United States Supreme Court
1 First Street NE
Washington DC 20543
____________________________________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

Case No. No. 08-570
For the Third Circuit, David H. Souter, Associate Justice
For the Ninth Circuit, Anthony M. Kennedy, Associate Justice
Title:
Philip J. Berg, Petitioner
Barack Obama, et al.

October 31, 2008
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
 Lower Case No.: (08-4340) Rule 11
 
Request: MOTION FOR LEAVE OF THE COURT TO SUBMIT A BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE / OR/ UPON THE COURT REQUEST TO PARTICIPATE IN ORAL ARGUMENT SUBMITTED BY APPLICANT CODY ROBERT JUDY-A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE 2008- (IN FAVOR OF PETITIONER MR. BERG).


RULE OF LAW UPON WHICH MOTION IS APPROPRIATE
BRIEF OF AN AMICUS CURIAE A brief of an amicus curiae may be filed only if accompanied by written consent of all parties, or by leave of court granted on motion or at the request of the court, except that consent or leave shall not be required when the brief is presented by the United States or an officer or agency thereof, or by a State, Territory or Commonwealth. The brief may be conditionally filed with the motion for leave. A motion for leave shall identify the interest of the applicant and shall state the reasons why a brief of an amicus curiae is desirable. Save as all parties otherwise consent, any amicus curiae shall file its brief within the time allowed the party whose position as to affirmance or reversal the amicus brief will support unless the court for cause shown shall grant leave for a later filing, in which event it shall specify within what period an opposing party may answer. A motion of an amicus curiae to participate in the oral argument will be granted only for extraordinary reasons." Rule 29. Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

A- IDENTIFICATION OF THE INTEREST OF APPLICANT.
1- Applicant is the only contesting candidate of the 2008 Election, for President of the United States to John McCain’s eligibility of qualification (filed & served 2 days prior to Republican National Convention) as well as EMERGENCY EXHIBIT OF EVIDENCE filed 2 days prior to 2008 election submitting Mr. Berg’s WRIT OF CERTIORARI to NEVADA FEDERAL court contesting President Elect Barrack Obama’s qualifications, filed in the lower court of the DISTRICT OF NEVADA, LAS VEGAS CASE No. 2:08-cv-01162-KJD-RJJ .
2- Applicant has in his candidacy “standing” and “Direct Harm” claims, also articulated in the body of his complaint which removes one (1) question of the Writ of Certiorari and more importantly prays the constitutional question of “ Qualification” requirements of (a) natural born citizenship and (b) age requirements said in U.S. Constitution, Article II Section1 clause 4. Three Motions remain as of Dec. 1st 2008 with no ruling, but around 60 days overdue.

B- REASONS WHY A BRIEF OF AN AMICUS CURIAE IS DESIREABLE
1- This court may want to review not only the qualification of President Elect Barrack Obama, but also see the argument presented against runner up Senator John McCain in the Constitutional question of qualification, and determination of what the best course of action might be, serving the public interest in election contributions that may have been mis-used on an unqualified candidate, protecting citizen voting rights from Political Parties that do not vet a candidate, and preserving the integrity of the law and security of the Nation in the office of the President of the United States.

2- This question has never before been raised on a President Elect, nor a Runner up gaining 46% of the American voters, representing both major parties, the Republicans and Democrats and thus deserves the attention of the courts consideration as it affects every voting, contributing American, and in that, also shall come to effect future generations.

3- The question is also in the considerations of what would be the appropriate course of the United States if a President Elect is never sworn in, the 12th and 20th Amendment are not in affect. The question would be does the Country need a new election, or does the contesting candidate become President, if the two major parties candidates are found not to be qualified? This would facilitate a more direct line of addressing the issue of Constitutional consideration rather than just the “standing” issue. The delay in administration of justice regarding this could end with a President unseated and in office which might lead to greater unrest in the nation then to address the U.S. Constitutional issue of qualification before an Oath is taken by an unqualified candidate.
Signed and submitted this 2 day of December, 2008
Signature of Applicant - ______________________________
                                               Cody Robert Judy/ Pro se

                                         Certification of mailing
 I hereby certify that I place a true and correct copy of the following :
“ MOTION FOR LEAVE OF THE COURT TO SUBMIT A BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE / OR/ UPON THE COURT REQUEST TO PARTICIPATE IN ORAL ARGUMENT SUBMITTED BY APPLICANT CODY ROBERT JUDY-A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE 2008- (IN FAVOR OF PETITIONER MR. BERG).”
Postage prepaid, U.S. Mail, this 2 day of December,2008 to the following parties :


Philip J. Berg, Esquire
Attorney in Pro Se
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
(610) 825-3134
And
Gregory Garre Esq. / Barrack Obama
950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington DC 20530

United States Supreme Court
1 First Street NE
Washington DC 20543
                             Signed this 2 day of December, 2008
                                                  _________________________________________
codyrobertjudyforpresident2012030002.jpg
SupremeCourt Letter
codyrobertjudyforpresident2012030001.jpg
Back to Main Law Suit
CASE WAS DENIED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT