26 pm In his original JW case, GIL would like some more words please because 15 pages is not enough to whine and complain about Judicial Watch, Fitton, and that conservative hating judge Rao (who should have supported GIL because Kollar-Kotelly is an evil leftist lib judge).
He wants 10 more pages because this case was drawn out since 2006 so it is very complex. Ignore the fact that it was his own actions that drew it out that long.
GIL wants more words.pdf
Pacer was being annoying and kept giving me Network Error when I tried to download. Had to print to PDF.. Appeals court docs don't get picked up on Recap..
08/18/2021 Open Document
3 pg, 92.14 KB MOTION [1910684] to exceed page limits in petition filed by Larry Elliott Klayman (Service Date: 08/18/2021 by CM/ECF NDA) Length Certification: 255 words. [19-7105] (Klayman, Larry) [Entered: 08/18/2021 03:04 PM]
08/27/2021 Open Document
1 pg, 38.91 KB PER CURIAM ORDER [1911846] filed denying appellant's motion to exceed page limits [1910684-2] Before Judges: Wilkins, Rao and Silberman. [19-7105] [Entered: 08/27/2021 12:23 PM]
08/30/2021 Open Document
51 pg, 1.78 MB PETITION [1912150] for rehearing en banc filed by Appellant Larry Elliott Klayman [Service Date: 08/30/2021 by CM/ECF NDA] Length Certification: 3899 words. [19-7105] (Klayman, Larry) [Entered: 08/30/2021 09:07 PM]
08/30/2021 Open Document
62 pg, 2.86 MB PETITION [1912151] for rehearing en banc LODGED by Appellant Larry Elliott Klayman [Service Date: 08/30/2021 by CM/ECF NDA] Length Certification: 25 pages, pursuant to MOTION FOR EN BANC PANEL TO CONSIDER 25-PAGE PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE FULL COURT filed concurrently herewith. [19-7105]--[Edited 08/31/2021 by LMF] (Klayman, Larry) [Entered: 08/30/2021 09:09 PM]
08/30/2021 Open Document
66 pg, 3.08 MB MOTION [1912152] for leave to file petition, for reconsideration of order [1911846-2] filed by Larry Elliott Klayman (Service Date: 08/30/2021 by CM/ECF NDA) Length Certification: 374 words. [19-7105] (Klayman, Larry) [Entered: 08/30/2021 09:10 PM]
He appealed en banc, and it was also denied.jcolvin2 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 6:23 pm Klayman's Petition for rehearing of the DC Circuit's reciprocal suspension was denied last week:United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 20-7110 September Term, 2020
18-BG-0100
Filed On: April 7, 2021
In re: Larry Elliott Klayman, Respondent
BEFORE: Henderson and Tatel, Circuit Judges; and Edwards, Senior Circuit Judge
O R D E R
Upon consideration of respondent’s petition for panel rehearing styled as “motion for reconsideration and petition for rehearing by the panel,” filed on April 2, 2021, it is ORDERED that the petition be denied.
Per Curiam
FOR THE COURT:
Mark J. Langer, Clerk
BY: /s/ Kathryn D. Lovett
Deputy Clerk
The report came back at the end of June (sorry, not available). That was followed by:03/26/2021 Open Document
292 pg, 12.48 MB LETTER [1892010] sent to refer matter to Committee on Admissions and Grievances for recommendation [20-7110] [Entered: 03/26/2021 04:47 PM]
Because Larry must Klayman, he filed for an extension and a short one was allowed. He managed to actually go only 853, but included the transcript from the advisory committee hearing.07/06/2021
BEFORE: Henderson and Tatel, Circuit Judges; Edwards, Senior Circuit Judge
O R D E R
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Committee on Admissions and Grievance filed on June 29, 2021, it is
ORDERED, on the court’s own motion, that by August 5, 2021, respondent show cause why the court should not adopt the Committee’s Report and Recommendation. The response to the order to show cause may not exceed 5,200 words.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this order and a copy of the Committee’s Report and Recommendation to respondent by certified mail, return receipt requested, and by first class mail.
Klayman can't answer a basic name/rank/serial number question without pontificating and whining.[COMMITTEE MEMBER]: If you could, could you please walk us through all those bars, federal and state, that you're a member of. With respect to each of the bars, provide us information about what notice, if any, did you provide each of those bars regarding the DC Court of Appeals's decision to suspend you for 90 days.
KLAYMAN: [Many words.]
[COMMITTEE MEMBER]: So just to circle back to my question. Could you -- do you have a list of all of the bars that you're a member of?
So, he has filed the 15-page one as required (with 29 pages of zidbits), the 25-page one he really wanted to file (with a bunch of pages of zidbits to make it 62ish), the 60 some page motion for reconsideration to file the 25-page one because the court already denied. Yesterday, he filed a 33-page SUPPLEMENT. Since the judges of the circuit are apparently incapable of reviewing the very long record, and the original briefs, and the opinion, Larry has to give them more stuff to read. I suspect all of his whines are repeats of all of the whines previously in the record.northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:55 pmSo...northland10 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 8:26 pm In his original JW case, GIL would like some more words please because 15 pages is not enough to whine and complain about Judicial Watch, Fitton, and that conservative hating judge Rao (who should have supported GIL because Kollar-Kotelly is an evil leftist lib judge).
He wants 10 more pages because this case was drawn out since 2006 so it is very complex. Ignore the fact that it was his own actions that drew it out that long.
GIL wants more words.pdf
Pacer was being annoying and kept giving me Network Error when I tried to download. Had to print to PDF.. Appeals court docs don't get picked up on Recap..
Rules say 15 pages (3,900 words), GIL wanted 25 and petitioned for more. Court says, no (which took only one page, and the actual order text could have fit into a text message). So, he files the 15-page one with 3,899 words though the doc was 51 pages because he included 29 pages of exhibits. He also filed the one he wanted to file along with a Motion for leave to file a petition for reconsideration of the no you can't have more pages order.
It turns out Wohl wasn't wrong, just chronologically challenged:
Is this a bit of SovCittery creeping into GIL's latest temper tantrum?Plaintiff
3. LARRY KLAYMAN is an individual, natural person, who at all material times
was and is a citizen of Florida.
His notice09/15/2021 Open Document PER CURIAM ORDER, En Banc, [1914292] filed denying the motion for en banc panel to consider 25-page petition for rehearing and motion for reconsideration by the full court [1912152-3]. The Clerk is directed to note the docket accordingly. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the 15-page petition for rehearing en banc be denied [1912150-2]. Before Judges: Srinivasan, Henderson, Rogers, Tatel, Millett, Pillard, Wilkins, Katsas, Rao, Walker, Jackson and Silberman. [19-7105] [Entered: 09/15/2021 02:49 PM]
09/15/2021 Open Document NOTICE [1914343] NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK ALTERNATIVE AVENUES OF RELIEF filed by Larry Elliott Klayman [Service Date: 09/15/2021 ] [19-7105] (Klayman, Larry) [Entered: 09/15/2021 05:30 PM]
09/15/2021 Open Document CORRECTED NOTICE [1914344] NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK ALTERNATIVE AVENUES OF RELIEF filed by Larry Elliott Klayman [Service Date: 09/15/2021 ] [19-7105] (Klayman, Larry) [Entered: 09/15/2021 05:54 PM]
09/23/2021 Open Document MANDATE ISSUED to Clerk, U.S. District Court. [19-7105] [Entered: 09/23/2021 01:57 PM]
I am going to:NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK ALTERNATIVE AVENUES OF RELIEF
Reading that one-page self-pitying whinefest should remove any doubt in the minds of the appeals court as to what kind of lawyer they were dealing with. Not that they didn't already know.northland10 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:48 pm Been slacking and missed that the DC Circuit denied his rehearing en banc. Larry is upset because the courts denied his constitutional right to get what he wants.
Essentially, "Imma sue you and appeal to SCOTUS"woodworker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:18 pm Although IAAL, I am not familiar with a "Notice of Intent to Seek Alternative Remedies". WTF is that supposed to accomplish -- warn the appellate court that they better change their minds or GIL is going to appeal to SCOTUS (otherwise known as the "I am going to mom that you are being mean to me" strategem. I would really love it (it won't happen) for just one judge to file a reply saying "Such as?". Or a request to GIL to clarify if he is threatening the judges.
DISBAR THE ASSHOLE.
W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:48 pm
This "lawsuit" is going to be Rule 12'd so fast it may well achieve escape velocity.
Klayman can always represent himself.woodworker wrote: ↑Fri Sep 24, 2021 2:19 amWell, I was going to say "DISBAR THE GOD-DAMNED ASSHOLE COCK-SUCKING MOTHERFUCKER", but I thought I should tone it down a little.
bob wrote: ↑Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:25 amKlayman can always represent himself.woodworker wrote: ↑Fri Sep 24, 2021 2:19 amWell, I was going to say "DISBAR THE GOD-DAMNED ASSHOLE COCK-SUCKING MOTHERFUCKER", but I thought I should tone it down a little.
A vex-lit pre-filing order is needed. And warranted where you are suing judges for ruling against you.
Dated: September 21, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Larry Klayman
Larry Klayman
KLAYMAN LAW GROUP, P.A.
7050 W. Palmetto Park Rd
Boca Raton, FL, 33433
Email: leklayman@gmail.com
Plaintiff Pro Se
Especially for suing the same judge repeatedly for ruling against you, in the same case.