Barnett (judy) V. Obama Notice 4 Decision On Motion For Joinder And Amendment

Cody Robert Judy Pro Se 1318 North 1500 West Farr West, Utah 84404 (801) 497-6655 [email protected] www.codyjudy.us _____________________________________________________________________________________

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

411 West Fourth Street, Room 1053, Santa Anna, California 92701-4516 PAMELA BARNETT

)

Et.al., (CODY ROBERT JUDY)

)

NOTICE FOR A DICISION &

)

DECLARATION OF MR. JUDY ON

)

MOTION FOR PERMISSIVE JOINDER

)

AND AMENDMENT TO THE

) )

CIVIL RIGHTS / FEDERAL ELECTIONS COMPLAINT

)

(42 U.S.C.19§83 or§ 1985

)

U.S. Constitution Art.II Sect.1 )

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

)

BY ADDITIONAL CANDIDATE

Et al.,

) )

IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 2008 / WITH MOTION TO RECONSIDER/.

Plaintiff,

V.

) Defendant .

)

1

Civil No. . 8:09-cv-82 Judge: HONORABLE DAVID O.CARTER

Comes now the Plaintiff Cody Robert Judy, pro se, in the Barnett v. Obama civil case number 8: 09-cv-82, before the Honorable David O. Carter, with this NOTICE FOR A DECISION AND DECLARATION OF MR. JUDY ON MOTION FOR PERMISSIVE JOINDER AND AMENDMENT TO THE CIVIL RIGHTS/FEDERAL COMPLAINT BY ADDITIONAL CANDIDATE IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 2008 /WITH MOTION TO RECONSIDER/( Submitted by Dr. Orly Taitz Esq. on November 9th,2009) and says: 1- My name is Cody Robert Judy. I am over 18 years old, am of sound mind and free of any

mental disease or psychological impairment of any kind or condition. I am a natural born citizen of the United States of America; currently reside in the State of Utah. I filed the Motion for Permissive Joinder with this court and signed it Nov. 7th,2009. 2- This MOTION was received by the Court and the Defendant‟s Representative Council on Monday, November 9th,2009, as well as Council for Plaintiffs Orly Taitz and Gary Kreep.

3- On Nov. 12,2009, Plaintiff Council Orly Taitz supported argument in “Judicial Notice” stating “The plaintiff in Berg was seeking Declaratory and Injunctive Relief under Article 2 Section 1 Natural Born Citizen and under 42 USC §1983, seeking determination of eligibility for presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. In his opinion judge Sloviter finds that though the election is over, the court has jurisdiction to hear it as it “fits squarely” as an issue “capable of repetition yet evading review.” Merle v US, 351, 3d 92,94 (3d Cir 2003) Based on this argument there is Article 3 jurisdiction to hear the case as long as the plaintiff can show standing with specialized injury. While Berg’s holding finds that a regular voter does not have standing, Presidential and vice presidential candidates such as plaintiffs Ambassador Alan Keyes and Gail Lightfoot have standing. Judge Sloviter proceeds by arguing that both parties with actual and imminent injuries would have standing in this case.” 2

4- On Nov. 13,2009 Defendants, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby set forth their opposition to Plaintiffs‟ stating “Motion for Reconsideration of Order to Dismiss Under Rule 59E and Rule 60.” And stated: Rule 7-18 of the Local Rules of the Central District of California provides as follows:“Motion for Reconsideration. A motion for reconsideration of the decision on any motion may be made only on the grounds of (a) a material difference in fact...” Plaintiff Cody Robert Judy is indeed a „material difference in fact‟, as the court considers the „standing‟ issue Natural Born Citizen Constitutional Qualification Question in the Presidential Race of 2008, and injury to Presidential Candidates in the same race with Barack Hussein Obama such as Mr. Keyes, and myself respectfully, (Mr. Judy).

5- No objections to the addition of another candidate for President were made by either Plaintiff council Orly Taitz or Gary Kreep, or Defendant Council as represented in the Motion of Joinder. (Nov. 17, 2009) Attorney Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation filed a

notice of appeal in the case of Captain Pamela Barnett et al. vs. Barack Hussein Obama et al., for his clients Dr. Wiley Drake and Mr. Markham Robinson, thus the current condition of Plaintiffs as a whole in the incident is up for consideration in separation and permissive joinder, holding the „standing issue” and “jurisdiction issue” is the still the primary court contemplation and „Joinder” does not represent any deviation within the court‟s current pleadings. Plaintiff Cody Robert Judy prays the court has not progressed in agenda to necessarily dismiss a plea for “Joinder” arising from the same event and same question, yet unique and additional injury. The particularized “standing” favored in the Court‟s eyes, necessarily doesn‟t favor “class action” protocol. 6- Many other of the Plaintiffs argued in the case are representatives from various States in the United States, and all including Plaintiff Cody Robert Judy are found under the Supreme Law of the Land or United States Constitution.

3

7- I, Cody Robert Judy, am asking the same Constitutional question, in the same election, yet have suffered and am suffering unique and separate injury which is pre election certain and not conjectured or imminent from any other Plaintiff(s) from the same incident/fraud/election in which defendant is charged in maleficence of being a qualified natural born citizen in Constitutional Qualification in a fair election. Wherefore, Plaintiff Cody Robert Judy should not be necessarily excluded for being a resident of Utah. 8- I, Cody Robert Judy, assert that in suffering from the same incident, having standing as a candidate in the Presidential Race, (which began long before vice presidential candidates were chosen by candidates for president, which represents an even closer proximity of standing in the election then any vice presidential candidate in taking the oath of qualification), and signing the Declaration of Candidate for President of the United States, that it represents a discrimination and thus a political bias towards Presidential Candidate in not granting the Motion for Joinder in which relief can be granted by the judging trial of the claim of monetary reimbursement and retribution owed a fair and qualified candidate by the actions of Defendant fraudulently stating a claim of qualification ultra vires and usurping as winner of the election and now in the chair of POTUS. 9- As an injured party in the incident of the election of 2008, in the race for President, I respectfully implore the honorable Judgment by and through Your Honor David O. Carter in my Motion for Joinder and I further state I am not a qualified professional lawyer and in such procure the Courts latitude and mercy in my pleadings in wide discretion and assert it is not beyond my consideration and cooperation to, for the Courts convenience and consideration, allow the Courts favor in disciplined Representative, Orly

4

Taitz, on I pray one condition: That the court would in the least but not in any confinement consider the Plaintiff‟s Alan Keyes and myself, Cody Robert Judy, to be injured parties as Presidential Candidates in the election of 2008, of whom this action is brought to the court for judgment /and or trial. Dr. Orly Taitz Esq.‟s part in this action is as a representative to the injured, and is in no way related to the suffered the specialized injury as a candidate for President that we have claimed and endured, which injury has gone on much longer then before Dr. Orly Taitz Esq., became involved in any way shape or form. Wherefore, I hope with all diligence upon Your Honor‟s consideration, that any inference towards Mrs. Taitz as somehow a plaintiff in this action with a political motive, or bias, or anything not strictly conforming to representation of a client, be reconsidered in the contemplations of the court as not representing the Plaintiff‟s claims of injury and for relief. Specifically speaking upon the charge of the Court that Orly Taitz challenged on her personal blog to have sympathizers contact the court- to witt the court emphasized ignoring any such calls, is steadfastly to place Orly Taitz in the place of a Plaintiff rather than a representative of a client(s), which by no fault of the Plaintiff‟s should not stand to insult their personal injury in dismissing their claim of real injury in contrast to the Court‟s answering machine being tied up and a secretary be asked to delete any messages; respecting the Court‟s authority to chastise any proceeding in the courtroom or Pleadings within the Rules of the Court and respecting Orly Taitz has no control over the population of the United States in direction of the freedom of speech awards and to hold the Plaintiff‟s claims hostage towards any unwanted prayer by Patriot or fan of Orly Taitz should not valiantly be suffered by Plaintiffs in dismissal of a merited claim.

5

Certification of mailing I hereby certify that I MAILED a true and correct copy of the following : “NOTICE FOR A DECISION AND DECLARATION OF MR. JUDY ON MOTION FOR PERMISSIVE JOINDER AND AMENDMENT TO THE (42 U.S.C. §1983 or §1985) CIVIL RIGHTS / FEDERAL ELECTIONS COMPLAINT BY ADDITIONAL CANDIDATE IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 2008 / WITH MOTION TO RECONSIDER/.”.

Postage prepaid, U.S. Mail, this 20th day of November,2009 to the following parties :

Mrs. Dr.ORLY TAITZ, Esq. (SBN 223433) 26302 La Paz MissionViejo Ca 92691 Telephone: (949) 683-5411 Facsimile: (949) 586-2082 [email protected]

And Mr.GEORGE S. CARDONA Acting United States Attorney Mr. LEON W. WEIDMAN Assistant United States Attorney Chief, Civil Division Mr.ROGER E. WEST (State Bar No. 58609) Assistant United States AttorneyFirst Assistant Chief, Civil Division Mr.DAVID A. DeJUTE (State Bar No. 153527) Assistant United States Attorney Room 7516, Federal Building 300 North Los Angeles Street Los Angeles, California 90012 Telephone: (213) 894-2461/2574 Facsimile: (213) 894-7819 Email: [email protected] [email protected]

Signed this 20th day of November, 2009 __________Original

/s/ { Cody Judy} on Hardcopies sent_______________

_________________________________________

Cody Robert Judy

7