Robel Bing v. Brivo Systems, LLC

On May 19, 2020, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals published their Opinion, 19-1220, having heard oral arguments on December 11, 2019. The published opinion has successfully resolved the question of appellate jurisdiction, in Sections I and II, and as such will not be included for further mention in this petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for writ of certiorari. The published dissent on sections III and IV, with respect to pro se pleading requirements, held in Ashcroft v. Iqbal (2009), Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly (2007), Erickson v. Pardus (2007), Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A (2002), by the district, appellate, and the US Supreme Court, as well as the resulting abrup­ tion of Rules of Federal Civil Procedure, have inspired this pro se petition to respectfully request a review of the following: 1. Did the 4th Circuit’s Published Opinion, with dissent, err in its 2-1 majority affirmance of the district court’s dismissal of Bing’s pro se complaint, under Rule 12(b)(6); whereas: a. Premature invocation of Rule 12(b)(6) at the pleading stage, effectively allows it to super­ sede not only established pleading require­ ments for pro se complainants who bring disparate treatment and disparate impact claims of employment discrimination under Title VII of 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. and race discrimination claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 et seq.; but, effectively renders the short and plain language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. as null, and; b. Does the district court, with the appellate court’s affirmance in the decision to apply