Petition for Certiorari – Patent Case 94-782 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) - Patent Statute 35 USC 261 – Judgment lien Statute 12 USC 1963
5/5
()
About this ebook
Does Civil Rule 12(h)(3) require that a court must decide a question of jurisdiction before it?
Does patent statute 35 USC 261 bar a court's jurisdiction to void the assignment of United States Patents by operation of California State laws? Does judgement lien statute 28 USC 1962 bar a court's jurisdiction to hear a suit to void the assignment of United States patents by operation of California State laws?
James Constant
writes on law, government, mathematics and science, as they are and as they should be
Read more from James Constant
Related to Petition for Certiorari – Patent Case 94-782 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) - Patent Statute 35 USC 261 – Judgment lien Statute 12 USC 1963
Titles in the series (10)
Questions Presented Supreme Court Cases Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari: Denied Without Opinion Patent Case 93-1413 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari Denied Without Opinion: Patent Case 93-1518 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari Denied Without Opinion: Patent Case 98-1972. Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari Denied Without Opinion: Patent Case 96-1178 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Extraordinary Writ Denied Without Opinion– Patent Case 94-1257 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari – Patent Case 99-396 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) Patent Assignment Statute 35 USC 261 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari Denied Without Opinion: Patent Case 98-1151 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari – Patent Case 01-438 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Related ebooks
Stop Judicial Abuse Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsKeeter & Sinquefield's Habeas Cite Book Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSupreme Court Petition No 10-1275 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsConstitution of the State of Tennessee Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Petition for Certiorari: Denied Without Opinion Patent Case 93-1413 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari Denied Without Opinion: Patent Case 98-1972. Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Extraordinary Writ Denied Without Opinion– Patent Case 94-1257 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsAn Inexplicable Deception: A State Corruption of Justice Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsFederal Rules of Evidence: Hyperlinked, #3 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari Denied Without Opinion: Patent Case 98-1151 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari – Patent Case 01-438 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPetition for Certiorari – Patent Case 99-396 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) Patent Assignment Statute 35 USC 261 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsShocking Judgements Delivered by the Supreme Court of United States: Full Text Judgements with Summary Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsU.S. Crimes and Criminal Procedure Hyperlinked: 18 U.S.C.: Hyperlinked, #7 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSelect Legal Topics Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Principles of Pleading and Practice in Civil Actions in the High Court of Justice Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Harvard Law Review: Volume 127, Number 5 - March 2014 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCivil Appellate Practice in the Minnesota Court of Appeals Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Jury Nullification: The Evolution of a Doctrine Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Harvard Law Review: Volume 130, Number 7 - May 2017 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsHow one of my Pro-se cases got destroyed by federal rogue judges Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsState of the Union Addresses Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsKnight's Code Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCopyright Law of the United States of America / Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThat Man from Nebraska - Confronting the Constitution Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsElements of Nevada Legal Theories Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsLighting the Way: Federal Courts, Civil Rights, and Public Policy Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsA Conceptual Approach to California Summary Judgment Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Target Defendant Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Constitutional Law For You
Constitutional Law Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Constitutional Law For Dummies Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5The Radical Mind: The Destructive Plans of the Woke Left Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsU.S. Constitution For Dummies Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Selected Works of Alexander Hamilton Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Crime Scene Investigations Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Supreme Court: 20 Cases that Changed America Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsWe the People: A Progressive Reading of the Constitution for the Twenty-First Century Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Federal Tax Returns Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsA Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law - New Edition Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The U.S. Constitution and Other Writings Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5An Introduction to Legal Reasoning Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsA Student's Guide to the Study of Law Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Justice Corrupted: How the Left Weaponized Our Legal System Rating: 2 out of 5 stars2/5Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy’s Guide to the Constitution Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Reason in Law Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Constitution of the United States: Including The Declaration of Independence and The Bill of Rights Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5Lincoln's Constitution Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The US Constitution with the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confede Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5From Covid To Communism: Chronicling the Global Assault on Our Freedom and What to Do About It. Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Bill of Rights Primer: A Citizen's Guidebook to the American Bill of Rights Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsConstitutional Law, Law Essentials: Governing Law for Law School and Bar Exam Prep Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsLoaded: A Disarming History of the Second Amendment Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Liberty and Sexuality: The Right to Privacy and the Making of Roe v. Wade Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5The Supermajority: How the Supreme Court Divided America Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Heritage Guide to the Constitution: Fully Revised Second Edition Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Supremes' Greatest Hits: The 44 Supreme Court Cases That Most Directly Affect Your Life Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5
Reviews for Petition for Certiorari – Patent Case 94-782 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) - Patent Statute 35 USC 261 – Judgment lien Statute 12 USC 1963
2 ratings0 reviews
Book preview
Petition for Certiorari – Patent Case 94-782 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) - Patent Statute 35 USC 261 – Judgment lien Statute 12 USC 1963 - James Constant
Petition for Certiorari – Patent Case 94-782
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3)
Patent Statute 35 USC 261 – Judgment lien Statute 12 USC 1963
By James Constant
Smashwords Edition
Copyright © 1994 by James Constant
Smashwords Edition, License Notes
This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.
No. 94-782
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE
UNITED STATES
October Term, 1994
________________________________________________________
In Re: JAMES CONSTANT,
Debtor.
________________________________________________________
ARGEREY CONSTANT, JAMES CONSTANT
Petitioners,
V.
DAVID L. RAY, SALTZBURG, RAY & BERGMAN,
Respondents.
________________________________________
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Argerey Constant
James Constant
Pro-per Petitioners
i
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Should this Court resolve direct conflicts between the court of appeal's decision on jurisdiction and decisions on jurisdiction of this Court and other Circuit Courts on the following matters:
Does Civil Rule 12(h)(3) require that a court must decide a question of jurisdiction before it?
Does patent statute 35 USC 261 bar a court's jurisdiction to void the assignment of United States Patents by operation of California State laws?
Does judgement lien statute 28 USC 1962 bar a court's jurisdiction to hear a suit to void the assignment of United States patents by operation of California State laws?
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
OPINIONS BELOW
JURISDICTION
STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT
A. Civil Rule 12(h)(3) Requires That A Court Must Decide A Question of Jurisdiction
Before It
B. Patent Statute 35