Rakesh Dhingra v. Charles Esposito, et al.

The Appeals Court affirmed the dismissal of Petitioner’s civil complaint for violations of his US constitutional civil rights. The civil complaint alleged that federal officials had engaged in perjury and fabrication of evidence at the Honorable Armstrong Court’s 2002 jury trial — and that they did so after taking an oath for stating the truth, besides their own federal agency oath “as an officer of the United States” to support the Constitution of the United States of America. The question presented is: Did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals err in affirming the civil district court’s dismissal of petitioner’s civil complaint without the civil court conducting fact-findings, or providing “intelligent” reasoning for appellate court’s review?