In Re Robert M. Miller

The same district judge presides over three of Petitioner’s pending cases. Throughout the proceedings, the judge condoned dozens of defendants’ rule violations, failed to timely rule on motions, made arbitrary decisions, and refused to take a pro se litigant’s facts or arguments seriously. The judge created false facts^ to claim Petitioner’s past and current filings were “frivolous” and “duplicative,” and the judge threatened Petitioner with sanctions. The judge’s intemperate comments indicate he is profoundly biased and prejudiced against Petitioner. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia also made decisions unsupported by facts or law and demonstrative of bias and prejudice. The questions presented are:

1. Whether this Court should issue a writ of mandamus to U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to reassign the cases because of the presiding judge’s deep-seated antagonism toward a pro se litigant and favoritism toward a federal defendant as to make fair judgment impossible.

2. Whether the lower courts erred in fact and law and abused their discretion.

3. Whether Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and court practices are prejudicial to pro se litigants.