Khan v. United States

Pro Se

Question(s) Presented

1.1 “Federal Circuit’s Application of the Plausibility Standard to Weigh Evidence Against Plaintiff Conflicts With This Court’s Precedent In Twombly and Iqbal As It Nullifies Procedural Due Process Under The Fifth Amendment To The U.S. Constitution;”

2.1. “U.S. Court of Federal Claims Has Concurrent Jurisdiction With A U.S. District Court Over a RICO Action Against The U.S. Pursuant To This Court’s Precedent In Tafflin v Levitt;”

3.1 “A Declaratory Judgment Is A Proper Vehicle For This Court To Uphold A Woman’s Equality To A Male Man Under God’s Word And The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments To The U.S. Constitution To Effectively Abolish The Class-Based Invidiously Discriminatory Animus Against Women Entrenched In America’s Culture;”

4.1 “Is This Case A Proper Vehicle For This Court To Permissibly Fashion A Remedy To Vindicate Federal Rights Under Fifth And Fourteenth Amendments To The U.S. Constitution When As In The Present Case There Is An Ongoing Violation Of Equal Protection Of The Laws;”

5.1 “Federal Circuit Committed An Egregious Error Because It Is In Defiance of All Relevant Statutory Provisions And Court Holdings On The Subject Of All Material Elements Required To Sustain Recovery Under Civil Rights And Civil RICO Statutes;”

6.1 “Is Civil Rights Statute 42 U.S.C. §1985 Money Mandating Against The U.S. Pursuant to U.S. Supreme Court Precedent In Monell u. Department of Social Services of City of New York AND Money-Mandating Read In Conjunction With 28 U.S.C. §1343 (a)(1) and (2) and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(a);”

7.1 “This Case Is An Ideal Vehicle For This Court To Establish Solid Legal Foundations Under Amendment Fifth To The U.S. Constitution For Acceptable Surveillance Practices While Upholding Its Own Ruling In Ziglar That National-Security Concerns Must Not Become A Talisman A ‘Label’ Used To ‘Cover A Multitude Of Sins’ Especially When ‘Danger Of Abuse’ Against Women Is Even More Heightened Given The Judiciary’s Failure To Define ‘Security Interest’ In Domestic Cases.”

Proceedings and Orders
June 7, 2019
Application (18A1276) granted by The Chief Justice to file petition for a writ of certiorari in excess of word limits. The petition may not exceed 10,500 words.
July 24, 2019
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
October 7, 2019
Petition DENIED.