OPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE INITIAL BRIEF
FEB 27, 2023 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: FEB 27, 2023
MARCH 8, 2023
UNPUBLISHED ORDER
(SUA SPONTE ORDER TO DENY TIME TO REPLY INCLUDING A 3 JUDGE ORDER ISSUED)
Before King, Jones, and Smith, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:
IT IS ORDERED that Appellant’s opposed motion to transfer this appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is DENIED.
The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has processed the recently widowed, elder Appellant’s appeal, assigned the appellate case number and noticed March 20, 2023 as the deadline for submission of the Appellant’s Brief.
On February 17, 2023, Appellant, Joanna Burke, requested this appeal be transferred to the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in the “interests of justice”.
On February 23, 2023, Appellees submitted a motion for an extension of time to respond to the Appellant’s request for venue transfer which this court has granted and extended until February 6, 2023.
Appellant today, February 27, 2023, timely requests this court extend the briefing schedule for a period of ninety days for the reasons set out in the above motion(s) along with the fact Appellant cannot possibly prepare the opening brief until venue is decided.
Why? Briefs are limited by word-count and the argument presented will be structured based on whether Appellant is addressing the “judicial machinery itself” which directly caused the harm, namely this Circuit, or whether Appellant is addressing an independent Circuit Court which is not familiar with the history and facts of the underlying litigation.
See Judge James Ho’s dissent from only five days ago, admitting and affirming Appellants like Joanna Burke cannot possibly receive a fair and impartial tribunal at the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit;
“Even worse, we’re not just getting the First Amendment backwards. We’re also getting qualified immunity backwards. Just compare the denial of en banc rehearing here with some of our other recent en banc decisions.” Gonzalez v. Trevino, No. 21-50276, at *13 (5th Cir. Feb. 22, 2023), and;
“Put simply, “we grant immunity when we should deny-and we deny immunity when we should grant.” Horvath v. City of Leander, 946 F.3d 787, 795 (5th Cir. 2020) (Ho, J., concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part). Indeed, ours is the rare circuit that has been summarily reversed by the Supreme Court for both wrongly granting and wrongly denying qualified immunity.”
Gonzalez v. Trevino, No. 21-50276, at *14 (5th Cir. Feb. 22, 2023).
In Appellant’s own case(s), judicial immunity has been granted, when clearly it should have been denied.
CONCLUSION
This motion for an extension of ninety days until Monday, June 20, 2023 should be GRANTED.
Wild West Hired Guns Misfire: PHH ONITY’s Cooked-Up n’ Cockamamie Arguments Implode
Judge Werlein recused in July and hence ONITY’s argument is frivolous, and their motion for summary judgment violates court procedures.
Southern District Court in Houston: Addressing the Missing USPS Express Mail with Specificity
All non-attorney pro se litigants must deliver or mail filings to the Clerk’s Office, as per SD TX Guidelines for Litigants Without Lawyers.
Texas Appellate Justice Ken Molberg: Statute of Limitations Suspended During Litigation and Appeal
That differs when you are in Federal Court on Appeal. It didn’t stop PHH and Mark Cronenwett from filing for nonjudicial foreclosure.
Texas Rustlers: Corralling Calculated Legal Bandits and Villainous Practices by Courtroom Outlaws
Behind Closed Doors: The Coordinated Efforts of Legal Bandits and Complicit Courts to Deprive Homeowners of Their Rights and Property.
Justice in the Wild West: One Fearless Widow’s Battle for Truth and Honor in the Federal Courthouse
The Texas Struggle: Defying Northern Banking Giants and Their Bounty Hunting Lawyers to Protect Her Home from Rustlers and Thieves
Including the How: Addressing the Missing Piece in Quoting Fraud with Specificity
In Plaintiff’s prior response, under section F. Burke Fails to Assert a Claim for Fraud, the How element was inadvertently omitted.
Federal Bankruptcy Judge Lopez: I Don’t Read Words Into Statutes. I Read What They Say and I Follow It
Texas Supreme Court Justice Blacklock: Why should the court give the lender rights it didn’t bargain for to get paid?
A Wild West Blunder: PHH’s Hired Bounty Hunters at Hopkins Law Deliver a Cockamamie Response
Gunsmoke and Legal Misfires: PHH’s Reply Misses the Mark. Hopkins Law’s Cockamamie Response Turns Legal Logic into High Noon Nonsense.
Texas Law Professors on Bankruptcy and Civil Rights Won’t Confront Premeditated Judicial Misconduct
Three lauded Texas University law schools employ these academics. Despite their resumes centered on civil rights, they refuse to defend them.
Second Quick-Fire Ruling by Federal Magistrate Judge Challenges Integrity of Her Own Scheduling Order
Uneven Treatment: Judge Allows Longer Response Time for Opposing Party and their Counsel Despite Previous Restrictions on Pro Se Plaintiff.
Quick-Fire Ruling by Federal Magistrate Judge Challenges Integrity of Her Own Scheduling Order
Uneven Treatment: Judge Allows Longer Response Time for Opposing Party and their Counsel Despite Previous Restrictions on Pro Se Plaintiff.
Federal Court Bailouts: The Troubling Connection Between PHH Mortgage Corp. and Judicial Corruption
The Southern District of Texas Houston Division’s Federal Court Scandals mount as this case presents a further example of Judicial Activism.
