Subject: Judicial misconduct of Chief Justice Jorge A. Solis
of the Northern District of Texas Abilene Division.

POSIT SLIP
for
Action 1-15CV-205P, {1:15cv27-P}
RA 292 428 629 US;RA 292 428 703 US
RA 693 498 967 US-TES-0012

Before United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

To: Sarah S. Vance, Chair 504-589-7595, fax 202-502-2888
Marjorie O. Rendell

Lewis A. Kaplan
R. David Proctor
Charles R. Breyer
Ellen Segal Huvelle
Catherine D. Perry

Thurgood Marshall Federal
Judiciary Building
One Columbus Circle, NE
Room G-255, North Lobby
Washington. DC 20544-0005
Clerk Office: 202-502-2800 FAX: 202-502-2888

Subject: Judicial misconduct of Chief Justice Jorge A. Solis
of the Northern District of Texas Abilene Division.

The Petitioner, of the cases 1-15CV-205 P, 1:15cv27-P the Grantor/Settlor/Beneficiary of the e-state Michael Allen Wells, who is the flesh and blood man with hands and feet is Ambassador Plenipotentiary michael-allen: the family of wells, hereinafter "Grantor/Settlor" on all court documents, of this relation, expressed, revocable, private trust, modifiable from time to time, who is not lost at sea, is competent with age of majority in power to choose and having all un-a-lienable rights, titles, and interests, without granting a waiver of any right, relief, remedy, or defense to any corporation or man, now comes in good faith, a divine spirit having a human experience, of the Mandan Indian Tribe, also known as the "White Indians" of the Nations of "Great Turtle Island" established 322 years before Christopher Columbus, as a descendant of Stephen Hopkins, a co-signor of "The Declaration of Independence TRUST (cestui que trust)", and under the 1776 A.D. law forum with purpose of
all in Private Equity for the protection of the Beneficial Rights of the Beneficiaries comes forward now as Ambassador Plenipotentiary.

There has, and continues to be, Judicial misconduct of Chief Justice Jorge A. Solis of the Northern District of Texas Abilene Division who represents the Corporation. On January 20th of the 2015 corporate calendar, case 1:15cv27-P was filed at the Dallas, Texas Federal corporate headquarters of that division by United States registered mail at that address. At that time, the posit of this case was established by Silver and Copper coins with the instruction to forward the posit of these coins to the Postmaster General (who wears two hats - one the organic 1776 united states and the other - the public UNITED STATES corporation). He was informed by registered mail to expect the transfer into the 1775 postal bank that was established in that year by Benjamin Franklin the Postmaster General; to create a new legal country one needs to create postal routes.

The Postmaster General of 2015 never received this posit to date. This was done by the Grantor/Settler to establish the Law Form under which this case was to be presented under the 1776 Trust of the "Declaration of Independence", "Laws of Nature and Nature's God". A certified copy of that document was also put into the court record at that time, for the Corporation of the UNITED STATES and its affiliates have a foreign law form than that which the Trust mandates.

The Grantor/Settlor understands why this was done; it was done to protect the Beneficiaries from themselves; the beneficiaries went to sleep and some have continued to sleep to this date. The Trustee's had to protect the trust at all costs at that time no matter if it harmed the beneficiaries or not. This was the thinking at that time.

The present day Trustees have now gone beyond this point to the point that they have mandated the outright murder of the Beneficiaries and this will stop.

The filings in the cases 1:15cv27-P, 1-15CV-205 P, is of record.

The Trustee's Agent Jorge A. Solis at that time did understand this and was in a perilous position. He concluded that he could stop this case. So his response was to point back to the public side to pull this case out of the private side by pointing to the corporation court procedures for payment of filings fees of four hundred corporation paper which do not apply to the Grantor/Settlor. When the corporation received the posit via the organic united states common money from the organic national postal bank, the registered mail number is the real money. The colonist all had different currencies at that time; the registered mail became the common currency throughout the land which created the country in 1776, and this is still true today. The Grantor/Settler has re-established the organic 1776 Trust on January 20th 2015.

The Grantor/Settlor was aware of the devised plan of the Trustee, he responded under his filing number "Indenture RA 292 428 703 US-MAW-0082" to the Trustee with the following which is in the court record;
U.S. Supreme Court
CRANDALL v. STATE OF NEVADA, 73 U.S. 35 (1867)
73 U.S. 35 (Wall.)
CRANDALL
v.
STATE OF NEVADA.
December Term, 1867
[73 U.S. 35, 36] ERROR to the Supreme Court of Nevada.
But if the government has these rights on her own account, the citizen also has correlative rights. He has the right to come to the seat of government to assert any claim he may have upon that government, or to transact any business he may have with it. To seek its protection, to share its offices, to engage in administering its functions. He has a right to free access to its sea-ports, through which all the operations of foreign trade and commerce are conducted, to the sub-treasuries, the land offices, the revenue offices, and the courts of justice in the several States, and this right is in its nature independent of the will of any State over whose soil he must pass in the exercise of it.

Footnotes
[ Footnote 1 ] Brown v. State of Maryland, 12 Wheaton, 438; City of New York v. Miln, 11 Peters, 136; License Cases, 5 Howard, 594.

[ Footnote 2 ] Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheaton, 200; Houston v. Moore, 5 Id. 21; Willson v. Blackbird Creek Marsh Company, 2 Peters, 252; Brown v. State of Maryland, 12 Wheaton, 448; License Cases, 5 Howard, 504, 574, 578, 579, 580-6; Ib. 607, 618, 619, 624-5.

[ Footnote 3 ] Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheaton, 201-4; City of New York v. Miln, 11 Peters, 102.

[ Footnote 4 ] Cases generally cited ante; McCulloch v. State of Maryland, 4 Wheaton, 316, 427-36.

[ Footnote 5 ] 7 Howard, 283.

[ Footnote 6 ] 12 Howard, 299.

[ Footnote 7 ] 3 Wallace, 713.

[ Footnote 8 ] 4 Wheaton, 316.

[ Footnote 9 ] 12 Wheaton, 419.

[ Footnote 10 ] 2 Peters, 449.

[ Footnote 11 ] 2 Black, 620.

and;

A judge is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980). The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.". Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason.

Having taken at least two, if not three, oaths of office to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, any judge who has acted in violation of the Constitution is engaged in an act or acts of treason (see below). If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason.

TREASON Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821) What is the penalty for treason? Any judge or attorney who does not report the above judges for treason as required by law may themselves be guilty of misprision of treason, 18 U.S.C. Section 2382.

Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in "fraud upon the court". In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated "Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted."

Fraud upon the court" makes void the orders and judgments of that court. It is also clear and well-settled Illinois law that any attempt to commit "fraud upon the court" vitiates the entire proceeding. The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions."); Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters ..."); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962) ("It is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything."); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App. 475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896); Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App. 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v. The Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed "fraud upon the court", the orders and judgment of that court are void, of no legal force or effect. AMY In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified." [Emphasis added]. Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994). That Court also stated that Section 455(a) "requires a judge to recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). In Pfizer Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that "It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he believes that he has received justice." "Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse herself su
a sponte under the stated circumstances." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989).

None of the orders issued by any judge who has been disqualified by law would appear to be valid. It would appear that they are void as a matter of law, and are of no legal force or effect. Should a judge not disqualify himself, then the judge is violation of the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. United States v. Sciuto, 521 F.2d 842, 845 (7th Cir. 1996) ("The right to a tribunal free from bias or prejudice is based, not on section 144, but on the Due Process Clause.").

Should a judge issue any order after he has been disqualified by law, and if the party has been denied of any of his / her property, then the judge may have been engaged in the Federal Crime of "interference with interstate commerce". The judge has acted in the judge's personal capacity and not in the judge's judicial capacity. It has been said that this judge, acting in this manner, has no more lawful authority than someone's next-door neighbor (provided that he is not a judge). However some judges may not follow the law. If you were a non- represented litigant, and should the court not follow the law as to non-represented litigants, then the judge has expressed an "appearance of partiality" and, under the law, it would seem that he/she has disqualified him/herself.

However, since not all judges keep up to date in the law, and since not all judges follow the law, it is possible that a judge may not know the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court and the other courts on this subject. Notice that it states "disqualification is required" and that a judge "must be disqualified" under certain circumstances. JUDGE YOU HAVE BEEN AUTOMATICALLY DISQUALIFIED BY LAW. The Supreme Court has also held that if a judge wars against the Constitution, or if he acts without jurisdiction, he has engaged in treason to the Constitution. If a judge acts after he has been automatically disqualified by law, then he is acting without jurisdiction, and that suggest that he is then engaging in criminal acts of treason, and may be engaged in extortion and the interference with interstate commerce. Courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their criminal acts. Since both treason and the interference with interstate commerce are criminal acts, no judge has immunity to engage in such acts.

The Trustee's corporation court, Trustee's Agent Jorge A. Solis were also made aware of the address change of the Grantor/Settlor. This was done by the court filings that the Grantor/Settlor made and these are in the Grantor/Settlor numbers of those filings - Indenture RA 292 428 703 US-MAW-0077, Indenture RA 292 428 703 US-MAW-0078, Indenture RA 292 428 703 US-MAW-0080, Indenture RA 292 428 703 US-MAW-0081, Indenture RA 292 428 703 US-MAW-0082, and Indenture RA 292 428 703 US-MAW-0083.

On April 30, 2015 an Order of dismissal was sent by the Trustee's Agent that was never received by the Grantor/Settlor at the change of address. The Court Clerk and Trustee's Agent was notified of this change of address by the Grantor/Settlor in the court filings that are on the record. Neither the Trustee's Agent nor the Court Clerk read any of the filings to correct the address change. They failed to follow the court procedures to change the address; thereby, the Grantor/Settlor could not respond. The Grantor/Settlor was not aware of that order until after he filed the below case.

On October 15, 2015, the Grantor/Settlor filed another case 1-15CV-205 P (when the Grantor/Settlor found out that the court misfiled the case) and the court filed the first case and disregarded the second case. When the Grantor/Settlor found out that the court misfiled the case, he called the court to rectify the misfiling. The court at that time corrected its error by merging or combining the two cases into one which is in the court record.

At that time the Court assigned the Chief Deputy of Operation, Leigh Lyon, to the Grantor/Settlor so there would no longer be any potential future problems in this action. The Grantor/Settlor appreciated this jester. The Grantor/Settlor instructed/ordered Ms. Lyon to proceed with sending out the summons to all 832 defendants in all fifty states. She informed the Trustee's Agent Jorge A. Solis and he advised her not to send out the summons until he looked over everything.

The concerns of the Grantor/Settlor when he informed Leigh Lyon that he the Grantor/Settlor has been waiting for this case to go forward since January 20th 2015 nun pro tunc. Because both cases have the same subject matter, it is approaching a year now that the Grantor/Settlor has been waiting to have this case adjudicated. The second case 1-15CV-205 P the Chief Justice is a Defendant how can he be neutral? Obstruction of Justice and Treason has occurred and continues in this matter. The Northern District Federal Court Corporation proclaims on its own web page (as a back drop) the Trust, "The Declaration of Independence". This does not mean that the Federal Court Corporation is independent or separate from the Trust. It derives its existence from the Trust itself.

The Grantor/Settlor strongly suggests to this panel to immediately proceed with this case. You can be a part of correcting the errors that have occurred in our country or you could be on the wrong side of history.

As what is written and is the voice of the Messiah, the choice is yours.

The Great Seal of the
Grantor/Settlor/Beneficiary__________________
Family wells michael-allen; wells
WCL Pure Banking Trust
Grantor/Settlor/Beneficiary 1071 N. Judge Ely Blvd.
PMB6404 Abilene TX 79601

All words contained in Trusts are defined and document meaning determined solely by the Grantors/Settlors. All Beneficial Rights Reserved by the Beneficiaries.

THIS WAS FAXED TO THE ABOVE ADDRESSEE AND PUT INTO THE COURT RECORD TODAY.

*****************************************************************