What the Hell Does Orly Think She's Doing in Hawaii

Home , Orly Taitz

What the Hell Does Orly Think She’s Doing in Hawaii: An attempt at a concise summary of the ongoing Hawaiian antics of Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq

Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq v. Loretta Fuddy and Dr. Alvin Onaka Circuit Court for the First Circuit, State of Hawaii Civil Case 11-1-1731 “Petition for a Writ of Mandamus and Request for Inspection of Records Under United Information Practices Act, Statute 92F, State of Hawaii”

NOTE: This document contains several links to Dr. Orly Taitz’s website. Dr. Taitz’s website has been known to trigger malware warnings on several occasions, and is often blocked by net nanny and safe browsing software. Click on links at your own risk.

NOTE: Due to the highly unpredictable nature of Taitz’s legal antics it can often be difficult to figure out which case she thinks she is arguing. Her default setting on those rare and special occasions when she gets to perform her art in front of a judge seems to be “all of them”. As a result, this timeline includes all of her known interaction with Hawaii State agencies, Hawaii State courts, the Federal District Court for Hawaii, and any filing in any other court that attempts or has attempted to compel or coerce the Hawaii Department of Health into doing anything at all. Also included are references to any and all relevant court or administrative hearing rulings. This is based on the theory that it is likely that Orly will attempt to reference some or all of these activities/events/filings/imaginary animals during any future hearing or court filing. NOTE: Where possible, information has been drawn from public records. However, there are cases where (unfortunately) the best available information consists of statements made by Orly Taitz. Dates of actions that Orly claims to have been taken should be viewed as approximations, at best. Reader beware.

Acknowledgements: I’m grateful to the members of The Fogbow for their suggestions following the publication of the first draft of this document, and their encouragement throughout the sanity-taxing task of assembling it.

Timeline of Events:

22 April 2011: President Barack Obama, acting through his personal attorney, requests that the Hawaii Department of Health make an exception to policy and allow him to obtain certified copies of his long form birth certificate. Obama’s attorney flies to Hawaii to obtain the copies1 25 April 2011: Hawaii Director of Health Loretta Fuddy signs a letter to the President granting his request, and stating that she personally witnessed the copying of the documents.1

27 April 2011: President Barack Obama’s long form birth certificate is released to the press at a White House press conference. 1

4 May 2011: Orly Taitz writes a four page letter to Dr. Alvin T. Onaka, Hawaii State Registrar & Chief, Office of Health Status Monitoring, Hawaii Department of Health. The letter is captioned as a “Request Of Access To Records Under Hawaii Uniform Information Practices Act of 1975.” The letter contains a litany of accusations relating to the birth certificate released days earlier by the White House, and concludes by demanding access for Taitz and her (as yet unnamed) experts to personally inspect the original birth record. Taitz also demands that Onaka answer a number of questions. Although Taitz gives the name of the statute she is relying on, she does not cite to any specific section or subsection of the statute.2 7 May 2011: Orly Taitz sends a letter to Hawaii Director of Health Loretta Fuddy demanding access to inspect President Obama’s birth certificate under Hawaii’s Uniform Information Practices Act (“UIPA”). This request is similar, but not identical, to the UIPA request sent to Dr. Onaka three days earlier requesting the same access to the same information. In this letter, Taitz states that she is attaching a “a certified copy of the original Certificate of Live Birth of one Susan Nordyke” as Exhibit 2. Exhibit 2 actually appears to be a photocopy or a scan of a certified copy of the Nordyke birth certificate, not an actual certified copy. This may indicate that Dr. Taitz has some difficulty in understanding the difference between certified copies and photocopies.3 19 May 2011: Dr. Onaka replies on behalf of himself and Dr. Fuddy to Taitz’s 3 May and 7 May UIPA demands. Citing Hawaii Revised Statute (“HRS”) §92F-13(4), he points out that Hawaii UIPA does not require the disclosure of records when disclosure is protected by

1 http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth- certificate 2 A copy of this letter was included within Exhibit 5 of Orly’s original complaint in Taitz v. Fuddy, and can be seen at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/64159576/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al- HI-CIR-CT-Exhibits-4-7-to-Complaint-64118717 3WARNING: site at following link may contain malware. http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21476

©Mike Dunford 2012. All Rights Reserved. 2 What the Hell Does Orly Think She’s Doing in Hawaii other State laws. He refers Taitz to HRS §338-18, which prohibits the Department of Health from disclosing vital records to anyone other than those who have a tangible interest in the document. He also specifically refers Taitz to HRS §338-18(b), which provides the listing of parties considered to have a direct and tangible interest. Dr. Taitz’s UIPA request is denied in full.4

24 May 2011: Orly Taitz mails a (fatally defective) subpoena to Loretta Fuddy. The subpoena in question demands that Fuddy submit to a deposition at 10:00 am on 27 June 2011, and that Fuddy permit Taitz and as yet unnamed experts to inspect Barack Obama’s original birth certificate at 10:00 am on 27 June 2011. The subpoena is nominally tied to one of Taitz’s FOIA cases in Washington DC, Taitz v Astrue (USDC, District of Columbia, case # 11-cv-00402-RCL). The subpoena in question was issued from the DC District Court instead of the Hawaii District Court, and was signed by Orly Taitz even though Taitz has not been admitted to practice in Washington DC.5 26 May 2011: Orly Taitz mails a (fatally defective) subpoena to Loretta Fuddy. This time, the subpoena demands that Dr. Fuddy produce Barack Obama’s original birth certificate for inspection at 10:00 am on 29 June 2011. The subpoena is nominally tied to one of Taitz’s FOIA cases in Washington DC, Taitz v Astrue (USDC, District of Columbia, case # 11-cv- 00402-RCL). This subpoena is issued from the USDC, District of Hawaii. As was the case with the previous subpoena, this one was signed by Orly Taitz even though Taitz has not been admitted to practice in Hawaii. 6 4 June 2011: Orly Taitz sends a UIPA request to Dr. Fuddy. This UIPA request demands a certified copy of the original long form birth certificate for Virginia Sunahara, who was born on 4 August 1961 and died the following day. Although Dr. Taitz has included a copy of this letter in the exhibits to one or more court filings, the Hawaii Department of Health’s denial of this request does not appear to have been alleged as a cause of action in any of them, and the remedies that Dr. Taitz has been seeking from the court in the action based on the denial of her UIPA requests do not include receiving access to the Sunahara birth certificate. 7

4 A copy of this letter was also included within Exhibit 5 of Orly’s original complaint in Taitz v. Fuddy, and can be seen at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/64159576/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et- al-HI-CIR-CT-Exhibits-4-7-to-Complaint-64118717 In a demonstration of the care and attention to detail that are characteristic of Dr. Taitz’s legal efforts, the response from Onaka actually appears within exhibit 5 first, with the actual request following the response. 5 http://www.scribd.com/doc/56229377/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-Invalid-Subpoena-Issued-by- Orly-Taitz-to-Loretta-Fuddy 6 http://www.scribd.com/doc/56475811/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-INVALID-SUBPOENA-2- ISSUED-BY-ORLY-TAITZ 7 A copy of this letter was also included within Exhibit 5 of Orly’s original complaint in Taitz v Fuddy, even though it appears to have little or no connection to the other documents included in that exhibit. http://www.scribd.com/doc/64159576/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al-HI- CIR-CT-Exhibits-4-7-to-Complaint-64118717

8 June 2011: Orly Taitz sends another letter to Dr. Onaka. Taitz titles this letter, “Request for administrative agency review”. In the letter, she states that she is sending the letter as part of the “required pre-litigation steps of requesting agency review of my appeal of your decision”.8 13 June 2011: Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine sends Orly Taitz a letter. The letter references the two defective subpoenas issued by Taitz (see entries for 24 May 11 and 26 May 11). Ms. Nagamine notes that the subpoenas were not issued or served in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ms. Nagamine goes on to say that even if a subpoena were to be issued in accordance with FRCP guidelines, Hawaii State Law prohibits the disclosure of the information. Taitz is told that she will need to receive a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction before she can be given access to Mr. Obama’s birth certificate.9

5 July 2011: Orly Taitz mails a new subpoena to “Ms. Loretta Fuddy”. This subpoena is similar to the one mailed on 26 May, with two noteworthy exceptions: it sets 8 August 2011 as the new date for production of the documents, and it is signed by a Deputy Clerk of the Court, Federal District Court, District of Hawaii. 10 8 July 2011: Orly Taitz files a Motion to Compel in the Federal District Court, District of Columbia. This motion is not an attempt to compel compliance with the subpoena Taitz had mailed on 5 July. Instead, it is an attempt to compel compliance with the subpoena Taitz had mailed on 26 May. The motion included a statement by Taitz claiming that the Federal District Court, District of Columbia is a court of competent jurisdiction for the purposes of HRS §338-18. 11 14 July 2011: In a post on her blog, Orly Taitz complains that Deputy Attorney General Nagamine is not returning her phone calls. In this blog post, Taitz suggests that her followers call both Ms. Nagamine and Director of Health Loretta Fuddy to demand that they comply with Taitz’s subpoena. 12 27 July 2011: Orly Taitz sends Loretta Fuddy a letter via FedEx. The letter was marked “Personal and Confidential”, and is available to the public via Taitz’s website. In this letter, Taitz demands that Dr. Fuddy advise her if Hawaii will comply with the 5 July 2011 subpoena, and that Dr. Fuddy do this no later than the close of business on 29 July 2011. Taitz does not specify whether she means the close of business in California, or the close of

8WARNING: site at following link may contain malware. http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=22573 9 http://www.scribd.com/doc/57878406/Letter-to-Orly-Taitz-From-Hawaii-AG-Re- Subpoena-BC-Cannot-Be-Provided-Per-HI-State-Law 10 http://www.scribd.com/doc/59432402/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-D-C-Subpoena-Issued- to-Loretta-Fuddy-3 11 http://www.scribd.com/doc/59789284/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-D-C-22-MOTION-to- Compel-by-ORLY-TAITZ-gov-uscourts-dcd-146770-22-0 12 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware. http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=23807

©Mike Dunford 2012. All Rights Reserved. 4 What the Hell Does Orly Think She’s Doing in Hawaii business in Hawaii. In this letter, Taitz informs Dr. Fuddy that because Taitz is aware that Dr. Fuddy is represented by counsel, Taitz mailed the subpoena to the attorney instead of actually serving it on Dr. Fuddy. Taitz asks Dr. Fuddy to tell her if Dr. Fuddy and Dr. Fuddy’s attorney have been in contact with each other regarding the subpoena, and if so what decision they have reached. 13

6 August 2011: According to birther blog Obama Release Your Records (ORYR), Jerome Corsi announces that he is working hard to get some competent Hawaii attorneys to “buttress” Taitz when Taitz arrives at the Hawaii Department of Health on 8 August to attempt to force compliance with her as-yet-unserved subpoena from 5 July.14 This local counsel is subsequently identified as Hawaii Republican Senate candidate and attorney John Carroll. 15 8 August 2011; ~10:00 HST: Orly Taitz arrives at the Hawaii Department of Health, accompanied by alleged document authentication experts Paul Irey and Doug Vogt.16 Taitz is met at the entrance to the Department of Health by Deputy Director for Health Keith Yamamoto and Special Assistant to the Attorney General Joshua Wisch. Taitz is denied access to the birth certificate and is given a letter signed by Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine that outlines the Department of Health’s position.17 Wisch offers Taitz a chance to properly serve the subpoena on the Department of Health. Taitz declines.18 Local Attorney John Carroll arrived near the end of all of this and attempted to assist Taitz. Taitz advised him that the only assistance she needed consisted of directions to the Federal Courthouse.16 8 August 2011; ~1130 HST: Orly Taitz proceeds from the Hawaii Department of Health to the Federal Courthouse, accompanied by her alleged experts. Alleged expert Irey is unable to enter the building due to an expired ID, so only alleged expert Vogt accompanies Taitz to the Clerk’s office. Taitz files an “Emergency Ex Parte Motion to Show Cause and to Compel Attendance for Production of Documents and for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs”. Taitz demands

13 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?iframe&paged=142 14 http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/dr-corsi-obamas-connecticut- social.html 15 This identification was not made until late November, when Carroll was identified as the local attorney assisting in another (unrelated) birther lawsuit. http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=6913#p311809 16 A brief firsthand account of this episode can be found at http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=5421&start=3725#p273791 17 A copy of the letter was included as Exhibit A to the Declaration of Jill Nagamine that was filed with the State’s Opposition to Taitz’s efforts to force Hawaii to comply with Taitz’s defective subpoena. http://www.scribd.com/doc/64159809/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al-HI- CIR-CT-Attachment-to-MtD-Declaration-of-Jill-Nagamine-64117099 18 http://www.scribd.com/doc/64160047/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al-HI-CIR-CT-Attachment- to-MtD-Declaration-of-Keith-Yamamoto-64117104

©Mike Dunford 2012. All Rights Reserved. 5 What the Hell Does Orly Think She’s Doing in Hawaii a hearing on 9 August.19 The Court gives her a 14 September 2011 hearing date20, and enters an order stating that the motion will be heard in the normal course of events. 21 Because the subpoena in question was issued based on the Taitz v Astrue case in the DC District Court, this motion is technically an extension of that case. 10 August 2011: Orly Taitz files suit against Director of Health Loretta Fuddy and Registrar Alvin Onaka. (Taitz v Fuddy). The complaint is filed in Hawaii State Circuit Court for the First Circuit. Taitz titles her complaint, “Petition for a Writ of Mandamus Request for Inspection of Records Under United [sic] Information Practices Act Statute 92F, State of Hawaii.22 Taitz attempts to serve her complaint by having copies mailed to Fuddy and Onaka, with a “courtesy notice” sent to Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine.23 The proof of service Taitz submits to the court includes photocopies of certified mail receipts demonstrating that something was mailed to all three, but only includes photocopies of return cards for Fuddy and Onaka.23, 24 22 August 2011: Instead of filling out an online form, Orly Taitz files a motion in Federal District Court, District of Hawaii, requesting access to the online filing system. She believes this will make it easier for her to file additional documents related to her pending Motion to Compel.25 A hearing on this motion is set for 30 August 2011.

24 August 2011: Hawaii files their opposition to Taitz’s Motion to Compel.26 This is the State of Hawaii’s response to the motion Taitz filed in Federal Court in Hawaii, and is part of the Taitz v. Astrue case in the DC District Court. It is not directly connected to the Hawaii State Court case Taitz filed.

19 http://www.scribd.com/doc/61883778/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-HAWAII-1-1- Attachments-1-RECAP-Emergency-Ex-Parte-Motion-for-Emergency-Order-to-Show-Cause- and-to-Compel-Attendance-for 20http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=5421&hilit=orly+fuddy+sub poena&start=3650#p273689 21http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=5421&hilit=orly+fuddy+sub poena&start=3700#p273754 22 http://www.scribd.com/doc/64159273/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al-HI-CIR-CT-COMPLAINT- 64118680-Taitz-v-Fuddy-Compl 23 http://www.scribd.com/doc/64159718/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al-HI-CIR-CT-Summons- and-Proof-of-Service 24 This was noted by Judge Rhonda Nishimura during a subsequent hearing. 25 http://www.scribd.com/doc/62943437/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-HI-5-REQUEST-for- ECF-Number-by-Orly-Taitz-Gov-uscourts-hid-98266-5-0 26 http://www.scribd.com/doc/63062252/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-HI-9-0- MEMORANDUM-in-Opposition-to-Plaintiff-s-Emergency-Ex-Parte-Motion-Gov-uscourts- hid-98529-9-0

30 August 2011, morning: US District Court, District of Columbia Chief Judge Royce Lamberth issues an order dismissing Taitz v. Astrue.27 30 August 2011, morning: US District Court, District of Columbia Chief Judge Royce Lamberth issues an order denying the Motion to Compel that Taitz filed in his court on 8 July. Lamberth predictably declines to attempt to issue an order compelling Hawaii officials to release the birth certificate, and points out that, “the requested birth certificate has nothing to do with this case.”28

30 August 2011, afternoon: A hearing is held in the Federal District Court, District of Hawaii, on Taitz’s motion to be granted electronic filing privileges. Taitz appears for this hearing by telephone; the State of Hawaii is represented by two Deputy Attorneys General who appear in person. Ms. Taitz receives detailed instructions from Chief Judge Susan Oki Mollway on how to fill out an online form. Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine then informs Judge Mollway that the underlying case had been dismissed that morning. Taitz advises Judge Mollway that she intends to file a Motion for Reconsideration, and that she has “no doubt” that this motion will be granted. Judge Mollway reschedules the 14 September hearing on the Motion to Compel for 21 November 2011.29 2 September 2011: The State of Hawaii files a Motion to Dismiss in the Taitz v Fuddy case in State Court. In support of dismissal, the State cites Taitz’s failure to properly serve the case, the fact that the Writ of Mandamus Taitz is requesting was abolished in the Circuit Courts of Hawaii in the 1970s, and the fact that Taitz is not entitled to the relief she is seeking as a matter of law. A hearing is set in front of Judge Rhonda Nishimura for 12 October 2011, at 8:30 am.30 20 September 2011: Taitz submits her reply to the State’s opposition to her Motion to Compel.31 This is part of the Federal Court proceeding in Taitz v Astrue. Although Judge Mollway provided Taitz with detailed instructions on how to obtain ECF privileges, the motion is filed via FedEx.32

27 http://www.scribd.com/doc/63579610/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-D-C-33- MEMORANDUM-OPINION-Signed-by-Chief-Judge-Royce-C-Lamberth-gov-uscourts-dcd- 146770-33-0 28 http://www.scribd.com/doc/63579991/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-D-C-35-ORDER-gov- uscourts-dcd-146770-35-0 29 http://www.scribd.com/doc/63842636/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-HI-OFFICIAL- TRANSCRIPT-8-30-11-HEARING 30 http://www.scribd.com/doc/64116181/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al-HI-Cir-Ct-MOTION-TO- DISMISS-64115865 31 http://www.scribd.com/doc/65830612/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-HI-14-0-Plaintiff-s- REPLY-to-Loretta-Fuddy-s-Memorandum-in-Opposition-to-1-Plaintiff-s-MOTION-to- Compel-Attendance-for-Produ 32 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=25608

2 October 2011: Taitz submits her opposition to the State’s Motion to Dismiss in Taitz v Fuddy.33 7 October 2011: Hawaii submits their reply to Taitz’s opposition to their Motion to Dismiss in Taitz v. Fuddy.34 12 October 2011: A hearing is held on the State of Hawaii’s Motion to Dismiss in Taitz v Fuddy. The hearing takes place before Judge Rhonda Nishimura, and lasts approximately 20 minutes. During the hearing, Taitz concedes that asking for a Writ of Mandamus might have been improper, given the abolition of that particular remedy several decades ago. She asks that the court instead treat her motion as an agency appeal. One of the several reasons given for granting dismissal is that the requirements for an agency appeal were not met. At the close of the hearing Judge Nishimura grants the State’s motion and dismisses the case. The State is ordered to prepare the Order.35 16 October 2011: Taitz sends a FOIA request directly to the office of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In this request, Taitz demands access to all of President Obama’s passport applications. Taitz cites Hawaii’s refusal to give out copies of the President’s birth certificate as part of the reason for this request. The fate of this FOIA request remains unknown at present.36

17 October 2011: Taitz’s Motion to Reconsider in Taitz v Astrue is denied.37 19 October 2011: Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine sends Taitz a copy of the proposed Order dismissing Taitz v Fuddy. Taitz is supposed to approve or object to the form of the order within five days.38 25 October 2011: Taitz files a Notice of Appeal in Taitz v Astrue. In this notice of appeal, she includes a request for a stay in order to allow her to have her hearing on her Motion to

33 http://www.scribd.com/doc/69637317/Taitz-v-Fuddy-HI1CC-Taitz-Opposition-to-MTD 34 http://www.scribd.com/doc/68396662/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-6-DEFTS- MEMORANDUM-IN-REPLY-TO-PLTF-S-OPPOSITION-TO-MTN-TO-DISMISS-PETITION-FOR- WRIT-OF-MANDAMUS 35 http://www.scribd.com/doc/71613967/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-CERTIFIED- TRANSCRIPT-OF-HEARING-10-12-11-Taitz101211 36 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26536 37 http://www.scribd.com/doc/69179304/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-D-C-39- MEMORANDUM-AND-ORDER-denying-36-Motion-for-Reconsideration-gov-uscourts-dcd- 146770-39-0 38 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Letter-from-Nagamine- 10.19.2011.pdf

Compel that is scheduled for 21 November 2011 in front of Hawaii District Court Magistrate Judge Richard Puglisi.39 26 October 2011: Citing the denial of the Motion to Reconsider, Hawaii District Court Magistrate Judge Richard Puglisi vacates the 21 November 2011 hearing and denies Taitz’s motion to compel.40 26 October 2011: Taitz files an “Emergency Motion for Rehearing” in Taitz v Fuddy. In this motion, Taitz claims (among other things) that she had fulfilled the requirements for an agency appeal. Taitz “tentatively” schedules this hearing for 16 November. The Court schedules the hearing for 30 November.41

3 November 2011: Taitz submits a document to the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The document in question is ostensibly attached to the Barnett|Keyes v Obama case that had been argued before the 9th Circuit in May. The document requests that the 9th Circuit issue a Writ of Mandamus directing Hawaii Director of Health Loretta Fuddy to permit inspection of Barack Obama’s birth certificate.42 Misstatements and outright lies by Taitz in this document spark objections from the US Attorneys assigned to the case.43 This, in turn, causes Taitz to submit a slightly modified version of the same motion. 44

9 November 2011: In an attempt to fulfill the requirements for an agency appeal, Taitz sends the Hawaii Department of Health a “Demand for Emergency Agency Hearing”.45

10 November 2011: The Order dismissing Taitz v Fuddy is signed and filed.46

16 November 2011: Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine sends a letter to Taitz. Nagamine denies Taitz’s 9 November request for an agency hearing. Nagamine reminds Taitz that Taitz’s suit is not about the authenticity of Mr. Obama’s birth certificate, but

39 http://www.scribd.com/doc/70410160/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-D-C-40-NOTICE-OF- APPEAL-as-to-34-RECAP-Order-on-Motion-for-Summary-Judgment-by-ORLY-TAITZ-gov- uscourts-dcd-146770-40-0 40 http://www.scribd.com/doc/70454252/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-HI-15-ORDER- DENYING-PLAINTIFF-S-EMERGENCY-EX-PARTE-MOTION-FOR-EMERGENCY-ORDER-TO- SHOW-CAUSE-AND-Gov-uscourts-hid-98529-15 41 http://www.scribd.com/doc/71146731/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-et-al-HI-CIR-CT-Orly-Taitz- Petiton-for-Re-Hearing-11-30-11 42 http://www.scribd.com/doc/72045789/BARNETT-KEYES-v-OBAMA-APPEAL-9th- CIRCUIT-53-Filed-ECF-Appellants-TransportRoom-53-0 43 http://www.scribd.com/doc/71994656/BARNETT-KEYES-v-OBAMA-APPEAL-9th- CIRCUIT-52-1-TransportRoom-52-1 44 http://www.scribd.com/doc/72050778/BARNETT-KEYES-v-OBAMA-APPEAL-9th- CIRCUIT-54-1-Filed-ECF-Appellants-TransportRoom-54-1 45 http://www.scribd.com/doc/72482060/From-Orly-Taitz-s-Website-Emergency- Petition-Taitz-11-9-11 46 This is indicated on the court docket for the case. A copy of the order is not currently available online.

©Mike Dunford 2012. All Rights Reserved. 9 What the Hell Does Orly Think She’s Doing in Hawaii about the Department of Health’s denial of access to the birth certificate. Nagamine concludes by informing Taitz that if Taitz persists in filing “frivolous and vexatious” requests to access President Obama’s birth certificate the State will seek sanctions and attorney’s fees.47

16 November 2011 (on or about)48: Taitz attempts to submit an Amended Motion for Rehearing in the Taitz v Fuddy case. This motion includes, as purported “new evidence” justifying reconsideration, the fact that Taitz and a number of New Hampshire citizens filed an action in New Hampshire challenging the placement of President Obama on the ballot for the 2012 Democratic Primary in New Hampshire. The Amended Motion also deletes a complaint about the court reporter from the 12 October hearing that was part of the original Motion for Rehearing.49 17 November 2011: Taitz submits a Motion for a Writ of Mandamus to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. This motion is ostensibly attached to Taitz’s appeal in the Taitz v Ruemmler FOIA lawsuit. In this motion, Taitz requests that the DC Circuit direct DC District Court Chief Judge Royce Lamberth to order the Hawaii Department of Health to allow Taitz to inspect President Obama’s original long form birth certificate.50

18 November 2011: Hawaii files its opposition to Taitz’s original Motion for Rehearing. This opposition does not reference Taitz’s Amended Motion, which has not been filed by this point, and which most likely had not yet been received by the State. In this filing, the State declares an intention to seek to recover attorney’s fees and costs from Taitz, and requests that the Court formally find that Taitz’s motion is frivolous.51 22 November 2011: Taitz posts an article to her blog which indicates that she believes that the hearing scheduled for 30 November will be a rehearing of her motion, rather than a hearing on her request for a rehearing.52

47 A copy of this letter can be found as Exhibit 2 in the following document: http://www.scribd.com/doc/76281397/Taitz-v-Fuddy-Zibits-Rep-MTR-Opp 48 The exact date for this event is uncertain, as the amended motion either did not reach the court or was not docketed due to the lack of any Hawaii rule permitting motions to be amended. 49 http://www.scribd.com/doc/72851843/From-Orly-Taitz-s-Website-TAITZ-v-FUDDY- Hi-Cir-Ct-Amended-Motion-for-Rehearing 50 http://www.scribd.com/doc/73752992/IN-RE-ORLY-TAITZ-ET-AL-U-S-COURT-OF- APPEALS-D-C-CIRCUIT-Petition-for-Writ-of-Mandamus-Transport- Room?in_collection=3358536 51 http://www.scribd.com/doc/73601243/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-11-DEFENDANTS- MEMORANDUM-IN-OPPOSITION-TO-PLFT-S-EMERGENCY-MOTION-FOR-REHEARING- MOTION-TO-STAY-FINAL-ORDER-PEN 52 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28168

29 November 2011: Taitz files, on behalf of herself, several residents of Hawaii, several residents of New Hampshire, and others, a lengthy request for an emergency hearing with the Chief Elections Officer of Hawaii. Although not directed to any court of law, the challenge apparently includes a complaint under sections of the Hawaii Revised Statutes that relate to voter fraud. In addition to requesting changes to Hawaii’s administrative rules pertaining to elections, Taitz demands an “evidentiary hearing”, and requests that the Chief Elections Officer order production of Obama’s birth certificate (in hardcopy and microfiche format), all of Obama’s “immigration and naturalization and passport records”, and Obama’s original Social Security Card application.53 29 November 2011: Taitz files her reply to the State’s opposition to the Motion for Rehearing in Taitz v Fuddy. In this reply, Taitz points out that the State has opposed her original motion, but not the (still not docketed) amended version. Taitz therefore requests that the Court find that the State therefore has conceded the points raised in the amended motion for rehearing, and that the court therefore order that Taitz be given access to the birth certificate.54

30 November 2011: A hearing is held before Judge Nishimura on Taitz’s original Motion for Rehearing. Taitz makes several attempts to argue her Amended Motion instead of the original. Taitz is reminded, several times, that there are no provisions for amending motions, and that a new hearing would need to be set on the amended motion. Taitz is also informed, several times, that anything she wants to argue must be included in the written motion. After attempting to raise “new evidence” discovered the previous day, Taitz is also informed that new evidence cannot be added after the motion has been filed. Taitz ultimately withdraws the original motion so that she can file and argue the amended version as a new motion.55 5 December 2011: Hawaii Chief Elections Officer sends Taitz a very brief letter denying Taitz’s 29 November demand for an emergency hearing.56

6 December 2011, 3:40 pm: Taitz’s Amended Motion for Rehearing is filed in Hawaii’s 1st Circuit Court. Despite her allegations of new evidence discovered on 29 November, the Amended Motion filed on 6 December is identical to the one she attempted to file on or about 16 November. A hearing is set for 6 January 2012, at 9:00 am.57

53 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28426 54 http://www.scribd.com/doc/75005308/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-Orly-s-Reply-to- Opposition-to-Amended-Motion 55 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76186157/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-Cir-Ct-Certified-Transcript- Hearing-Held-Nov-30-2011-tfb 56 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28665 57 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76295160/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-Amended- Emergency-Motion-for-Rehearing

6 December 2011, 3:41 pm: Taitz’s “Emergency Motion/Request for the Court to Docket ‘Amended Motion for Rehearing’” is filed in Hawaii’s 1st Circuit Court. This appears to be a request that Judge Nishimura order the clerks to file the amended motion for rehearing. (See entry for 6 December 2011, 3:40 pm.)58 12 December 2011: Taitz apparently attempts to gain access to inspect President Obama’s original long form birth certificate and the original 1961 “microfiche roll” containing a copy of the birth certificate by issuing a subpoena to Hawaii Director of Health Loretta Fuddy to provide evidence and testimony in a case Taitz has pending before an Administrative Law Court in the State of Georgia. The subpoena purports to attempt to compel Dr. Fuddy to submit to a deposition, to be taken in Fuddy’s own office, on 5 January 2012.59 This subpoena appears to bear the signature of the judge in the case, but is actually a pdf-format blank form that can be readily downloaded from a website.60

16 December 2011: Hawaii submits its Opposition to Tatiz’s Amended Motion for Rehearing. They again indicate that they will be seeking attorney’s fees and costs, and again ask that Judge Nishimura formally find that Taitz’s pleading is frivolous.61 21 December 2011: Taitz attempts to gain access via subpoena to the original birth certificate for Virginia Sunahara. This subpoena is issued in Taitz’s pending Administrative Law proceeding in Georgia.62 29 December 2011: Taitz apparently attempts to file a “Motion for Reciprocal Subpoena Enforcement/Motion to hear in conjunction with the scheduled motion on January 6,2012 [sic]”. This appears to be an attempt to have Judge Nishimura order enforcement of the subpoenas Taitz has attempted to issue in the Georgia Administrative Law proceeding. Taitz claims that these subpoenas that she personally filled out and issued constitute grounds under HRS §338-18(9) for Judge Nishimura to grant the Motion for Reconsideration of the dismissal of the UIPA request that Taitz filed for the same documents many months before Taitz filled out the online subpoena forms, printed them, and mailed them to Hawaii.63 As of 2 January 2012, there is no indication that this motion has been docketed.

30 December 2011: Taitz posts a copy of her reply to Hawaii’s opposition to Taitz’s Amended Motion for Reconsideration. On Page 13 of this filing, Taitz states that Hawaii

58 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76295058/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-Emergency- Motion-Request-to-Docket-Amended-Motion-for-Rehearing 59 http://www.scribd.com/doc/75515549/Loretta-Fuddy-Hawaii-DOH-Subpoena-For- Obama-Birth-Certificate-and-1961-Microfiche-Roll 60 http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=6845&start=475#p316316 61 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76346646/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-Defendant-s-Reply- to-Plaintiff-s-Amended-Emergency-Motion-for-Rehearing 62 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=29459 63 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76723408/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-Hi-Cir-Ct-For-Writ-of- Mandamus-Motion-for-Reciprocal-Subpoena

Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine sent her a letter stating that Dr. Fuddy will not be submitting to the demands that Taitz made in the subpoenas that Taitz filled out as an alleged part of her Georgia Administrative Law proceeding.64

2 January 2012: Taitz puts a post on her blog declaring that she is “expecting a surprise witness” to appear at the 6 January 2012 hearing that is scheduled on Taitz’s second attempt at an Emergency Motion for Rehearing in Taitz v Fuddy.65

64 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76793662/TAITZ-v-FUDDY-HI-CIR-CT-Reply-to- Opposition-to-Emergency-Morion-for-Rehearing-and-Stay-12-29-11 65 WARNING: Site at following link may contain malware: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=29952