Teresita A. Canuto v. Nancy Pelosi, et al.

The district court made legal mistakes in the review the time to respond, directed must respond in summons served or-if required 21 days or within 60 days. Federal defendants William Pelham Barr, Channing D. Phillips and defendant Eric Garcetti failed to reply served summons. The district court’s order on December 4, 2019 dismissing the case was erroneous and contrary to rules because it allowed federal defendants and defendant’s non-compliance under the rules of the Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(a)(1) which (A) state the time within which the defendants must appear and defend; (B) filed-may be served in a judicial district of the United States by (l) following state law for serving a summons in an action brought in court’s of general jurisdiction; (C) state the name and address of the plaintiff s attorney or-if unrepresented. In addition, Appellant asserts that the district court has jurisdiction to hear claims against defendant Gavin Newsom under FTCA claims. As stated by Circuit Judges Dyk, Taranto and Hughes of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Case No. 2015-5085 decided on September 14, 2015 Teresita A. Canuto v. United States: “District Courts have jurisdiction over FTCA claims against injury or loss of property or personal injury or death caused by the neglect or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the government while acting within the scope of his office or employment.” The Questions Presented Are l) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals and the District Court erred when it affirm the motion for summary affirmance and motion to dismiss of appellee Gavin Newsom.