Jenn-Ching Luo v. Owen J. Roberts School District, et al.

Whether bombing courts or shooting judges is a holy mission to counter a corrupt judicial system? That is a satire to ridicule the Courts below if a corrupt judicial system is on the other side of God for God to clean up. It is uncertain how other Circuits did their job. However, in the Third Circuit, legal proceedings are not a matter of right or wrong, lawful or unlawful, or fair or unfair but a lawless game for the Court to play. It is not a baseless accusation. There are facts sufficient to be a book. We can see that from 2017, the Courts below "always" issued per curiam orders, contravening precedents or statutory laws, to rule against the Petitioner. How could a Court issue a per curiam order in contravenance with precedent? Why did the District Court and the Third Circuit not issue an order, contravening the precedent, against the big guy? Does the judicial system deserve trust? The District Court and the Third Circuit did not proceed according to procedural rules. The procedural controversy started in 2017 after District Judge O'Neill in November 2016 denied the defendants' motions to dismiss; since then, this case was reassigned to two other judges because of the judge's retirement. After the defendants' motions were denied, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4), defendants should answer within 14 days after their motions were denied. It is the rule requirement that every Court follows. However, the defendants never answered; the Petitioner followed Rule 55(a) to request a default. The District Court could grant or deny the request.