Orly needs to immediately file a motion for recusal.

In footnote 1, Judge Lamberth says, "is premised on the incorrect assumption that Social Security numbers assigned prior to1973 have any correlation to the recipient’s residence" This factually wrong. It was only for SSN assigned after 1973.

Clearly Judge Lamberth is sending her a signal that he is under duress or else he wouldn't have made this mistake.

He is practically begging for her to give him the chance to recuse himself.

The Court is loath to dignify plaintiff’s allegations of fraud with a response on the merits. However, suffice it to say that plaintiff’s argument is premised on the incorrect assumption that Social Security numbers assigned prior to 1973 have any correlation to the recipient’s residence, see Employer Filing Instructions and Information,http://www.socialsecurity.gov/employer/stateweb.htm (“Prior to 1973, social security numbers were assigned by ourfield offices. The [first three] number[s] merely established that his/her card was issued by one of our offices in that State.”). Plaintiff’s entire premise is totally defeated by a cursory examination of this site, which demonstrates that plaintiff’s allegations lack any basis in fact.

ORYR comment:

You're good. I would have never suspected. That being the case, why wouldn't the judge just come out and recuse himself? Or better still, come clean as to where the pressure is coming from?

Nothing is too stupid for birfers. Dealio says:

TAITZ v ASTRUE (USDC D.C.)
New Docket Entry...

link shortly
Another not so lucky day for Orly
Taitz v Ruemmler also DISMISSED today
See thread with link shortly

Yes, but there's always hope Taitz v. Hillary Clinton.

It never dawned on me there's Special Reports section since I access Fogbow by going directly to the Forum. I guess I'll need to make a point to check out the homepage every once and a while. I didn't see an author for this report, but whoever did it did an excellent job. I wish I had known this report (as well as the other reports listed in the Special Reports ) about this because I could have saved so most trying to re-find information.

Foogy did the SR on the SSN. IIRC, Epectitus wrote the Layers one, and Verbie most of the Abercrombie one (and I posted them). Foogy did the rest.

We sort of came to a halt when the LFBC was released in April, except for the special reports.

Because it's a conspiracy!

Among counsel's "disdainful and unsubstantiated conclusions about the panel members’ emotional stability and competence to serve objectively" was an allegation that one panel member “would or should provoke a congressional investigation." Sound familiar?

Still batshit crazy

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26591

Draft of Notice of Appeal and Motion to stay final order pending appeal
Posted on | October 18, 2011 | No Comments

Snip
4. Plaintiff Moves this court to stay its’ final order pending appeal, so the Plaintiff can proceed with the Motion to compel hearing currently scheduled for November 21, 2011 in USDC in HI to compel inspection of Barack Obama’s original birth certificate,

Court showed bias against the Plaintiff, political dissident civil rights leader attorney Dr. Orly Taitz and in favor of the defendant, Commissioner of the Social Security administration, aimed at shielding from criminal prosecution Mr. Barack Hussein Obama, II, currently occupying the position of the President of the United States and Commander in Chief, party of interest in the case, in spite of clear, undeniable, irrefutable evidence, presented by the Plaintiff, showing that Barack Obama is fraudulently using a Social Security number, issued in the state, where he never resided, which was never assigned to him according to the Social Security administration.

From the Draft Notice of Appeal...



Since it's a DRAFT I won't comment on what's not in the appeal.

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ pro se

29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, STE 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-7603

E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com, orly.taitz@gmail.com



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Dr. Orly Taitz, in pro se ) Hon. Royce C. Lamberth

)

Plaintiff, )

) Case No. 11-cv-00402

v. )

) Notice of Appeal

Michael Astrue, Commissioner of the )

Social Security Administration, ) Request to stay final order

) pending appeal

)

)

Respondent . )

_________________________________)

Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. (Hereinafter “Taitz”) is hereby notifying this court of an Appeal being filed challenging the following orders:

1. Order granting Motion for Summary Judgment by the defendant Michael Astrue, commissioner of the Social Security administration. Plaintiff files this appeal based on following:

a. Court made an error of facts of the case and misrepresented the case and the argument by the Plaintiff in its’ order, as well as error of law.

b. Court showed bias against the Plaintiff, political dissident civil rights leader attorney Dr. Orly Taitz and in favor of the defendant, Commissioner of the Social Security administration, aimed at shielding from criminal prosecution Mr. Barack Hussein Obama, II, currently occupying the position of the President of the United States and Commander in Chief, party of interest in the case, in spite of clear, undeniable, irrefutable evidence, presented by the Plaintiff, showing that Barack Obama is fraudulently using a Social Security number, issued in the state, where he never resided, which was never assigned to him according to the Social Security administration. Contrary to the court assertion, in and around March of 1977, when above Social Security number was issued in the state of Connecticut, according to the Social Security own guidelines, the application was supposed to be submitted from the state of Connecticut. At a time Barack Obama was 16 years old and resided in Hawaii and was nowhere near the state of Connecticut, which clearly shows him fraudulently using a Social Security number issued to another individual. The court erred in completely ignoring affidavits of Senior Deportation office of the Department of Homeland Security John Sampson, licensed investigators Susan Daniels and Neil Sankey, attesting to the fact, that the application for Connecticut Social Security number xxx-xx-4425, had to be submitted and mailed from Connecticut, as well as information that in the national databases this Social Security number is connected to multiple dates of birth, including birth in 1890, which places the holder of the above number at an age of 121 years old, which is clearly not the age of Barack Obama.

2. Order, denying motion for reconsideration is appealed on the same grounds.

3. Order, denying preparation of Vaugn index is appealed on the same grounds

...the holder of the above number at an age of 121 years old, which is clearly not the age of Barack Obama.