Perry Adron McCullough v. David F. Levi, et al.

Ex-prisoner seeks Tort claim for monetary dam­ ages and restoration of his second amendment rights; due to prosecutor’s default of failure to prove jurisdic­ tion. The claimant had his case dismissed, the “Gov­ ernment” claiming it had no merit or substance. Meanwhile, the claim is replete with admissible evi­ dence, and the USA lacking any. The Questions Presented Are:

1. During the collateral attack against Jurisdiction as this Petitioner has done by his U.S. District Court action against US. Attorney’s who previous prosecuted him, can a prosecutor legally escape answering the “Acccardi Doctrine” if a Court simply calls Petitioner’s filings “frivolous” or “gibberish” or “meritless” with no signed Affidavit or other substantive basis?

2. Do so-called U.S. Attorney’s have plenary unlimited authority against a “transient foreigner” and “stateless person” [as defined in 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d), 4 U.S.C. § 110(d)]?

3. Do so-called U.S. Attorney’s have authority to refuse to answer proof of authority or “jurisdiction” giving lawful power to prosecute an individual man or woman?

4. What authority does a Federal Court have to deny a sincerely motivated litigant be denied his day in court, for because of being too successful or other meritless reasons?