Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Dawud C. S. Gabriel v. Kristi Noem, Secretary of Homeland Security
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 24-13865 · judgment May 13, 2025
Questions presented
4 IL PRESENTED QUESTIONS
-
Whether or Not the Eleventh (11th) Cir. C.O.A. Departed Far from the Accepted & Usual Course of Judicial Proceedings, As to Call for an Exercise of the Court’s Supervisory Power?
-
Whether or Not the Eleventh (11th) Cir. C.O.A. was Impartial During the Appellate Proceedings?
-
Whether or Not the U.S. District Court - S.D.Fla. was Impartial During Trial Court Proceedings?
-
Whether or Not the Eleventh (11th) Cir. C.O.A.’s Final Order is Unconstitutional & Erroneous?
-
Whether or Not the Eleventh (11th) Cir. C.O.A. was the Proper Venue to Conduct Appellate Proceedings?
-
Whether or Not the U.S. District Court - S.D.Fla. was the Proper Venue to Conduct Trial Court Proceedings?
-
Whether or Not the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (“PACER”) System’s Policy of Access Fees is Constitutional? III. LIST OF THE PARTIES A. Petitioner & Respondent The caption of the case holds the names of all the parties.1 B. Corporate Disclosure Statement Petitioner DAWUD C.S. GABRIEL (“Gabriel”) is not a non-govemment corporation. C. List of Proceedings
-
On August 14, 2024, Gabriel filed civil action against the Secretary in the matter of Gabriel v. Mayorkas - Secretary, U.S, Department of Homeland Security, Case no.24-CV-14262 (S.D.Fla.2024) (“Gabriel v. Mayorkas”), when and while filing a Civil Complaint [Vol.l, App. R], the Civil Cover [Vol.2, App. A], the Original Unendorsed Summons [Vol.2, App. B], the Pauper Motion [Vol.2, App. D], an alleged Volunteer Attorney Referral Program (“VARP”) Motion 1 The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (the “Secretary”) is not an active party to this matter, for reason of the October 31, 2024, unlawful dismissal [Vol. 1, App. B] was entered prior to an attempt to process service of the Amended Summons [Vol.2, App. G] and the Civil Complaint [Vol.l, App. R]. See Appendix, Vol.l, App. B, Pgs. 1-3. For the record, the October 31,2024, unlawful dismissal [Vol.l, App. B] falsely implies that the Secretary was allegedly an active party during district court proceedings, which was not the case. See Appendix, Vol.l, App. B, Pgs. 1-3. ii of xlii
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Dawud C. S. Gabriel
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Proceedings
- Dec 08 2025The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
- Nov 13 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/5/2025.
- Sep 18 2025Application (25A311) to file petition for a writ of certiorari in excess of page limits granted by Justice Thomas. The petition for a writ of certiorari may not exceed 80 pages.
- Jul 23 2025Application (25A311) to file petition for a writ of certiorari in excess of page limits, submitted to Justice Thomas.
- Jul 23 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 29, 2025)