May Chen v. Manufacturers & Traders Trust Company, et al.

This is a 4th filing of Petition for a Writ of Certiorari following the previous Supreme Court Case No. 23-5501 “May Chen v. MPD et.al.”. Due to repeated failure to implement law, misapplying law, miscarry justice, obstruction ofjustice, escalation of grievances, encourage evil, failure to return petitioner’s banks deposit, persecution, intentional harm, murder etc., Petitioner hereby further appeal the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Case No. 25-7068 and all other related cases based on the following issues:

1. Pursuant to the Rules of Judicial Conduct Rule 1.1, “a judge(s)shall comply with the law, including the Code of Judicial Conduct”. For example, in regards to the subject case judges Patricia Millett, Pillard, Rao and the U.S. Court of Appeals Clerk should comply with the law F, R.C.P. Rule 55 (default / default judgment), F. R. C. P. Rule 12 (failure to answer Summons & Complaints), F. R. App. P. Rule 31 (failure to file Reply Brief), F. R. App. P. Rule 27 (Emergency Motions) as well as all other applicable law refenced under Table of Authorities.

2. Rules of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.2, “a judge shall uphold and apply the law, and shall perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially”. For instance, I filed six Notice of Appeals including Appellant’s Briefs with the U.S. Court of Appeals in 2023, 2024, 2025. Judges did not compensate for anything ($90 per hour) instead of illegally taking away the petitioner’s two primary residences, three banks deposit, vehicle, personal belongings, even murder.

3. Pursuant to the Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.3, the attorney(s) “shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer”. For example, the U.S. District Court Judges’ Order / Judgment and U.S. Court of Appeals Clerk’s Order / Judgment as well as Supreme Court Clerk’s Judgment etc. Page 2 of 38