In Re Mawule Tepe

Under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, it is well established that: (i) a Judge who lacks an Oath of Office cannot preside over a case; (ii) a Judge cannot be a Judge at his own trial or when he has a conflict of interest in the outcome of the case; (iii) an attorney cannot practice laws at U.S. District Court unless he/she is admitted to the federal bar of that federal court; and (iv) Corporations and LLCs cannot represent themselves. In this case, despite the undeniable evidence that the presiding judge and attorneys do not have an oath of office, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee (or EDTN), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (or SCCA) refuse to disqualify them. Besides this, these latest court unlawfully let professional corporations represent themselves as pro se on disputed facts of issues. As the Petitioner Mawule Tepe (or Tepe) challenged the jurisdiction of EDTN, the SCCA failed to rule on the Petition. According to the Supreme Court, when the challenge is raised in timely manner, it will have an effect of unravelling the cases’ proceeding. An impartial district court is necessary to ensure due process. Is the case proceeding valid and consistent with the due process when the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee (or EDTN), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (or SCCA) refuse to recuse Honorable U.S. District Judge Clifton L Corker when this latest failed to