Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Jay Nolan Renobato v. Bureau of the Fiscal Service

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 18-20761 · judgment March 29, 2019

Certiorari denied · November 4, 2019
Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

  1. Legal Issues. Whether Acts of Congress and the Constitution require their corrected application to judicial proceedings, property ownership, and interstate commerce and trade? (U.S. CONST, art. Ill; 28 U.S.C.; 15 U.S.C.; 7 U.S.C.; 31 U.S.C.) a. Judicial transgressions, conflicts, and miscarriages. Whether Rule 12(b)(1) subject matter jurisdiction exists per §§ 1331, 1332, and was properly administered/adjudged in light of Home Builders, Stockman, Wachovia, St. Paul, and DeAguilar, and if appeals Court met legal standard of review as required by law under Becker, Barrett, and Robicheauxl i. Transgressions. Whether lack of authority under § 636 and Rule 72, for a promoted court Clerk neither assigned to, nor presiding over the case, is proper dispositive procedure over objection of party, and without consent or notice? ii. Conflicts of Interest. Whether Bray’s conflict of interest from a close working relationship between FPDO/ USAO, and publicly expressed beliefs on federal budgets clouding Judgment- is truly unbiased or warrants recusal? ■>?— iii. Miscarriage of Justice. Whether unsupported and rebutted presumptions in Bray’s dispositive Memo merging 13 counts of Complaint mixing antitrust, commodity/ security, and Treasury rules into 1 common law breach of contract action for less than $10,000 is reversible as clear errors/plain mistakes of law/fact tainting the Final Judgment Adopted? b. Bill of Rights. Whether rights in the Constitution protect Plaintiff against excessive government power limiting its authority exercised over Plaintiffs property/TREASURY DIRECT Account and business? (U.S. CONST, amends. V, XIV) c. U.S.C./C.F.R.. Whether Claimant’s monopoly/restraint of trade charges confessed to and admitted by BFS/BPD under Rule 8(d) seals liability for its commissions/omissions in violation of trade laws and obligations under 7 U.S.C. Ch. 1; 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2; 31 U.S.C.; 31 C.F.R. §§ 309.3, 306.15?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Jay Nolan Renobato

For respondent
Noel John Francisco
Jones Day

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Nov 04 2019
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Oct 09 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2019.
  3. Oct 02 2019
    Waiver of right of respondent Bureau of the Fiscal Service to respond filed.
  4. Aug 31 2019
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 4, 2019)