Louis Wayne Ratfield v. Ellen L. Cohen, et al.

Can each individual of the three federal prosecutors, to ensure that their government branch recognizes the limits of its own power by presenting to the Honorable Court their individual original “Written, signed AUTHOR­ ITY by the SOT, Mr. John W. Snow (dated between April, 14-18,2006), to further prosecute each individual listed IRS violations included in the federal grand jury Indict­ ment” Counts 1-45, based on Title 26, Section 7206(2) & (1), April 14,2006?

There are clear & fair processes for enforcing the law to reach a clear resolve, liquidation settlement, whereby if any individual of the three federal prosecutors fails to present the original said “AUTHORITY” to the Honorable Court, thus showing the Plaintiffs Constitutional Rights of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 8th & 14th Amendments have been violat­ ed then redress’s by the four co-defendants are required to be paid tax-free to the Plaintiff’s Trust (LOUIS WAYNE RATFIELD TRUST), within 30 days of the Courts Order?

In said BIVEN’S case, not analogous to Section 1983, concerning IRS alleged violations, is there any “absolute prosecutorial immunity” for fraudulent activity by the same three federal prosecutors, since IRS is not “state” with nothing to do with 42 USC, Sec. 1983 (state), as the lower Courts would like us to believe?

What US Statute gives “AUTHORITY” to the bias Unit­ ed States District Court judge to convert a BIVEN'S claim to one under 42 USC, Sec. 1983?

What US Statute gives “AUTHORITY” to the bias Unit­ ed States District Court judge to issue an Order to help his lying federal prosecutor in a case that has been clos­ ed for almost a year?