June 6 felt like the weight of institutional resistance pressed in on every front. I filed a supplement to my Rule 59(e) motion documenting new evidence that the Eastern District had improperly disclosed my unserved ex parte TRO to outside parties—an action that became clear when it was cited in the OAH’s May 23 Final…
June 5 was another infuriating example of how process is being used to obstruct rather than facilitate justice. Magistrate Judge Auld denied every pending motion I had filed: my urgent request to strike his prior orders, my motion for alternative service, and both the CM/ECF and recusal motions—despite the fact that the docket had shown…
On June 5, AL Judge Turrentine immediately denied my Rule 59(e) motion challenging the May 23 final decision, which I filed to correct legal and factual errors, retaliatory framing, and improper judicial notice of unrelated litigation—including an unserved federal complaint that raised serious due process and surveillance concerns. The denial falsely claimed the motion was…
On May 30, I formally resubmitted my Record on Appeal along with a detailed Notice of Objection, after it had been improperly rejected twice—without any judicial order—despite full compliance with Rule 11(b) because Judge Osteen failed to rule on the 59(e) motion.
My resubmission wasn’t just about compliance—it was about preserving my appellate rights and…
Judge Osteen denied my Emergency Motion for an Ex Parte TRO, claiming I hadn’t demonstrated irreparable harm or likelihood of success—despite submitting verified evidence and a detailed procedural record showing deliberate interference with my appellate rights and ongoing judicial misconduct. The ruling ignored the central issue: that orders were being issued without jurisdiction, service was…
What happened on May 26 and 27 wasn’t judicial review—it was judicial retaliation wrapped in technicality. In my federal Fair Housing Act case against Anna, Magistrate Judge Auld issued back-to-back rulings that dismissed my renewed motion for electronic filing access and my motion for his recusal. But neither order was grounded in law—they were personal,…
I had to drive back to Greensboro to refile my 1983 claim and TRO in the Middle District. I also filed a Motion for Alternative Service in Anna’s federal case because she’s actively evading the summons. The address she registered with the state denied any association with her, which is just another illegal act on…
On May 23, Administrative Law Judge Karlene Turrentine of the NC Office of Administrative Hearings issued an order that didn’t just deny my contested case—it weaponized my other case in an attempt to discredit me entirely. The ruling wasn't grounded in facts, legal precedent, or the specific procedural violations I raised. It read more like…
On May 21, Judge James Dever III issued a dismissive order denying my Emergency TRO and Motion for Electronic Filing, citing generic case law as if he'd conducted a genuine review—when in fact, he ignored the verified evidence and mischaracterized my claims to suggest they were retaliatory simply because Yopp appeared as opposing counsel. That…
On May 14, the Court of Appeals dismissed my Motion to Identify the Judicial Panel without explanation, ignoring my explicit request for legal authority to justify the denial. Just minutes later, they rejected my Record on Appeal again—without a court order, without explanation, and without following any proper procedure. That moment pushed me into a…