DC – Ex Rel. Sibley v Obama – Quo Warranto I – Doc 9 – Order denying petition

An order from the Court of Appeals. Apparently Sibley was not too happy with the speed of the proceedings and filed a motion with the COA.

[9] USCA ORDER (USCA Case Number 12-5040). Upon consideration of the petition for writ of mandamus or, in the alternative, fora writ procedendum ad justicium, it is ORDERED that the petition be denied. The district courts delay in ruling on the petition for writ of quo warranto is not so egregious or unreasonable as to warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. (kb) (Entered: 03/07/2012)

Sibley announces that he is going on vacation and what does this judge do? Realizing that even Sibley understands this is not an urgent issue, he denies the petition for writ of mandamus.

Tell me that you did not see that one coming?…

Continue reading

DC – Ex Rel. Sibley v Obama – Quo Warranto I – Doc 20 – Notice of Appeal

[20] NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 19 Memorandum & Opinion, 18 Order on Motion to Expedite, Order on Motion for CM/ECF Password, Order on Motion for Discovery, Order on Motion for Hearing, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion to Dismiss, by MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY. Filing fee $ 455, receipt number 4616049283. Fee Status: Fee Paid. Parties have been notified. (dr) (Entered: 06/19/2012)

DC – Ex Rel. Sibley v Obama – Quo Warranto I – Doc 10 – Motion for extension of time

[10] MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by JOHN DOE #1, JOHN DOE #2, ERIC HIMPTON HOLDER, JR, RONALD C. MACHEN, JR, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Soskin, Eric) (Entered: 03/08/2012)

If Sibley can go on vacation, then the defendants should have some extra time :-)

Continue reading

DC – Ex Rel. Sibley v Obama – Quo Warranto I – Doc 12 – Motion to dismiss

[12] MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint by JOHN DOE #1, JOHN DOE #2, ERIC HIMPTON HOLDER, JR, RONALD C. MACHEN, JR, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Soskin, Eric) (Entered: 04/02/2012)

Sibley is way in over his head. This is a beautiful, well written motion with appropriate references to relevant court rulings.

More below the fold

Continue reading

DC – Sibley v Obama – Quo Warranto I – US COA – Doc 2 – Reply in Support Summary Affirmance

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF APPELLEES’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE

Appellees respectfully reply to appellant Montgomery Blair Sibley’s opposition to their motion for summary affirmance.

In his opposition, Sibley principally argues that this Court’s summary affirmance procedures are unlawful, see Opp. at 2-5, and that he has an “inalienable right” to full briefing and oral argument, see id. at 20. As Sibley does not dispute, however, under the law of this Circuit, summary affirmance may be granted “when the merits of the parties’ positions are so clear,” Gray v. Poole, 243 F.3d 572, 575 (D.C. Cir. 2001), that “no benefit will be gained from further briefing and argument of the issues presented,” Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297-98 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam); see also D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and Internal Procedures § VIII.G (2011) (discussing summary disposition and citing authorities).

Continue reading

DC – Ex Rel. Sibley v Obama – Quo Warranto I – Doc 5 – Amended Complaint

After send a letter to the US Attorney Machen to request that he be heard by the Grand Jury

I write to request pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3332 that you inform the grand jury of the following alleged offense committed by President Barack Obama, my identity, and your action or recommendation. Moreover, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1504, I request that you communicate to the Grand Jury my request to appear before the Grand Jury.

Sibley added some additional items to his complaints.

[5] AMENDED COMPLAINT against JOHN DOE #1, JOHN DOE #2, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR, RONALD C. MACHEN, JR, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II filed by MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY.(dr) (Entered: 01/31/2012)

Read the amended complaint below the fold.

Continue reading