In the Honorable District of Columbia

Civil Division
Washington, D.C .

In the name of, Case #_____________________

We, the People of the United States of America, Judge______________________
Naturalist Citizen of the United States of America Date______________
Petitioner VICTOR DEL RIO, Class
2427 Pinpoint Dr
Spring, TX 77373
Private Attorney General

V.

UNITED STATES, dba a Federal Corporation

LAW FIRM of ERIC HOLDER Jr.
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001,

Senate Judiciary Committee

226 Dirksen
Senate Office Building
Washington, DC

United States Courthouse

515 Rusk Avenue
Houston, TX 77002,

United States Courthouse

333 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001,

Harris County Family Courthouse

1115 Congress
Houston, Texas 77002,

Ex Parte Petition for Expedited Leave to File Writ of Quo Warranto,

Ex Parte Petition for Expedited Writ of Habeas Corpus,
& Ex Parte Petition for Expedited Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

18 U.S.C. § 245 et seq ,

18 U.S.C. § 371,
18 U.S.C. § 1513, &
18 U.S.C. 1581

USDC WRITS 1 OF 38
 01.

COMES NOW PETITIONER VICTOR DEL R IO, Sui Juris, Citizen of Texas State,

expressly not a citizen of the United States (“federal citizen”), respectfully and urgently

petitions for Expedited Leave to File Writ of Quo Warranto, expedited Writ of Habeas

Corpus, and Expedited Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for urgent legal relief.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

02.

Purs ua nt to D.C. ST § 16-3501, A quo warra nto may be issued from the United States

District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a

person who within the District of Columbia us urps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or

exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United

States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.

03.

Purs ua nt to D.C. ST § 11-501, In addition to its jurisdiction as a U nited States district

court and any other jurisdiction conferred on it b y law, the United States Distri ct Court

for the District of Columbia has jurisdi ction of the following:

(1) Any civil action or other matter begun in the court before the effective date of the

District of Columbia Court Reorganization Act of 1970 ot her than any matter over which

the Superior Court of the District of Columbia takes jurisdiction under section 11-921(a)

(4)(G) or 11-921(a)(5)(B).

(4) Any civil action (other than a matter over whi ch the Superior Court of the District of

USDC WRITS 2 OF 38
Columbia has jurisdiction under paragraph (3) or (4) of section 11-921(a)) begun in the

court duri ng the thirty-month period beginning on such effective date wherein the

amount in controversy exceeds $50,000.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS

04.

Purs ua nt to D.C. § 16-3541, When a quo warranto proceeding is against a person for

usurpi ng an office, on the relation of a person claiming the same office, the relator shall

set forth in his petition the fa cts upon whi ch he claims to be entitled to the office.

05.

Purs ua nt to D.C. ST § 16-3502, The Attorney General of the United States or the U nited

States Attorney may institute a proceeding pursuant to this subchapter on his own

motion or on the relation of a third person. The writ may not be issued on the relation of

a third person except by leave of the court, to be applied for by the relator, by a petition

duly verified setting forth the grounds of the application, or until the relator files a bond

with suffi cient surety, to be approved by the clerk of the court, in such penalty as the

court prescribes, conditioned on the payment by him of all costs incurred in the

prosecution of the writ if costs are not recovered from and paid by the defendant.

06.

Purs ua nt to D.C. ST § 16-3503, If the Attorney General or United States Attorney refuses

to institute a quo warranto proceeding on the request of a person interested, the

USDC WRITS 3 OF 38
interested person may apply to the court by certified petition for leave to have the writ

issued. When, in the opinion of the court, the reasons set forth in the petition are

sufficient in law, the writ shall be allowed to be issued by any attorney, in the name of

the United States, on the relation of the interested person on his compliance with the

condition prescribed by section 16-3502 as to security for costs.

07.

Purs ua nt to 18 U. S.C. § 371, If two or more persons conspire either to commit any

offense against the United States, or to defra ud the United States, or any agency thereof

in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect

the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more

than fi ve years, or both. If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of

the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not

exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.

08.

Purs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 245 et seq:

(a)(1)Not hi ng in this section shall be construed as i ndicating an intent on the part of

Congress to prevent any State, any possession or Commonwealth of the United States, or

the District of Columbia, from exercising jurisdiction over any offense over which it would

have jurisdiction in the absence of this section, nor shall anythi ng i n this section be

construed as depri ving State and local la w enforcement authorities of responsibility for

prosecuting acts that may be violations of this section and that are violations of State and

USDC WRITS 4 OF 38
local law. No prosecution of any offense described in this section shall be undertaken by

the United States except upon the certification in writing of the Attorney General, the

Deput y Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or any Assistant Attorney

General specially designated by the Attorney General that in his judgment a prosecution

by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice,

which function of certification may not be delegated.

(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the authority of Federal officers,

or a Federal grand jury, to investigate possible violations of this section.

(b)Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully

injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere

with--

(1)any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any

other person or any class of persons from--

(A) voting or qualifying to vote, qualifying or campaigning as a candidate for elective

office, or qualifying or acti ng as a poll watcher, or any legally authorized election official,

in any primary, special, or general election;

(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facilit y, or

activity provided or administered by the United States;

(C) applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the

United States;

(D) serving, or attending upon any court in connection with possible service, as a grand or

petit juror in any court of the United States;

(E) participating in or enjoying the benefits of any program or activity receiving Federal

USDC WRITS 5 OF 38
financial assistance; or

(2) any person because of his race, color, religion or national origin and because he is or

has been--

(A) enrolling in or attending any public school or public college;

(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facilit y or activity

provided or administered by any State or subdi vision thereof;

(C) applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any pri vate

employer or any agency of any State or subdivision thereof, or joining or usi ng the

services or advantages of any labor organization, hiri ng hall, or employment agency;

(D) serving, or attending upon any court of any State in connection with possible service,

as a grand or petit juror,

(E) traveling in or using any fa cility of interstate commerce, or using any vehi cle,

terminal, or facility of any common carrier by motor, rail, water, or air;

(F) enjoying the goods, services, facilities, pri vileges , advantages , or accommodations of

any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests,

or of any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom , lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility

which serves the public and which is principall y enga ged in selling food or beverages for

cons umption on the premises, or of any gasoline station, or of any motion picture house,

theater, concert hall, sports arena , stadium, or any other place of exhibition or

entertainment whi ch serves the public, or of any other establishment which serves the

public and (i) which is located withi n the premises of any of the aforesaid establishments

or within the premises of which is physi cally located any of the aforesaid establishments,

and (ii) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such establishments; or

USDC WRITS 6 OF 38
(3) duri ng or incident to a riot or civil disorder, any person engaged in a business in

commerce or affecting commerce, including, but not limited to, any person engaged in a

business which sells or offers for sale to interstate tra velers a substantial portion of the

articles , commodities, or services whi ch it sells or where a substantial portion of the

articles or commodities whi ch it sells or offers for sale have moved in commerce; or

(4) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any

other person or any class of persons from--

(A) participating, without discrimination on account of race, color, religion or national

origi n, in any of the benefits or activities described in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)

(E) or subparagraphs (2)(A) through (2)(F); or

(B) affording another person or class of persons opportunity or protection to so

participate; or

(5) any citizen because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such citizen or any

other citizen from lawfully aiding or encouraging other persons to participate, without

discrimi nation on account of ra ce, color, reli gion or national origin, in any of the benefits

or acti vities described in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)(E) or subparagraphs (2)(A)

through (2)(F), or parti cipating lawfully in speech or peaceful assembly opposing any

denial of the opport unity to so participate--

shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one yea r, or both; and if

bodil y injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts

incl ude the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or

fire shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if

death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include

USDC WRITS 7 OF 38
kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit

aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or

imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. As

used in this section, the term "participating lawfully in speech or peaceful assembly"

shall not mean the aiding, abetting, or i nciting of other persons to riot or to commit any

act of physical violence upon any individual or against any real or personal property in

furtherance of a riot. Nothing in subparagraph (2)(F) or (4)(A) of this subsection shall

apply to the proprietor of any establishment which provides lodging to transient guests,

or to any employee acting on behalf of such proprietor, with respect to the enjoyment of

the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of such

establishment if such establishment is located wit hin a building which contains not more

than fi ve rooms for rent or hire and whi ch is actuall y occupied by the proprietor as his

residence.

(c) Not hi ng in this section shall be construed so as to deter any law enforcement officer

from lawfully carrying out the duties of his offi ce; and no law enforcement officer shall be

considered to be in violation of this section for lawfully carrying out the duties of his offi ce

or lawfully enforcing ordi na nces and laws of the U nited States, the District of Columbia,

any of the several States, or any political subdi vision of a State. For purposes of the

precedi ng sentence, the term "law enforcement officer" means any officer of the United

States, the District of Columbia, a State, or political subdivision of a State, who is

empowered by law to conduct investigations of, or make arrests because of, offenses

against the United States, the Dist ri ct of Columbia, a State, or a political subdivision of a

State.

USDC WRITS 8 OF 38
(d) For purposes of this section, the term "State" includes a State of the United States,

the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United

States.

09.

Purs ua nt to US ATTORNEY MANUAL (USAM) 9-42.001:

United States v. Li cciardi, 30 F.3d 1127, 1132-33 (9th Cir. 1994)(even though the

defendant may ha ve impaired a government agency's functions, as part of a scheme to

defraud anot her party, the government offered no evidence that the defendant intended

to defraud the United States and a conspi ra cy to violate an a gency regulatory scheme

could not lie on such fa cts).

In summary, those activities whi ch courts have held defraud the United States under 18

U.S.C. § 371 affect the government in at least one of three ways:

They cheat the government out of money or property;

They interfere or obstruct legitimate Government activity; or

They make wrongful use of a governmental instrumentality.

10.

Purs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 1513,

(1) Whoever kills or attempts to kill another person with intent to retaliate against any

person for—

(A) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given

or any record, document , or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding;

or

USDC WRITS 9 OF 38
(B) providing to a law enforcement offi cer any information relating to the commission or

possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation,

supervised release, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings, shall be punished as

provided in paragraph (2).

(2) The punishment for an offense under this subsection is—

(A) in the case of a killing, the punishment provided in sections 1111 and 1112; and

(B) in the case of an attempt, imprisonment for not more than 30 years.

(b) Whoever knowingl y engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to

another person or damages the tangible propert y of another person, or threatens to do so,

with intent to retaliate against any person for—

(1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given

or any record, document , or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding;

or

(2) any information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal

offense or a violation of conditions of probation, supervised release, pa role, or release

pending judicial proceedings given by a person to a la w enforcement officer;

or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 yea rs,

or both.

(c) If the retaliation occurred because of attendance at or testimony in a criminal case,

the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense under this

section shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that

could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.

(d) There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section.

USDC WRITS 10 OF 38
(e) Whoever knowingly, with the intent to retaliate, takes any action ha rmful to any

person, including interference with the lawful employment or livelihood of any person, for

providing to a law enforcement offi cer any truthful information relating to the

commission or possible commission of any Federal offense, shall be fi ned under this title

or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

(f) Whoever conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be subject to the

same penalties as those prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object

of the conspiracy.

(g) A prosecution under this section may be brought in the district in which the official

proceedi ng (whether pending, about to be instituted, or completed) was intended to be

affected, or in which the conduct constituting the alleged offense occurred.

11.

Purs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 1595 (PEONAGE, SLAV ERY, AND TRAFFICKIN G IN

PERSONS)

(a) An indi vidual who is a vi ctim of a violation of this chapter may bring a civil action

against the perpetrator (or whoever knowingly benefits, financially or by receiving

anythi ng of value from participation in a venture which that person knew or should ha ve

known has engaged in an act in violation of this chapter) in an appropriate district court

of the United States and may recover damages and reasonable attorneys fees.

(b)

(1) Any civil action filed under this section shall be stayed during the pendency of any

criminal action arising out of the same occurrence in which the claimant is the victim.

USDC WRITS 11 OF 38
(2) In this subsection, a “criminal action” includes investigation and prosecution and is

pending until final adjudication in the trial court.

(c) No action may be maintained under this section unless it is commenced not later

than 10 years after the cause of action arose.

12.

Purs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 1592,

(a) Whoever knowingly destroys, conceals, removes, confiscates, or possesses any actual

or purported passport or other immigration document , or any other actual or purported

government identification document, of another person—

(1) in the course of a violation of section 1581, 1583, 1584, 1589, 1590, 1591, or 1594 (a);

(2) with intent to violate section 1581, 1583, 1584, 1589, 1590, or 1591; or

(3) to prevent or restrict or to attempt to prevent or restri ct , without lawful authority, the

person’s liberty to move or travel, in order to maintain the labor or services of that

person, when the person is or has been a victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons,

as defined in section 103 of the Trafficki ng Victims Protection Act of 2000,

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more tha n 5 years, or both.

(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to the conduct of a person who is or has been a victim of

a severe form of trafficking in persons, as defi ned in section 103 of the Trafficki ng

Victims Protection Act of 2000, if that conduct is caused by, or incident to, that

trafficking.

(c) Whoever obstructs, attempts to obstruct, or in any way interferes with or prevents the

enforcement of this section, shall be subject to the penalties des cribed in subsection (a).

USDC WRITS 12 OF 38
 13.

Though PETITION ER has repeatedl y requested MODIFICATION of current CHILD

SUPPORT, based on 2007 salary of $56k annually + extra $ 100.00, to reflect his current

salary of $10,800 and reflecting credit for ALL PREV IOUS DIRECT PA YM ENTS of

approximately $8k, PETITION ER is refused the MODIFICATION whi ch will res ult in

his FALSE IMPR ISONM ENT, AS CONFIRMED BY EX-W IFE (see ATTACHMENTS), in

MARCH, TO DISCOURAGE FURTHER LITIGATION ON BEHALF OF SON AND

HIMSELF.

REFERENCE THE PROTOCOL – TOOL USED ALONG WITH VOID ORDERS &

TORTS, IN CONSPIRACY, TO 'DISABLE' PETITION ER, LIKE SON, AND

CONTINU E THEIR HUMAN TRAFFICKING. I'V E B EEN CLAIM ING THAT S INC E

EARLY 2008.

QUO WARRANTO 1 OF 4 (to US DOJ)

14.

DISABLED SON AND PETITION ER BOTH V ICTIMIZED BY STATE SINCE 1996,

THEN FEDERALLY TORTED BY DOJ (28 U.S.C. S 2680(h), SEPERATED TWO YEARS

NOW, AND PETITION ER, THEIR ONLY VOIC E FOR REDRESS, IS GOIN G TO BE

FALSELY IMPRISON ED BY V OID ORDERS, POSS IBLY SCAPEGOATED FOR HIS

SON'S BRA IN DAMAGES & SILENCED FOR GOOD. AND SINCE DEC EMB ER 2007,

PETITIONER R EPEATEDLY SOUGHT COMPACT WITH TEXAS (WA IV ER) TO

REMOV E ANY AND ALL THREAT OF LITIGATION IN ORDER TO SPARE BRAIN-

USDC WRITS 13 OF 38
DAMAGED SON AND HIMSELF FROM FURTHER DAMAGES.

15.

PETITIONER R EQUESTS THIS COURT TAKE MANDATOR Y NOTICE OF ONE OF

SIX B ENEFACTORS FOR PETITION ER IN THIS CASE:

TRUDY A. TRAINO, 11003 OLIV EWOOD DR, Houston, TX 77089, PH: 832.642.4878

STATEMENT OF FACTS

16

V ICTOR DEL RIO, PETITIONER , in support for this EX PARTE PETITION, requests

this Honorable Court take Mandatory Judicial Notice of Fi nal Orders No 2000-27121

based on Custody Hearings in 2008 void of Due Process, Fairness & Impartialit y,

involved Perjury, and the Excl usion of Evidence, Testimony by the PETITION ER and

SON, and OTHER SIGN IFICANT FACTS.

17.

V OID, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, & UNFINALIZED Fi nal Orders No. 2000-27121 are a

blatant violation of statutory regulations, Supreme Court case law, and repugna nt to the

Texas & US Constitutions .

18.

Court orders are law; Final Orders No. 2000-27121 unjustly subjects (DEN IES) all of

PETITIONER'S and SON 'S Constitutional Rights to the Permission of TRACEY DEL

RIO which sanctions the ABUSE-NEGLECT-EXPLOITATION and MENTAL

USDC WRITS 14 OF 38
RETARDATION CLASSIFICATION of SON for Federal funds (False Claims, 31 U.S.C. §

3729–3733).

19.

PETITIONER has spent two years unsuccessfully trying to have Final Orders vacated in

several State and D.C. Courts while TOLERATING continuous Federal torts (28 U.S.C. §

2401(b) from the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE representing the 'United States', a

Federal Corporation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 3002.

20.

Final Orders No. 2000-27121 are still not finalized so TRACEY DEL R IO and

DEFEN DANTS build circumstantial evidence for PETITIONER'S C IV IL

COMM ITM ENT or FALSE ARREST W ITHOUT DU E PROC ESS as a PERV ERT-

ABUSIV E PERS ON-STALKER et c... from the resulting effects of THEIR INTENTIONAL

IN FLICTION OF EM OTIONAL DISTR ESS from TORTS, DEN IAL OF LEGAL

REMEDY, PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROM E, INTERFERENCE WITH

CUSTODY of INJURED ABUSED SON in GREAT RIS K OF IRREPABLE HARM.

21.

PETITIONER comes with charges of Crimes, equivalent to Domestic Terrorism (18

U.S.C. § 2331) and Torture (18 U.S.C. § 2340), which Federal and State Courts dismissed

for Want of Jurisdi ction or discriminated against victims (Title II, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-34;

ADA 504 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq)

USDC WRITS 15 OF 38
 22.

Victimized since 1996 with help from Texas while tolerating TORTS from expatriated, by

D.C . oath, Federal government officials, is in violation of Article 27 of the Fourt h Geneva

Convention.

23.

22 U.S.C. Chapter 11 (Foreign Relations and Intercourse)identifies all public offi cials as

forei gn agents.

24.

Purs ua nt to Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9

December 1948, reference Arti cle 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with

intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethni c, ra cial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberatel y inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about

its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly tra nsferring children of the group to another group

25.

The FBI defines a HATE CRIME (aka . bias crime) to be: "a crimi nal offense committed

USDC WRITS 16 OF 38
against a person, property or societ y whi ch is motivated, in whole or in part, by the

offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicit y/national

origi n."

26.

(America Nationals) Public Law #103-322A, a 1994 Federal law, defi nes a HATE CRIME

as "a crime in which the defendant intentionally selects a vi ctim, or in the case of a

propert y crime, the property that is the object of the crime, beca use of the actual or

perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethni city, gender, disability, or sexual

orientation of any person."

27.

Traditional HATE CRIME legislation protects persons because of "his ra ce, color, religion

or national origin ," as in the case of the 1969 Federal HATE CRIMES law. (18 U.S .C. §

245).

28.

Purs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 245, “The portion of Section 245 of Title 18 which is primarily

enforced by the US DOJ Criminal Section makes it unlawful to willfully injure,

intimidate or interfere with any person, or to attempt to do so, by force or threat of force,

because of that other person's race, color, religion or national ori gin and because of their

activity as one of the following:

a. A student at or applicant for admission to a public school or publi c college,

b. A parti cipant in a benefit, service, privilege, program, facility or activity

USDC WRITS 17 OF 38
 provided or administered by a state or local government,

c. An applicant for private or state employment; a private or state employee; a

member or applicant for membership in a labor organization or hiri ng hall; or an

applicant for employment through an employment agency, labor orga nization or

hiring hall,

29.

Twel ve years of my SON'S life to date has been in vi olation of the United Nations

General Assembly's Declaration of the Rights of the Child created on 20 November 1959.

Full text of Declaration: http://www.undemocracy.com/A-RES-1386(XIV ).pdf

30.

Our Custody and Modification hearings ha ve been in violation of The Uniform Parentage

Act of 2002; 42 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(2) (Requirement of statutorily prescribed procedures to

improve effectiveness of child support enforcement)

31.

Allegedly the "Great Writ" of Habeas Corpus, "the most celebrated writ in the English

Law," William Blackstone, Commentaries at 129, offers protection a gainst "illegal

restraint or confinement."

Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 400 (1962).

USDC WRITS 18 OF 38
 32.

Allegedly Habeas Corpus relief is based on the pri nciple "that in a civilized society,

government must always be accountable to the judiciary for a man's imprisonment: if the

imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law,

the indi vidual is entitled to his immediate release." Id. at 402. The Texas Constitution

vests in the Courts the power to issue writs of habeas corpus, TEX. CONST. art . 5, § 5,

construed to encompass claims raising jurisdictional or fundamental defects or

constitutional issues. Ex parte Tuley, 109 S.W.3d 388 (Tex.C rim .App. 2002); Ex parte

Gra ves, 70 S.W.3d 103, 109 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002). Claims of act ual innocence raise issues

of constitutional magnit ude.

33.

Purs ua nt to Texas Ci vil Practi ce & Remedies Code § 66.001, an action in the nature of

Quo Warranto is available if:

(1) a person usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or executes a franchise or

an office, incl udi ng an office in a corporation created by the authorit y of this

state;

(3) an association of persons acts as a corporation without being legally

incorporated;

(4) a corporation does or omits an act that requires a surrender or causes a

forfeiture of its rights and privileges as a corporation;

(5) a corporation exercises power not granted by law;

USDC WRITS 19 OF 38
 34.

Purs ua nt to Texas Ci vil Practi ce & Remedies Code § 66.002.

(a) If grounds for the remedy exist, the attorney general or the county or district attorney

of the proper county may petition the district court of the proper count y or a district judge

if the court is in vacation for leave to file an information in the nature of Quo Wa rranto.

(b) The petition must state that the information is sought in the name of the State of

Texas.

(c) The attorney general or count y or district attorney may file the petition on his own

motion or at the request of an individual relator.

(d) If there is probable ground for the proceeding, the judge shall grant leave to file the

information, order the information to be filed, and order process to be issued.

35.

From “The Practice of EXTRAORDINARY REMEDIES; HABEAS CORPUS AND THE

OTHER COMMON LAW WRITS V olume II” By CHESTER JAMES ANTIEAU, OCEANA

PUBLICATIONS, INC .(1987):

Purs ua nt to § 4.02, In modern American practice the principal purposes of the action in

Quo Warranto are:

(c) to void actions of persons and associations claiming to be corporations without lawful

authority;

(f) to question the authorit y of both individuals and corporations exercising franchises

and pri vileges without lawful authorit y.

USDC WRITS 20 OF 38
 36.

Purs ua nt to § 4.05, The writ of Quo Warranto is proper to test the validity of the exercise

of particular powers by local governmental entities. The writ is used to test the validity of

the enactment of ordinances. At the common law in America, electors and taxpa yers were

unable to bring Quo Warranto to question the validity of municipal corporations or the

exercise of their powers.

37.

Purs ua nt to § 4.10, Quo Warranto, being a discretionary remedy, courts customarily have

denied relief when the petitioner had available another remedy, at law or in equity, that

was fully as convenient and effective. "It is one of the fundamentals of procedure in Quo

Warranto," according to the Florida Supreme Court, "that the writ will not be issued

where there is another ample and sufficient remedy provided by law for the relief

sought."

38.

Purs ua nt to §4.14, The state supreme courts customarily are empowered to grant Quo

Warranto, and at times have exclusive authority where state officers are concerned.

Frequentl y Quo Warranto proceedi ngs can be brought before circuit, superior and district

courts, and occasionally before intermediate appellate tribunals. Unless constitutional or

statutory provisions are expressed so clearly as to be particularly beyond a reasonable

doubt, the power of all state courts of general jurisdiction to entertain Quo Warranto

actions will be deemed undist urbed.

USDC WRITS 21 OF 38
 39.

Purs ua nt to § 4.25, However, where the defenda nt has allegedly usurped an office or

franchise belonging to the state, if has been held at times that it is only necessary for the

state to allege that it is being exercised without lawful authority. Freq uently leave is

granted ex parte, the majority rule being that notice of intent to file application for leave

is not required except when mandated by statute.

40.

Purs ua nt to § 4.26, When an individual is the real party in interest in bringing action for

Quo Warranto, his pleading must positively, with certainty and specificity set forth the

facts on which he relies, They must be set forth clea rl y and without ambiguity, sufficient

to indicate the unlawful nature of the defenda nt 's actions. Legal conclusions are not

sufficient. In some states the complaint must allege that the indi vidual seeking relief has

a private interest in the matter and that the action sought to be challenged by Quo

Warranto has harmed that interest. When an individual making application for Quo

Warranto is able, as under many statutes, to assert his own claim to the office occupied

by the incumbent defendant, the plaintiff must set forth facts indicating his own right to

the office.

41.

Purs ua nt to § 4.29, Upon filing of the answer or other permitted pleading of the

defendant/respondent, Quo Warranto proceedings are customarily expeditiousl y set for

hearings, when there are disputed facts. There is a right to a speedy trial, guaranteed at

times by statutes.

USDC WRITS 22 OF 38
The typical state constitution guarantees trial by jury in some civil actions at least, and a

few courts ha ve recognized that parties to Quo Warranto proceedings have such a

constitutional ri ght to trial by jury. In some other jurisdi ctions the right to a jury trial

exists under statutes or rules of court. In a number of other states, however, either as a

result of court rule or judicial decision there is no ri ght of trial by jury in Quo Warranto

proceedi ngs. Comparably, when a defenda nt is alleged to be exercising a franchise or

special privilege, the burden of proving his right to the same is generall y upon the

defendant.

42.

Purs ua nt to § 4.30, The prime relief available to the applicant who brings Quo Warranto

is the ouster of the defendant from the office, franchise or privilege which he had

usurped. In Quo Warranto, guilty defendants can not only be ousted, but can be

prohibited from further pra ctice of the activity. Courts in Quo Warra nto proceedings

customaril y have broad power to make any order whi ch is "an appropriate form of relief."

CASE LAW

43.

State v. Murphy, 148 S.W.2d 527 (MO. 1941). A writ of quo warranto is in the nature of a

writ of right for the king, against him who claims or us urps any office, fra nchise, or

liberty, to inq ui re by what authority he supports his claim, in order to determine his

right."

USDC WRITS 23 OF 38
 44.

Rowan v. City of Shawneetown, 38 N.E.2d 2 (Ill. 1941). "Where the Attorney General and

Stat's attorney have refused to bring a Quo Warra nto proceeding at the request of an

individual, the statute permits the individual to make application on his own relation but

he must show he has an interest in the question."

"...one who has no interest except that whi ch is common to every other member of the

public is not entitled to use the name of the government in Quo Warranto proceedi ngs."

45.

Lockhard v. People, 178 P. 565 Q. Seeking redress of individual wrong, invol ves a matter

of public interest.

OTHER PROVISION

46.

Magna Carta, clause 40 reads, "To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay,

right or justice."

QUO WARRANTO 2 OF 4 (to US DOJ)

47.

CONSIDERABLE EV IDENCE WILL CONFIRM MY SON AND I ARE TWO INNOCENT

GUYS WHO ARE BY FAULT SENS ITIV E, PENSIV E, EXTREMELY UNSELFISH AND

GOOD NATURED WHO HAV E BECOME BIOLOGICAL ASSETS OF CITIZENS WITH

STANDARDS BEN EATH OURS AS LAW-ABIDING, INDEPENDENT, RESPECTFUL

USDC WRITS 24 OF 38
PATRIOTS WHO HAD R EFUS ED TO BE CONS IDERED ENTITLEM ENT CASES ANY

LONGER.

48.

WE'RE DISCRIM INATED AGAINST, OUR DISABILITIES EXPLOITED, AND

FALSELY ACCUSED OF BEING ENTITELEMENT CASES AND V EXATIOUS

LITIGANTS THOUGH I REPEATEDLY OFFERED TO LEGALLY WAIV E ALL

DAMAGES TO SECUR E SOLE CUSTODY OF SON AND OUR SAFETY TOGETHER.

49.

OUR QUALITY OF LIFE IS IN V IOLATION OF THE UN ITED NATION'S Protocol to

Prevent, Suppress and Punis h Trafficking in Persons , especially Women and Children,

entered into force on 25 December 2003. The Protocol covers the following:

a) defining the crime of trafficking in human beings; essentially, trafficki ng is the

transport of persons, by means of coercion, deception, or consent for the purpose of

exploitation such as forced or consensual labor or prostitution:

"Trafficking in persons" shall mean the recruitment , transportation, transfer, harbouring

or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of

abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or

of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person

havi ng control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.

a) facilitating the return and acceptance of children who ha ve been victims of cross-

border trafficki ng, with due regard to their safety;

b) prohibiting the traffi cking of children (whi ch is defined as being a person

USDC WRITS 25 OF 38
 under 18 years of age) for purposes of commercial sexual exploitation of children

(CSEC), exploitative labour practices or the removal of body parts;

c) suspending parental ri ghts of parents, caregivers or any other persons who have

parental rights in respect of a child should they be found to have trafficked a child;

d) ensuri ng that definitions of trafficking reflect the need for special safeguards and

care for children, including appropriate legal protection;

e) ensuri ng that trafficked persons are not punished for any offences or activities

related to their havi ng been trafficked, such as prostitution and immigration

violations;

f) ensuri ng that vi ctims of trafficking are protected from deportation or return where

there are reasonable grounds to suspect that such return would represent a

significant security risk to the trafficked person or their family;

g) considering temporary or permanent residence in countries of transit or

destination for traffi cking victims in excha nge for testimony against alleged

traffickers, or on humanitarian and compassionate grounds;

h) providing for proportional criminal penalties to be applied to persons found guilt y

of trafficking in aggra vating circumstances, including offences involving trafficking

in children or offences committed or involving complicity by state officials; and,

i) providing for the confiscation of the instruments and proceeds of trafficking and

related offences to be used for the benefit of trafficked persons.

The Convention and the Protocol obligate ratifying states to introduce national

trafficking legislation.

USDC WRITS 26 OF 38
 50.

One of the most important functions of the Committee is to provide oversight of the

Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

51.

QUO WARRANTO 3 OF 4 (to US DOJ)

SUMMARY OF OUR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS TO DATE

FAMILY COURT 311TH

01) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . TRACEY DEL RIO, NO. 2008-02476 (DISMISSED)

02) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . TRACEY DEL RIO, NO. 2008-03143 (DISMISSED)

03) TRACEY DEL RIO V . VICTOR DEL RIO, NO. 2000-27121 (CONTESTED)

APPEALS - STATE

04) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . TRACEY DEL RIO, NO. 01-08-00993-CV , DENIED ALL

RELIEF

05). VICTOR DEL RIO V. DOU G WARN E IN DIV IDUALLY ...,

NO. 01-08-00993-CV , DENIED ALL RELIEF

06). VICTOR DEL RIO V. ELIZAB ETH PAGEL, NO. 01-08-00993-CV , DEN IED

ALL RELIEF

07) In re VICTOR DEL R IO, NO. 01-08-00993-CV , DENIED ALL RELIEF

CIV IL COURT

08) N. DEL RIO, bnf V ICTOR DEL RIO V . SPRING IN DEPENDENT SCHOOL

DISTRICT, NO. H073937, UNHEARD, TRACEY DEL RIO INTERFERED

WITH WITNESS

USDC WRITS 27 OF 38
09) USA V. CITY OF HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY & TEXAS, NO. 2009-17355,

DENIED ALL RELIEF-DECLARED V EXATIOUS LITIGANT-PENDIN G

MORE HEARINGS IN 2010.

Hon. Judge Randy Wilson, Court Phone: (713) 368-6230

10) UNKNOWN, FALSE CHARGES OF HIRIN G HOOKER HANDLED BY EX-

EMPLOYER (FTCA claim)

11) UNKNOWN, FALSELY CHAR GED WITH THEFT BY ANOTHER EX-

EMPLOYER (FTCA Claim)

FEDERAL COURT

12) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . DEN ISE DREXLER & TRACEY DEL RIO, NO.

409MC00076, DENIED ALL RELIEF except IFP

13) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . TRACEY DEL RIO, NO. 409MC00076, WANT OF

JUR ISDICTION

14) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . US DEPARTM ENT OF JUSTICE, NO. H-09-1651,

HEAR INGS IN MARCH 2010, DENIED ALL RELIEF except IFP

TEXAS SUPREME COURT

15) In re Victor Del Rio, NO. 08-0896 (DEN IED HABEAS CORPUS, WITHDR EW

W/O PREJ)

16) UNITED STATES V. Tracey Del Rio & Douglas Warne indi vidually & in

his/her official capacity as Administrati ve Judge in Family Division in

Harris County, NO. 09-0963 DENIED ANY POSS IBILITY OF A HEARIN G

US SUPREME COURT

17) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . TEXAS et al, NO. 09-6398, DENIED ALL RELIEF except

USDC WRITS 28 OF 38
 IFP

US COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

18) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . UNITED STATES, NO. 09-130C, DENIED ALL RELIEF

except IFP

5TH CIRCU IT COURT OF APPEALS

19) In re Victor Del Rio, NO. 09-20232, DENIED ALL R ELIEF except IFP

STATE COURT, TRAV IS COUNTY

20) V ICTOR DEL RIO V . DEN ISE DREXLER , NO. D-1-GN-09-000882, DENIED

ALL RELIEF except IFP

OTHER

21) CPS cases in 2007-2008 No.s 26492443 & 26550760 confirm SON is being

neglected, nervous and fri ghtened (ha ving been in his mother's custody for weeks

after she suddenly discontinues PETITIONER'S every other week custody (since

2006) & home schooling (from Sep 2007 - Dec 16 2007), symptoms of mental

reta rdation, agents suspicion TRACEY is lying about PETITIONER, DENIS E

DREXLER is listed as COLLATERAL CONTACT but redacted from reports,

ea rlier copies FALSELY ACCUSE PETITION ER having meth lab near home,

EXPEDITED LEGAL REMEDY REQUESTED

52.

RESPECTFULLY, PETITIONER again urgently req uests the EXPEDITED return

of his SON by gra nting an expedited WR IT of HABEAS CORPUS FOR OV ERDU E

MEDICAL ATTENTION OF BRA IN DAMAGES and BRAIN SEIZUR ES ,

USDC WRITS 29 OF 38
EXPEDITED LEAV E TO FILE WRIT OF QU O WARRANTO – US DOJ, and

EXPEDITED Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

53.

PERMISSION TO PROCEED IFP IF CHIEF JUDGE ROYCE C. LAMBERTH HAS NOT

PROCESSED, FILED, AND ASSIGNED MY OR IGINAL EX PARTE PLEADING WITH

IFP APPLICATION SENT EARLIER THIS WEEK.

54.

CEASE AND DES IST ALL ONGOIN G CONSTITUTIONAL V IOLATIONS BEING

COMM ITTED BY F.B.I., OR HBU BEHAV IORAL UNIT, TORTING, USING

KEYLOGGING SOFTWARE FOR HACKIN G, AND ILLEGALLY SURVEILLING

PETITIONER 24X7 IN V IOLATION OF EXCLUSIONAR Y RULE ETC IN ORDER TO

COMPILE EV IDENCE FOR UNNECESSAR Y CIV IL COMMITMENT AND OR ARREST

TO AV OID PROSECUTION OF CASE.

SEE QUO WARRANTO 4 OF4 (to US DOJ) and refer the above to this person

unable to determine right from wrong.

55.

INJUNCTIV E RELIEF FOR ALL MY PERSONAL CONTACTS ASKED,

THREATENED, OR 'DISCONNECTED' FROM COMMUNICATING WITH THEM.

REF http://profile.myspace.com /victordelrio2 and http://www.facebook.com/home.php?

#/profile.php?ref=profile&id=100000041540361,

USDC WRITS 30 OF 38
 PRAYER

55.

The District of Columbia not being a State and is not represented in Congress; its offi cials

are not part of this action as D.C. holds a neutral position. I, V ICTOR DEL RIO, urgentl y

and respectfully request our case to be heard, and arrangements for my son's ret urn upon

receipt of this email, quickly, directly or indirectl y through Supervisory Control or

Extraordinary Writ, purs ua nt to Constitutional and statutory provisions.

SIGNED _____________________________________________________________________

DATED_______Dec 28, 2009________________________

Respectfully submitted,

V ICTOR DEL RIO, 2427 PINPOINT DRIV E, SPRIN G, TX 77373,

Ph 281-216-5624, Fx 281-617-4218, delrvich@gmail.com

VERIFICATION

56.

I, VICTOR DEL RIO, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of

the United States of America, without the “United States” (Federal government), that the

above statement of facts and laws is true and correct, according to the best of my current

information, knowledge, and belief, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). I say what I mean

and mean what I say... respectfully. (PETITION ER has a brief & direct wa y of

communicating wrongly interpreted as DISRESPECT, or OBNOXIOUS, especially in

written comm unication. Testimony of all his co-workers will undoubtedly prove he is not

what TRACEY DEL R IO et al falsely allege him to be, he's incredibly patient (not

USDC WRITS 31 OF 38
explosive or ill-tempered), well-meaning (not selfish or manipulative), and a ''nice guy

who will always finish last” (not a tyrant).

SIGNED _____________________________________________________________________

DATED_______Dec 28, 2009________________________

Respectfully submitted,

V ICTOR DEL RIO, 2427 PINPOINT DRIV E, SPRIN G, TX 77373,

Ph 281-216-5624, Fx 281-617-4218, delrvich@gmail.com

PROOF OF SERVICE

57.

I, VICTOR DEL RIO, Sui Juris, hereby certify, under penalty of perj ury, under the laws

of the United States of America, wit hout the “United States” (Federal government), that I

am at least 18 yea rs of age, a Citizen of ON E OF the U nited States of America, and that

I, pursuant to TEXAS Penal Code §37.02 and 28 U.S.C. 1746(1), personally served this

EX PARTE DOCUMENT on the following via their email addresses:

Attorney General Greg Abbott greg.abbott@oag.state.tx.us

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. askDOJ@usdoj.gov

US Attorney of Ha rris County Tim Johnson usatxs.atty@usdoj.gov

US Attorney of D.C. Cha nning Phillips channing.phllips@usdoj.gov

D.C . District Court Clerk Greg Hughes Greg_Hughes@dcd.uscourts.gov

Chairman Senate Judiciary Committee senator_lea hy@leahy.senate.gov

Senate Judiciary Committee John Cornyn john_cornyn@cornyn.senate.gov

USDC WRITS 32 OF 38
SIGNED _____________________________________________________________________

DATED_______Dec 28, 2009________________________

Respectfully submitted,

V ICTOR DEL RIO, 2427 PINPOINT DRIV E, SPRIN G, TX 77373,

Ph 281-216-5624, Fx 281-617-4218, delrvich@gmail.com

CC:

Esthela_Mares@t xs.uscourts.gov

Case Manager to Judge Vanessa Gilmore, CASE NO. H-09-1651

Jennifer_Meeks@txs.us courts.gov

Judicial Assistant to Judge Vanessa Gilmore, CASE NO. H-09-1651

barbara_conley@txs.uscourts.gov

Coordinator to Judge Randy Wilson, CASE NO. 2009-17355

QUO WARRANTO 4 OF4 (to US DOJ)

ATTACHMENT

APPENDIX 01 – ex-wife's clear expressed nonchalance about her prosecution for her

ongoing 12 year criminal conspiracy 'under color of law'.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Victor Del Rio <delrvich@gmail.com>

Date: Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Subject: UPDATED: LEGAL NOTIC E: IFP SERV IC E PETITION FOR WRITS -

USDC WRITS 33 OF 38
 QUO WARRANTO AND HABEAS CORPUS

To: ASKDOJ <AskDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "channing.phillips"

<CHANNIN G.PHILLIPS@usdoj.gov>, gregory.abbott@oag.state.t x.us,

Usatxs .atty@usdoj.gov, usatty.txs@usdoj.gov

Cc: Greg_Hughes@dcd.uscourts.gov

<V ICTOR TO TRAC EY>

FYI: I have been printing your responses regarding legal proceedings in D.C. to the

Courts.

<TRACEY TO V ICTOR>

You won't send your son anything for Christmas but "this" you waste your time on.

pathetic.

http://www.scribd.com /doc/24556949?secret_password=1ez8vz176bxjmluvulh1

APPENDIX 02 – ex-wife's clear expressed nonchalance about her prosecution for her

ongoing 12 year criminal conspiracy 'under color of law'.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Victor Del Rio <delrvich@gmail.com>

Date: Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:52 AM

To: Tracey Del Rio tra ceydelrio@hotmail.com

Hope D.C. Superior Court renders a fair and impartial decision in his favor to

change all of this very soon, Ms. False Claims and Allegations of Houston, TX.

USDC WRITS 34 OF 38
 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Tracey Del Rio <tra ceydelrio@hotmail.com>

wrote:well thanks to Mr. Del Rio his son will not have a good Christmas, see Mr.

Del Rio chose not to pay child support, he is now about $10,000 behi nd. See child

support goes to the child and since Mr. Del Rio would rather spend his days locked

up in his mother's house not worki ng and trying to sue everyone that enters his life

his child is suffering. As his mother I am doing the best that I can to provide for my

son like a parent should, Mr. Del Rio also chose not to ca rry health insurance for

his son as well so now I have have been court ordered to do so which is fine because

I am the only responsible parent here. I find it hard to believe that everyone is

supporting Mr. Del Rio in his decisions but they are poor and pathetic choices. He

really needs to get off his butt, stop making excuses, get a job , be a real man and do

the right thing and that is to take care of his son. How can his son look up to him

when he won't even provide for him.

Thank you!

APPENDIX 03 – ex-wife's clear expressed nonchalance about her prosecution for her

ongoing 12 year criminal conspiracy 'under color of law'.

17139797626@tmomail.net to me “Then enjoy jail”

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Victor Del Rio <delrvich@gmail.com> wrote:

Reminder, I've filed in D.C. SUPERIOR COURT whi ch has jurisdiction to hear

OUR cases of CHILD ABUSE AND CUSTODY, MALPRACTICE, DENIAL AND

DEPR IV ATION OF R IGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL DAMAGES, TORTS AND

FALSE CLA IMS.

Very best regards,

USDC WRITS 35 OF 38
APPENDIX 04 – ex-wife's clear expressed nonchalance about her prosecution for her

ongoing 12 year criminal conspiracy 'under color of law'.

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Ni ck Del Rio <nickdmarvel@gmail.com > wrote:

get a job, pay child support and act like a real man!

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 8:39 AM, V ictor Del Rio <delrvich@gmail.com > wrote:

I'm fili ng in the Court that W ILL hear our case.

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Nick Del Rio <nickdmarvel@gmail.com > wrote:

I hope that you are out looking for a job Mr. Del Rio, stop wasting my time

with those ridiculous text messages. I have more important things to do

tha n respond to that nonsense. Good luck on the job hunt!

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Nick Del Rio <nickdmarvel@gmail.com> wrote:

Also Victor if you are so concerned about the final orders you should have

showed up for the final court date. You put everyone through hell and you

did not even show, you got what you deserved.

APPENDIX 05– ex-wife's clear expressed nonchalance about her prosecution for her

ongoing 12 year criminal conspiracy 'under color of law'.

17139797626@tmomail.net to me on Dec 5 “Unless u are paying child support do

not send this useless crap.”

USDC WRITS 36 OF 38
 Victor Del Rio to 17139797626

In the Honorable Super ior Court District of Co lumbia

Civil Division
Washington, D.C .

In the name of, Case #_____________________

We the people of the united States of America Judge______________________
Naturalist Citizen of the United States of America Date______________
Petitioner; Vic tor Del Rio; Class,
2427 Pinpoint Dr
Spring, TX 77373
Private Attorney General
v.
UNITED STATES, d.b.a., Corporation
LAW FIRM ERIC HOLDER
U.S. Depar tment of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Defendant.

PETITION IN THE NATURE OF A SUIT FOR DEPRIVATION

APPENDIX 05 – ex-wife's clear expressed nonchalance about her prosecution for her

ongoing 12 year criminal conspiracy 'under color of law'.

Nick Del Rio to me on Dec 16 (13 days ago)

right backatcha baby! a fair decision for Nick for you to pa y child support, get a

job, stop suing everyone, act like a man, you are soooo right, a fair decision because

they you are able to do so since you have been declared vexatious litigant. have a

great day V ictor, just a great day in life and may God bless you in every wa y..

you know what Victor, I am done with you, you will not hea r from me anymore.

You take care and good luck in life and may God Bless you and your family.

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:52 AM, Victor Del Rio <delrvich@gmail.com> wrote:

Hope D.C. Superior Court renders a fair and impartial decision in his favor to

USDC WRITS 37 OF 38
change all of this very soon, Ms. False Claims and Allegations of Houston, TX.

USDC WRITS 38 OF 38