Case 10-2055 Begins

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT, FOR THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF IL

JAMES F. OSTERBUR

V. CASE #10-2055

STATE OF IL/ USA/ & JUDGE CHASE LEONHARD

DATED: 4/15/10

RE: motion to dismiss 4/ 12/10

NO guaranteed inherent constitutional right/ the failure of due process, where constitutional law is cited and demanded; CAN BE DISMISSED, CHALLENGED, OR DENIED by a rule, or every rule, of civil procedure. The right of law, the demand of citizenship, & the reality of democracy comes first.
1. This is errant, and fails to cite the USA as a primary defendant, represented by the solicitor general. It is consequently not only ridicule, because it suggests judge Chase Leonhard is the primary defendant/ it lacks respect. The primary plaintiff, is my guaranteed right, under my constitutional government, by law. State and national government is so completely intertwined, they cannot be separated in this matter. Because the state falls under federal jurisdiction/ it cannot be set aside as alone, in a matter of constitutional law. Neither can the federal court claim separation from the state, as without the states it is nothing. The constitution controls both by protecting this citizen, against UNFAIR practice, the lack of JUSTICE, and the equality: only the law decides, not a judge.
THIS IS A JUDICIAL failure to obey the constitution of this USA. And authorizes the claim grievous harm and substantial prejudice, by a judge who failed. The degree of crime, in stripping me of my right to sue/ my right to stand in court and demand due process from the employees who represent this state or national government called the constitution is deliberate. The lack of respect is clear/ the failure to return summons/ to date, the failure to provide a docketed attorney by either the USA attorney general office or solicitor general office: a clear sign of corruption.

Discarding this litigant from clear constitutional oversight; under which the US attorney must reply. Suggests conspiracy and fraud: “already been decided”/ DON’T need no damn jury. The use of a civil rule of procedure, in this case, an affront to democracy itself. The denial of both constitutional authority and WE THE PEOPLE. You, the state of IL are required to instruct these USA employees of their failure/ and fix it. You the state of IL are required to defend against the claim MY RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS/ THE LAW, CALLED FIRST AMENDMENT REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES WAS DENIED. Rules of procedure do not apply; guaranteed and inherent right does!

2. Judge leonhard is the state-court judge who presided over the case Entitled Osterbur V. Provena case 09-LM-1414, who denied without cause or statement, the addendum adding : doctor YOO/ emergency care physician for Provena, and his selected “bill collector”service ; Shemauger Emergency Physicia box 37757 Philadelphia pa 19101. Because the case is distinctly and deliberately about requesting and accepting the charges of one type of service/ and being billed for another. The service I accepted would have included the doctor billing. THEREFORE THE SAME CASE IN EFFECT/ they were not added in the beginning, because the billing had not come until the previous case had been filed. A failure of the court. The consequence being: that Shemauger has crossed the line, contacting me repeatedly even though I have told them this matter is in court/ even though I sent them court documents along the way/ even though I have told them cease and desist/ even though I have told them I would answer no further questions until this matter was resolved and I had my day in court. Even though I told them their doctor would be called into court, and charged with harassment if they failed to respect my day in court. Their last call was April 13, 2010 which having been duly and significantly been made aware of all the parameters in this case/ DOES CONSTITUTE CRIMINAL FELONY HARASSMENT. Because my day in court is of inestimable value to me/ it is my guaranteed right as a citizen of this nation, and the law will be respected. These two entities prove to respect that not.
You, the court; are advised I will agree to prosecute them, for criminal mischief; and that makes this matter your responsibility. Because my day in court has value to me/ my life demands respect from you/ and I will not surrender my due process in court without a fight. Because the judge failed in his duty/ failed to respect my right to be heard and failed in the case being concluded in a timely and honorable matter. By including these parties, it is one case. By failing to include it is two.

3. I do indeed state distinctly that the defendants engaged in the denial of my first amendment right to call upon a jury in this state with regard to REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES. IT’S THE LAW! AND THIS STATE OF ILLINOIS HAS NO RIGHT TO DENY TO ME A UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHT TO EVERY CITIZEN, THE LAW, I have demanded. I have established cause/ even though it is unnecessary, because throughout this United States; and this state of Illinois the facts and evidence of state and nation in crisis is UNDENIABLE; BY EVERY NEWS MEDIA IN THE NATION. PROVE ME WRONG. The establishment of inappropriate billing charges by a medical facility and its doctor as is this case/ is constant throughout this nation. And it is up to a jury to decide IF THE MERITS that I present are worth pursuing, under redress according to the first amendment.. Redress IS OUR LAW/ not yours. Redress is the constitutional demand, that our employees of government SHALL be held accountable, and that DEMOCRACY DOES BELONG to the people. NOT, to those who assume themselves to be rulers. I will argue the other amendments before nation, instead of state/ as they are summoned to this case, just like you. As they are an intricate part of the denial or acceptance: THAT EVERY STATE MUST OBEY THE CONSTITUTION, as would be reasonable to the owners of this land: WE THE PEOPLE. It is the USA attorney who must prove any state, can simply deny to me, a first amendment constitutional NATIONAL law/ a guaranteed and inherent right to me, for which there is no excuse, but to provide it. The civil war was fought on that same principle; that the states are bound to the same constitutional laws, every one/ and it is the federal government that must enforce it.
4. Judge Leonhard denies to me, my right to REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES: by the decision of a jury composed of WE THE PEOPLE, as the constitution allows. The first amendment is a legal right/ NOT a political one. Due process in a courtroom of law is therefore being denied to me/ and my case before this federal trial is: MAKE THIS STATE OBEY THE LAW! And remove the judge, who fails to obey the constitution. The law, as his oath demands.
5. I sue for my first amendment redress of grievances right/ I sue for my GUARANTEED INHERENT RIGHT AS PROVIDED BY THE US CONSTITUTION. The money you as leaders of this nation have already made worthless, is merely YOUR demand, it is not mine. You require it/ not me. I REQUIRE MY RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS WITHIN THE LAW OF THIS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. And that includes redress of grievances.

6. As to the state case 09-LM-1414 I demand a jury trial, so that they can decide the merits of my complaint/ and NOT A DAMN group of thieves who believe with a few words and the cover of immunity they can do any damn thing they wish. Protecting only the powerful/ dispensing only the intent of the rich.
7. The eleventh amendment IS, AS IT READS!   And no judge/ no courtroom/ no supreme court can alter those words or reinterpret them in any other way.   Only the congress/ and then by ratification the states, can change a single word. Thereby proving this statement describes, a corrupt and dangerously out of control judiciary. I demand accountability from this state/ it is my right, because they take my money; and demand work from me/ they take my life, because it is required to earn the money. These leaders, strangle the future of every citizen in this state; and they are NOT entitled to immunity:   because that, is the very nature of the first amendment to the US constitution redress of grievances. That the people are entitled to their nation, their state, and their government;   IT DOES NOT belong to the employees! IT IS OURS!
8. Judicial immunity applies to “good behavior” as does the constitution so state in article three! Bad behavior is subject to law! And it is the courtroom that sets the example for the people/ for the nation. Therefore it is the judge, that must demand from him or herself a level of competency, and knowledge so that no citizen should doubt:   it is the law, that rules here! That is not the case in 09-LM-1414 wherein hiding in lies, ruling for the sake of power, discarding constitutional law, and proving that due process for the common citizen is a privilege held back for the rich and powerful, with lawyers who fail justice. Whereby it is evident and real, this citizen is attacked with frivolous and useless denial of the facts in this case. This case 1414, is about inappropriate billing/ the relief is: APPROPRIATE BILLING. THE RELIEF IS:   stop the medical industry from extorting money from us all/ by examining what is right or wrong as a society through redress of grievances. Letting the people decide according to the constitutional limits it places upon them.
9. The action against judge Leonhard is allowed by article 3 section 1;   ...”the judges of both the supreme court and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during GOOD behavior...”   And section 2. 1. “The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity.” There is no allowance for denial of constitutional law, due process, or guaranteed rights.
10. Qualified immunity applies to “discretionary actions”. Obeying the law/ establishing due process/ protecting the citizen/ and establishing the 7th amendment of the US constitution is NOT discretionary.

11. For these reasons, the federal authority MUST INTERVENE, and demand the state, and its courts shall obey the law, provide due process, enforce the constitution/ and enforce the constitution as written. Protecting the inherent guaranteed rights of this citizen both of the USA and the state of IL.
12. This court is reminded: THAT IN DEMOCRACY, WE THE PEOPLE are the owners of this land/ and this government. Which means we also OWN THE COURT, and its employees are paid for by us. You are not alone, in a courtroom of law: YOU SIT, BY THE GRACE OF THIS PEOPLE. You are immune from actions against you under the constitution/ only by obeying the law, as written. You are not “gods/ you are not rulers/ you are not the government”: the constitution does this for us by its law. You, are employees, whose oath suggests, that bad behavior shall be penalized.

RE: MEMORANDUM OF LAW by the state
Facts as alleged

I need not claim 42 USC 1983: My demand is IT IS a federal mandate for the court of this USA to make:
THIS state of IL obey the law. By applying the rule of federal law to demand that they shall not deny the constitution and corrupt this government called we the people of THIS USA.
That, is a judicial matter/ a demand within the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment/ and the guaranteed rights and responsibilities of every judge to establish GOOD BEHAVIOR within a courtroom of this state and nation. That “good behavior” is denied, when the law is broken, or denied by any means.
Again I seek my day in court, under the rule of constitutional law, as written by the founders of this nation, and within the preamble to that constitution which declares the purpose of this people, in union with, this government called the constitution, and these states.

Judge leonhard failed to obey the law, by suggesting that what even a young man or woman could understand by simple english/ cannot be understood by his claim of justice, in champaign county court. As is noted, there is NO confrontation of facts or evidence by the judge or defense/ NO DENIAL of argument with specificity, even though that was demanded by the plaintiff. All that exists to deny due process to me, is the frivolous claims of “a child who believes he can play games with life”/ by stating “I won’t understand”. JUSTICE, IS FOR WE THE PEOPLE/ not games for the judiciary. If the people understand/ then a judge or defense attorney must as well. Let the jury decide/ that, is the law.
The failure to accept common statements of cause and effect, by an average citizen: is NOT due process. The legitimacy of a courtroom relies upon the ability of that court to determine what is hidden, or abused, or diverse, or a right of the people to know. The legal system requires “the ability to understand”/ its your job. My demand remains BE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND. And so will I. Until you do so, there are no facts which can be analyzed for review. As is the case with Miranda rights: I have a right to specific knowledge from the court/ specific procedural safeguards to insure by right of due process, my right of law, my right to defend myself in a courtroom of law. Shall not be denied or lost.; not simple “we don’t care about you or this law”. Therefore due process was again denied, the failure is corruption within the court.
The defendant in 09-LM-1414 desires my property, the result of my life of work: amendment 5 clearly states none “... shall be deprived of their life, liberty, or property without due process of law...” Do you deny I have rights equal to a criminal?

ISSUES AND ARGUMENTS

I. THIS PLAINTIFF HAS STATED: MAKE THE STATE PROVIDE ME WITH REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES IN THIS STATE OF ILLINOIS COURTROOM, by demanding the FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE US CONSTITUTION: The law, shall be obeyed! That is the relief to be granted! THAT, is the demand before this court, TO OBEY THIS LAW, and make the state obey it as well.

Other realities such as the removal or penalty required for the failure of a judge/ is entirely up to this federal court. Let the nation see, “WHAT CORRUPTION” has, as its price and penalty. Establish the law.
I CARE, about my guaranteed rights under the law, my inherent right to a courtroom with RESPECT, due process and the reality of JUSTICE, through fair play. It is the job of this courtroom to insist, that shall be done properly and with honor toward the law and constitution. The rest is frivolous to me.

Again, if this is “too educated, TOO PLAIN, or complex for you to understand as stated by this judge leonhard”. THEN BE SPECIFIC, about what it is that you do not understand, so that I can take you by the hand, and lead this court to the law. not endless words, but justice, fair play, and equality as a beginning. The claim being: unless the judge or the defense can be specific about what it does not understand/ then it must be established that they lie. Because that, is what facts, investigation, and evidence requires; not frivolous innuendo as is being hidden behind in this courtroom! THE LAW RULES a courtroom, NOT its judge. The people OWN THAT COURTROOM, and frivolous accusations are not allowed. This is not a game/ and I will not be ridiculed.
Case 09-LM-1414 is equally clear: the filing in reply “preparations for trial”/ clearly establish the reality of relief to be granted with regard to mediation in this billing. It is simply based upon whether or not the plaintiff did in fact state and establish: “ANYTHING BUT, an emergency room visit”/ and was in fact offered: “We have fasttrack” instead. The jury decides based upon that singular fact.
This defendant fails its own rule “a complaint must do more than merely “avoid foreclosing possible bases for relief; it must actually suggest that the plaintiff has a right to relief by providing allegations that raise a right to that relief above the speculative level”. There is no speculation in that filing, it is plain simple and direct. The establishment that inappropriate billing in medicine exists across this nation, is without doubt/ thereby establishing redress for the people to decide.
This defendant fails to establish by specificity or any introduction of facts/ instead, using merely innuendo and wishing to suggest that due process rights were not violated. I claim the law/ as described/ the defense offers nothing to refute that law, does not apply.
The defendant refuses to respect the plaintiffs filing/ refuses to apply the rules of due process that the evidence of a court case itself MUST be used as facts to establish whether the law was broken or not/ whether a judge failed this state or nation. As this is dismissed by the defendant outside the courtroom, whereby the law and its purpose in protecting this people is made a game. THEN THE ONLY PLACE, where JUSTICE can be served, is within the courtroom, by a jury that shall hear the evidence and decide. IT IS MY GUARANTEED INHERENT RIGHT/ by constitutional law, and the arguments filed/ the amendments stated, are my claim to be heard by a jury established for justice, equality, and fair play.

JUSTICE requires that the constitution shall be held with honor/ and separate from corruption by all parties and all citizens in this nation. JUSTICE demands that it is not only the job of the judiciary to represent that fact before the people/ it is their obligation to enforce the oath of office, wherever immunity has been lost, because THE LAW was denied. Its your job, and the degree of negligence, corruption, and denial by the court with regard to established cases under the first amendment law of redress of grievances, DEFINES AND CREATES, A JUDICIAL CONSPIRACY TO DENY “WE THE PEOPLE” OUR LAW!
That is a criminal felony, due punishment required stealing from the people their law/ that is treachery, against this UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. It is the courtroom of this USA that is at fault. By the evidence of trial as is represented by supreme court case 08-1339, conspiracy exists. Combined with the evidence presented, to deny this law, is as a disease within the court of this USA. Their deficiencies as a judiciary across the lines of jurisdiction by denial of the first amendment, are treasonous. IT IS THE PEOPLE YOU ARE SWORN TO UPHOLD, TO PROTECT. IT IS THIS DEMOCRACY WHICH LEADS, ALLOWS, AND DECIDES: not its employees. And there is NO ALLOWANCE for any interpretation of constitutional law, outside the boundaries presented within that preamble to the constitution which governs us all.
I do not re-plead/ I demand the jury that the constitution of this United states provides. I demand due process under the fourteenth amendment and require: that the judiciary SHALL RESPECT “the common citizen” within his or her right to justice. That does not entitle you to frivolous rules, or endless procedural requirements, or lies about what you do or do not understand. It entitles me, to DUE PROCESS! AND FAIR PLAY. To a jury trial, as the law allows.

IT IS noted, the US attorneys represented by the solicitor generals office and the US attorney general’s office have acted with contempt and bad faith/ causing an undue delay with regard to summons (3rd summons now sent/ no reply to the first two; thereby disrespect for the law, the judicial process, the people, and the court is obvious). It is the state’s defendant attorney which causes a dilatory plea to exist; with a clear purpose to defeat this cause of action by challenging on the grounds “the plaintiff cannot communicate”. 32 S.W. 2d 674, 675 A cause without merit or appreciable substance; it is the law NOT THE JUDGE nor the attorney for the defense that holds a superior ground. It is the jury that determines merit, not a judge. It is the law that must be served NOT the punitive claims of “judicial children” throwing tantrums “I don’t want to do it”. THAT, is not your right to decide! The prejudice is found in the court/ not me. The requirement that I must be a licensed lawyer to be heard in a courtroom, does not exist. Should this court decide that I cannot appeal/ I say to you plainly, communication is not limited to this courtroom.

I will now be specific to your memorandum: within the assumption that “I pleaded myself out of court, “by establishing an impenetrable defense”; how is that against the law requiring due process and my day in court? If indeed “I have won this case” then do as ordered and provide me with redress of grievances and a jury to decide as declared. Take the judge to task, and show what destroying your oath of office means to this nation.
The defense says: “...would be necessary to contradict the complaint in order to prevail on the merits”. How is that NOT FUNDAMENTAL to presenting the need for justice/ as it is clear the aberrations in the rule of fair play are so distinct, the corruption so plain in the court: THEY CANNOT BE DENIED? Again, if I have won/ then prove it with merit and obedience to the law.
“....the defendant may use those facts to demonstrate that he is not entitled to relief”. The defendant does no such thing, rather the defense relies upon a vague reference to constitutional amendments, without argument/ and functionally suggests I have no business in court, because I don’t speak the language of lawyers/ and am intent only on JUSTICE. Due process is not so blind, as to give credence to such a claim as this defense has made.
This defense attorney pleads that the eleventh amendment can be reinterpreted by taking out or adding to the words that exist therein. IT IS A LIE/ only the congress and the states can rewrite a constitutional amendment. This is tyranny, plain and simple.
The case against judge leonhard relies upon “good behavior” for which there is no argument: stay within the law and the intent of justice/ and even if you error, I will not complain but appeal. This case however recognizes bad behavior/ because WHEN A JUDGE DISOBEYS OR DISCARDS, THE LAW! Particularly constitutional law: THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT, TO SEE HIM DISMISSED FROM THE COURT, as is consistent with the judicial oath of office, and the purposes and intent of this democracy. Break the law, and you go to jail, or face the penalties: IS THAT NOT SO! Judge leonhard breaks the law, by sitting on a bench representing what the people demand that he must do, IN HIS JOB! THAT IS: OBEY THE LAW, and enforce it.

II THE CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE ARE BARRED BY ELEVENTH AMENDMENT

The leaders of a state are not immune from LEGAL accountability to its people/ nor is a nation. THAT is the purpose of the law, called first amendment redress of grievances. The law is the law. The eleventh amendment is the eleventh amendment and it is not open to any interpretation that is literally NOT within the content of its words. This is treason to suggest that the judiciary in any form can supercede the constitutional requirement that only the congress and then by ratification among the states, CAN ONE SINGLE WORD, be changed or denied. You have failed the nation/ and it is with treachery that this statement or claim exists.
This case is as it is brought before this courtroom BASED ENTIRELY ON CONSTITUTIONAL DEMAND, for guaranteed, inherent rights as granted to a citizen of this state and this nation, by which the court MUST declare itself: either for or against the constitution of this United States of America. Because that is what obeying the law as a judge requires.
I do not plead under 42 USC 1983

III JUDGE LEONHARD IS ENTITLED

This case is about unlawful acts performed within the jurisdiction of a courtroom in this state of IL. The constitution provides “for good behavior”/ NOT BAD! I do not contend against “good behavior”. What is important in every nation is JUSTICE/ to allow a judge to run away from the law, and do whatever he pleases to a plaintiff or defendant, IS NOT LAWFUL. This therefore suggests that a level of corruption so abhorrent that the court no longer knows the difference between law and justice/ between due process and rights granted by a constitution, and is viewed as A VEXATIOUS ACTION by the defense. Prosecuted only by employees in open revolt against the people of this nation.
It is not the disappointment of law that brings judge leonhard or me, to this case 10-2055, it is the refusal to obey the law in case 09-LM-1414. The denial of justice, and the corruption of public purpose/ the failure of democracy. That, is injurious to this state and nation; and to me. That is “adhering to the enemies of peace and harmony within this nation”/ and it forfeits the right of a citizen, or reason called immunity for a judge.

The absolute disgrace of a statement suggesting that judges “forced to face their erroneous decisions” would be too timid to continue their job. Establishes an unfair and undue reliance on one single citizen employee/ whereas the entire public being forced to endure the ERRONEOUS DECISIONS OF A JUDGE/ are in effect FORCED into timidity, because they have no options in the court. Rather instead of justice, the courtroom is held in open contempt against the people. An absolute denial of every judicial intent called FAIR PLAY. AN ENEMY of the people protected by an illicit and illegal gang of thieves who stole our own nation, by using law to rape and run rampant over lives.
There has been NO final judgment in this case 09-LM-1414 as of this date/ so far as any notice by the court given to me. Further, any assertion that a judge “...no matter how reprehensible the conduct....” can be “...absolutely barred...” from accountability for that conduct: IS THE EPITOME OF TYRANNY! No rules for the judge/ his oath is nothing more than “window dressing” to destroy, enslave the people, or do anything he pleases: IS NOT JUSTICE/ NOR IS IT LAWFUL/ NOR IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL, as this is NOT “good behavior” for which immunity is granted; and nothing else, but good behavior.
The official duty of a judge is NOT to break the law, but defend the people with law. This was not done; he stepped outside the protection of immunity, by failure to obey the law, as is required by oath, and by EVERY citizen of this USA, including judges. It is the official duty of a superior courtroom to establish the penalties of his oath, the failure of his duty to this people.

IV THE ACTION AGAINST JUDGE LEONHARD IS BARRED

The supreme court HAS BEEN established as the preferred venue, TO confront an illegal conspiracy against the first amendment of this US constitution/ withholding its value/ and its law, from the people of this nation and state of IL. The federal court HAS THE RIGHT, AND THE DUTY to send this case to the supreme court of this UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. And they, the supreme court of this USA, have absolutely no right to dismiss, because this case, is about whether the state of IL shall be required to obey constitutional law within its courtrooms therein. It is the job of the federal government employee judiciary, to enforce constitutional law! There is NO allowance for “I don’t want to”. It’s the law, its your job/ and you shall do it or be in open revolt against this USA! Specifically REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, by the first amendment.

While that is established as fact for state and nation, as a requirement for every court in this nation and in this state. The demand for protection as a citizen of this USA, within a federal court; again returns to:   MAKE THIS STATE OF IL, obey the law and establish redress of grievances, in case 09-LM-1414. IT IS NOT ONLY THE LAW, IT IS YOUR OATH AND YOUR DUTY! IT IS YOUR JOB!
The injury associated with this case, IS A DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS/ by means so lacking in merit, that a child can see it.
The defense asserts “...called upon to review the state court decision...the district court may not do”. The merits of law and justice disagree;   law determines the people right/ while justice determines whether the court has acted properly in accordance with law and the constitutional requirements to protect this people. It is not the state court decision that owns a right to decide/ NOT A JUDGES DECISION. It is the law that decides who and what is FAIR PLAY. When that chain of protection, which is the appellate process is broken, the nation suffers; when a lower court can be reminded, “the law is the law”: the people are honored. The tragedy of failure, as is necessary to address by redress of grievances as is clearly seen in this case 10-2055. INCLUDES:   With gluttonous stupidity the leaders are spending as of last February per month:   39.7 billion dollars more than it takes in, just for federal spending. THAT debt EQUALS 39,700 MILLIONAIRES losing all their money in that month. We cannot pay it, WHICH MEANS it ain’t debt/ but inflation, and the numbers (money) is held apart for the rich to have. While making the people become slaves working for devalued dollars while being sold lies, about a financial future that does not exist. Amendment thirteen precludes slavery; but reality says, if you destroy the foundations of money/ you make the people slave, prostitute, and violent; wanting revenge. The leaders of this nation do break the 13th amendment.
Redress applies, when fair play is not evident in a state court, justice is not granted by our leaders, failure is obvious and extreme.   It is the job of a federal court to ensure the damage being done is limited:   so that even greater tragedy does not occur. The bill or rights: ...”they cannot by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity”   The court is the first line of defense, where peace for the nation, is the purpose of a court/ by providing justice and fair play. This is NOT a review of decision per se/ but a review of procedural due process. The law is superior to every judge, AND THEY KNOW IT, therefore the law rules, and not the judge.

REDRESS APPLIES: I am threatened in every conceivable way/ by the leaders of both state and nation who gamble with our lives, our nation, our world, and our future. As is or will be set out for the jury to decide. The bill of rights: “... that government is or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, security, or protection of the people”.. Yet I am charged money in taxes, SO THAT I CAN BE THREATENED, by state and nation; (no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community) because the leaders committed fraud, continue to destroy, fail to accept the duties of peace on earth, mutilate the very nature that keeps us alive, and threaten to burn the entire planet with fusion: the burning of atomic bonds as on the sun/ bringing that here, where everyone and everything is fuel. The bill of rights: “...an indubitable, inalienable, infeasible, right to reform, abolish or alter in such form as the public decide....
YOU CHARGE ME FOR YOUR FAILURE, YOUR DISGRACE/ YOUR DISRESPECT/ YOUR ARROGANCE/ YOUR LIES, STEALING, CHEATING, AND GAMBLING WITH ALL LIFE ON EARTH! You fill this nation with your religion called evolution; which by no means can be proven; you destroy the purpose and the possibilities of DEMOCRACY with tyranny and corruption. And fail at every turn. REDRESS IS ACCOUNTABILITY. Redress is reality and truth by the evidence, by constitutional law and intent. Redress is “the owners right”, to address and demand their employees shall give them answers, or pay the penalty by law; as an oath provides.
This constitutional claim is not intertwined with a decision, it is a reality of law. This demand is based upon procedural due process, and constitutional guarantees; and that is well within the jurisdiction of a federal court to demand. “The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity”/ not just whatever they choose. It is NOT the courts right to dismiss ANY CASE, brought before it in law or equity by constitutional decree: AND THAT INCLUDES THE US SUPREME COURT. They deny, and ridicule the people/ but THIS IS OUR NATION, not theirs; and they are merely the employees and must give account..
The final decision has not yet been handed down in case 09-LM-1414

V JUDGE LEONHARD IS ENTITLED

It is not discretionary for a judge, to obey the constitution. HE MUST OBEY! Let the supreme court prove otherwise.
It has been established this judge did violate clearly established constitutional rights, and law; of which he clearly would have known. THIS IS ABOUT THE LAW, CLEARLY WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS USA, AND IT IS, THE JOB OF EVERY JUDGE TO KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THAT DOCUMENT. This judge was given opportunity to reverse his decision, and obey/ he chose not to.

In the case at bar the defense suggests that I have failed to establish a claim upon which relief can be granted. The defense thereby suggests, that both due process and the first amendment are toys to the court, that words can defeat justice, that the right of trial by a jury is DENIED: because the judge or a defense attorney can pretend this is due process instead/ they lie. There is no true specificity regarding the filing by the defense, only the complaint; “We don’t like this claim/ throw it away”. Or more simply: the defense says, we don’t like these laws, let the court REBEL AND DESTROY THE CONSTITUTION. Use anything you like, it don’t matter to us, corruption throughout the system of justice in this USA. As is consistent with the claim of conspiracy against the people of this nation in denying to them their first amendment redress of grievances. THERE IS NO CASE ANALOGOUS to show/ because the courtroom of this USA is corrupt, and violates THE LAW, not allowing these cases to exist. They rebel not only against the nation, but democracy itself.

CONCLUSION

The defense has failed to establish merit or substance that overrides the duty applied by this case. Judge leonhard is not entitled to immunity, because he failed to accept, establish, identify, quantify, certify, respect, or protect this nation called WE THE PEOPLE, with its law. He chose against the law.
I cannot “plead myself out of court”/ due process is not a judiciary option: therefore my right to be in court/ my right of trial by jury according to the merits of this case, are a constitutional duty before the court and any intent to remove them is fundamentally an attack, upon each citizen in this state and nation. It’s the fourteenth amendment that applies/ not the discretion of a judge, not any judge.
Whereas let the various aspects of this case be commenced at once.

The electronic record, is filed at www.justtalking3.info under the heading federal trial 10-2055.