From: John Hummasti <shomerbaithchur@yahoo.com> To: "info@judicialwatch.org" <info@judicialwatch.org>; "PM_ENG2@pmo.gov.il" <PM_ENG2@pmo.gov.il> Cc: "governor@state.or.us" <governor@state.or.us>; "SMorrill@osbar.org" <SMorrill@osbar.org>; "rraschio@gorge.

net" <rraschio@gorge.net> Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2013 11:44 AM Subject: Here's a case to check out

Judicial Watch: Here's a case to Check out: Hummasti v. Ali, Et. Al., 06-1710-BR (OR. US DC.)
How can Plaintiff be represented in Civil RICO case by "Counsel of Record" when Counsel of Record was suspended by the Oregon State Bar for NOT representing Plaintiff and Resigned from the California State Bar for admittedly not withdrawing from Plaintiff's case in a timely manner in 2008? Milo Petranovich did not withdraw until September 2012 after District Court ruled against Plaintiff in August 2012 reasoning that "Local Rule 83-9b prohibited Plaintiff from filing her own pleadings" and Plaintiff was denied new counsel, a protection and safe passage order and was assaulted and arrested while fleeing domestic violence and attempting to return to Israel? If Plaintiff was NOT entitled to file own Motions and Pleadings,as per the latest ruling in August 2012, (denying Motions for New Counsel, Safe Passage and Return, a Protection Order and Witness Security) how could Court rule on Rule 60b3 Motion to Correct the Judgement for fraud, inter alia, and Deny said Motion as untimely (when there is no time limit on making a Motion to Correct a Judgment)? If Plaintiff was actually represented by Counsel of Record, Court should not have ruled on Rule 60b3 Motion and rejected the Motion outright as it did in August 2012 when it rejected Plaintiff's Safe Passage, New Counsel, and Protection/Witness Security Motions. If Plaintiff was not represented by Counsel of Record, due to Counsel's informal withdrawal and his later OSB Suspension and his resignation from the California State Bar, then the US District Court should have at the very least Ordered New Counsel to be appointed to Represent Plaintiff and held Milo Petranovich in contempt and ordered sanctions against Petranovich. The Court cannot have it both ways: either Plaintiff can file own Motions and Pleadings as was the case with the Rule 60b3 Motion; or Plaintiff cannot file own Motions and Pleadings as was the case with the Motions for New Counsel, Protection Safe Passage and Witness Security Orders. This inconsistency in the record is grounds for appeal and raises the question of the Competency of the Court to adjudicate this case, or the question of the bias of the court for holding inconsistent positions wherein both rulings have been to the detriment and prejudice of the Plaintiff causing irrepairable injury to Plaintiff's person, property and reputation. <http://www.scribd.com/doc/127503357/In-RE-Hummasti> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/120538616/Petranovich-Resignation-Before-the-CaliforniaState-Bar> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/102234538/12-J-10703-Petranovich-California-State-BarORDER> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/78349253/Petranovich-Suspension-Order-by-Oregon-State-Bar> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/123801532/International-Strategy-and-Assessment-Center-sLibel-and-Slander-too-Is-Petranovich-subject-to-a-Libel-and-Slander-civil-action-forcausation> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/123799587/What-Constitutes-Libel-and-Slander-via-the-WWW>

What I do know is someone better fix this or a Petition for sciar fascius writ is next!

"(n) Duties upon Suspension or Disbarment

By the time of the effective date of the suspension or disbarment, a suspended or disbarred lawyer must stop practicing law and must take all reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable prejudice to the rights of his or her clients . BR 6.3(a)-(b); EOL 21.33. To qualify for reinstatement, the lawyer must attest that he or she has not engaged in the practice of law while suspended or disbarred. See, e.g., BR 8.1(a), 8.2(a), 12.9; see also In re Kraus, 295 Or 743, 670 P2d 1012 (1983). Failure to comply with requirements of BR 6.3 may cause disciplinary counsel to petition the supreme court to hold a suspended or disbarred lawyer in contempt. BR 6.3(c)." <http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/or/narr/OR_NARR_0.HTM> When did Petranovich take any steps to avoid prejudice to his client? When did Petranovich inform the US District Court of his Suspension as required by Local Rules of the US District Court?

LR 83-6 Suspension or Disbarment

(a) Duty of Counsel to Notify Court
Every attorney admitted to general or special practice before this Court has an affirmative duty to notify the Clerk, Chief Judge, and the assigned judge in writing within fourteen (14) days after they have: 1. Been suspended or disbarred from practice by any court. 2. Been convicted of a felony in either a state or federal court. 3. Resigned from the bar of any court while an investigation was pending into allegations of misconduct which would warrant suspension or disbarment. 4. Been notified of a change in their admissions status in any other jurisdiction which would affect their eligibility for general or special admission to the bar of this Court. Practice Tip It is in the attorney's interest to report an order of suspension to the Chief Judge, assigned judge, and Clerk as soon as possible. If a period of reciprocal suspension is imposed under LR 83-6(b), early notification increases the likelihood that the period of reciprocal suspension may coincide with the suspension period imposed by the disciplining court or bar. For most attorneys, parallel suspension periods are less disruptive to professional obligations than serial or overlapping suspension periods.

(b) Order to Show Cause

1. Upon receipt of a notice pursuant to LR 83-6(a), or upon notice or information that an LR 83-6 violation may have occurred, the Court may direct the Clerk to issue an order to show cause why disciplinary action including suspension, disbarment, or other appropriate disciplinary action, should not be taken against the attorney. 2. The Clerk will mail the order to the last known address of the attorney and the Oregon State Bars Discipline Committee. 3. The attorney must file a response to the order within twenty-one (21) days from the date of the order, showing good cause why he or she should not be subject to disciplinary action. If requested, the responding attorney may ask that a hearing be held on the matter. If a hearing is requested, the Chief Judge may appoint a judge or special master to preside over the hearing.

4. At the conclusion of any hearing, or within twenty-one (21) days if no response is filed by the attorney, the presiding judge or master will enter a final order. A copy of the order will be mailed to the attorney and the Oregon State Bars Discipline Committee.
<http://www.ord.uscourts.gov/index.php/attorneys/local-rules/local-rules-of-civilprocedure-2013/830-lr-83-rules-and-directives-by-the-district-court128>

JMH/MAJ Portland, Oregon, USA