Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT: VICIOUS ACTIVISM IN THE JUDICIARY

5 views

Skip to first unread message

searchgroup

unread,

Jan 2, 2010, 8:20:00 AM1/2/10

US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT: VICIOUS ACTIVISM IN THE
JUDICIARY

_________________________________________________________

US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT: PETITIONER'S BRIEF IN-OFUME
V. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR. NO. 09-1610

January 1, 2010

This case is supposed to be transferred to neutral or impartial court
in the United States of America. Chief Immigration Judge and Office of
the Administrative Appeal have corrupted Judge Matthew D’Angelo and
Boston Immigration Court when they failed to reprimand them for all
what they have done in this case during ex-President George W. Bush’s
government.

Notwithstanding that certain US law courts are influenced by the
incumbent or politicians, this Court has edged other similar courts
across the United States.

Review of the entire "Respondent's Certified Administrative
Record"(1,169 pages) shows that June 4, 2007 was manufactured by the
IJ or Boston Immigration Court to cover the most important hearing in
this case, which was heard on June 5, 2007. 100% of what was
discussed on June 5, 2007 was censored.

Under obstruction of justice FBI has censored all investigation into
this outrageous forgery and obstruction of justice in this part of
democracy. The IJ or Boston Immigration Court did not defend
Petitioner’s Complaint to this Court and FBI but shamefully under
moneyed politics, bribery and corruption, this Court usurped the
position of the IJ or Boston Immigration Court and in an Order
written, unsigned and dated December 2, 2009 Margaret Carter, Chief
Deputy Clerk, wrote,

“Petitioners (Ofume family) seek to have the Administrative Record
corrected. Specifically, they object to the correction of an
immaterial error misidentifying the June 5, 2007 hearing as occurring
on June 4, 2007. Because the date is immaterial and the parties are
apparently in agreement that June 5, 2007 is the date on which the
hearing actually occurred, petitioners’ motion to correct the
Administrative Record is denied.”

OUTRAGEOUS ACT OF BRIBERY & CORRUPTION IN THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Petitioner did not ask any courts in the United States or FBI to
correct the administrative forgery. Petitioner requested the FBI to
arrest, investigate and if probable charge IJ and Boston Immigration
Court.

In over 3 pages of 4-page of the decision of Judge D’Angelo, he (IJ)
cited and referenced June 4, 2007 as date of hearing. Also in
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record"(1,169 pages) over 200
pages cited and referred to June 4, 2007 as date of hearing.

On August 19, 2009 after Petitioner’s has filed Complaint with the
FBI, the Respondent/Plaintiff, Boston Immigration Court, IJ, and
Petitioner’s political opponents hired Lynn Police Department to raid
Petitioner’s apartment (33 Arlington Street #1 Lynn, MA 01902) and the
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record"(1,169 pages) was
removed to unknown destination.

To prepare this Brief (see below), Petitioner requested for the
photocopies of the "Respondent's Certified Administrative
Record"(1,169 pages) and upon review of the copies sent, Petitioner,
Dr. Phillip C. Ofume found that ONLY page 000602 line 2 June 4, 2007
was erased and June 5, 2007 was added with one (1) line of Judge
D’Angelo’s transcript and over 23 lines of 25 lines of page 00602 and
over 199 pages including cover pages are June 4, 2007.

Margaret Carter, Chief Deputy Clerk said, “…the parties are
apparently in agreement that June 5, 2007 is the date on which the
hearing actually occurred…” Petitioner did not agree with the unknown
parties she referred to.

Petitioner did not request for CORRECTION and did not agree to June 4,
2007 as date of hearing. Petitioner requested for the Respondent's
certified Administrative Record or transcript of the hearing on June
5, 2007. " The entire June 5, 2007 is removed and not part of the
Respondent's Certified Administrative Record"(1,169 pages). No any
other paper contains the hearing on June 5, 2007.

Reference to content of another Order of this Court (US Court of
Appeals for the First Circuit) dated May 28, 2009 is another ground to
expose the pre-determination, political and activist conduct and bias
of this Court.

Inside and outside the United States, Service providers and others
have profited from the sanction and embargo directed against the
Petitioner (Ofume family) by its political rivals. Heavy bribes are
issued to them under secret camera to force them to permanently deny
services and justice to the Petitioner (Ofume family).

________________________________________________________

- i -
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
___________________________________________________________

Civil Appeal No. 09-1610
___________________________________________________________

IN REMOVAL
PROCEEDINGS

In the Matter of:

1. 97-446-370 – OFUME, PHILLIP CHUKWUMA
2. 96-416-429 – OFUME, MAUREEN NGOZI
3. 96-416-430 – OFUME, KLEBER ODIMEGWU
4. 96-416-431 - OFUME, KEYNES ONYERO
5. 96-416-432- OFUME, ISABELLE IFEOMA
6. 96-416-432 – OFUME, LYNDA LAFAYETTE
7. 96-416-434 – OFUME, BARNETT CHIDI
8. 96-416-435 – OFUME, CHRISTIAN TOBECHUKWU
9. XX XXX XXX - OFUME, GLORIA CHIYEM (US BORN CHILD, ALSO
RIDER)
PETITIONER (OFUME FAMILY- PRO SE)

ERIC J. HOLDER, JR. (United States Attorney General)
RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF
___________________________________________________________

Petition for Review from the Decision of The Board of Immigration
Appeal Docket No. 97-446-370.
___________________________________________________________

BRIEF FOR THE PETITIONER/RESPONDENT, OFUME FAMILY (PHILLIP OFUME ET
AL) IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR REVIEW URGING REVERSAL OF THE
DECISION OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEAL
-ii-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610
___________________________________________________________

Respectfully
submitted,

Phillip C. Ofume,
Ph.D.
Representative/
Advocate for the
Ofume Family or
Petitioner
5933 Plank Road,
Fredericksburg, VA
22407
Tel. (781) 556-1464
E-mail:
limpt...@gmail.com

NO. TABLE OF CONTENT PAGE

TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………. i

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES…………………………...………………

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………………...1-2

A. FOUR QUESTIONS PRESENTED…………………………..2 - 3

B. PETITIONER’S INTEREST…………………………………. 3 -16

C. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT……………….……………… 16-23

D. STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND LIABILITY
FINDINGS…………………………………………………..23 - 35

1. Shortlist of the submission below……………………………23 - 25

-iii-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

2. – 4. …………………………………………25 - 26

5. OPPOSITION TO “RESPONDENT CERTIFIED
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD” ……………………………………26 – 33

6. FURTHER OPPOSITION TO THE DECISION
OF THE BIA OR IJ……………………………………………33-35

E. ARGUMENT……………………………………………….35 - 64

• Several credible past, present and future physical and
psychological and other persecutions and tortures direct
against Petitioner’s nuclear and extended families, friends
and NGOs; conduct of the IJ, BIA; Biometric Test as
suppression of the principal jurisdiction (Application
for Asylum and supplemental submission in support; etc………35 – 44

• NO CHANGE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE NIGERIA &
NO TIME LAPSE IN PERSECUTION…………………..44 – 53

• FURTHER GROUNDS OF REVIEW BY
COURT OF RECORD…………………………………53 - 55

• IMPORTANCE OF NEW EVIDENCE AND
TIME OF ADMISSION………………………………55 – 64

F. RELIEF…………………………………………………..64 – 66

G. CONCLUSION………………………………………………..66

-iv-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

APPENDIX

SHORTLIST OF DOCUMENTS HERE & BELOW

1. Decisions of the IJ (two: order of deportation and denial of
Motion to Reopen

2. Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeal (BIA)

3. Order of the US Court of Appeal for the First Circuit allowing
Petitioner’s Motion for Stay of Deportation. Order of this Court was
issued after The Honourable Secretary of Justice and Attorney-General
of the United States , Eric H. Holder, Jr. entered non-opposition to
Petitioner’s Motion for Stay of Deportation

4. Petitioner's Petition for Review to US Court of Appeals for the
First Circuit.

5. Petitioner/Respondent’s Motion to Reopen to IJ of the Boston
Immigration Court

6. Petitioner’s Notice of Appeal to the BIA

-v-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

7. Petitioner’s Motions & Orders/Decisions of the US Court of Appeals
for the First Circuit

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

FEDERAL CASES

Da Silva v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2005)……………2
Da Silva v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2005)…………...16
SOLANGE LEVEILLARD RAVIX, ET AL. v. MICHAEL B.
MUKASEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL, United States Court
of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 08-1128…………………………….39

Un v. Gonzales, 415 F.3d 205, 210 (1st Cir. 2005). 1993……..44

McCreath v. Holder, No. 08-2276………………………………50

Lee v. City of Los Angeles , 250 F.3d 668, 688-89
(9th Cir. 2001)…………………………………………………….53

Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988
(9th Cir. 2001)……………………………………………………..53

Caal-Tiul v. Holder, No. 08-2464 (09/10/2009)…………………..54
Matovu v. Holder, No. 08-2391 (08/21/2009)…………………......54
Lopez-Castro v. Holder, No. 08-1895 (08/19/2009)………………54
Hussain v. Holder, No. 08-2214 (08/10/2009)…………………… 55

IMPORTANCE OF NEW EVIDENCE AND
TIME OF ADMISSION - Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.

-vi-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

App. 171, 174 (Vet. App. 1991) NEW or MATERIAL
EVIDENCE requires that there be "a reasonable possibility
that the new evidence, when viewed in the context of all
the evidence, both new and old, would change the outcome."
Also see pages ………………………………………………………56

Calderón v. Thompson, 523 U.S. 538 (1998),
In re Davis, 2009 WL 2486475 ( U.S. Aug. 17, 2009)……………….....58
Kartasheva v. Holder, No. 08.2243 (09/11/2009)………………………62

STATE CASES

State v. Alexander, 875 S.W. 2d 924, 928 (Mo.App.1994)………….21

State v Rousan, 961S.W.2ND 831, 844(mo.banc)………………….21

State v. Dennis, 990S.W.2nd 78,81(Mo.App.1999)………………21

State v. Masden, 990 S.W.2d 190,193(Mo.App.1999)…………… 22

State v Evans, 992 S.W.2d 275, 290(Mo.App.1999)……………..22

State v. Nastasio, 957 S.W. 2d 454.459 (Mo.App. 1997)…………..22

FEDERAL STATUTES

212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality

-vi-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Act (“INA” or “the Act”)………………………………………………2

8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c ) (2008)………………………………………. 35

8 C.F.R. § 1003.23 (c )……………………………………………...35

8 C.F.R. §3.2(c) (3)(ii)……………………………………………….35

28 U.S.C. §1746………………………………………………………35

( 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B)…………………………………………….47

8 C.F.R. § 3.2(c)(3)(ii)…………………………………………………62

28 U.S.C. § 1746………………………………………………………..62

US Immigration and Nationality Act Title 8 Chapter 12,
Subchapter II, Part I Section 1159 – Adjustment of Status
of Refugees to enable Petitioner save its life in the United States …
65

Title 8 Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part I Section 1158 (3)(c)
including Section 1157…………………………………………………. 65

US Federal Tort Claims Act particularly 28 U.S.C.
sections 2674 and 2675 (a)……………………………………………….65

Title 5 U.S.C sections 702 and 704……………………………………… 65
United States Civil Rights Act of 1964………………………………….65
Title II 42 U.S.C. sec. 200a(a) and 42 U.S.C. sec……………………… 66
200a(b)(1); Title III 42 U.S.C. sec. 200c et seq……………………… 66
Title VI 42 U.S.C. sec. 66200d et seq…………………………………..66
The Constitution of the United States of America - 42 U.S.C.
sec. 1983 ………………….……………………………………………. 66

-viii-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Eight Amendment to the United States Constitution;
etc………………..........................................................66

CRITICAL PARTS OF “RESPONDENT CERTIFIED
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD”

• "Respondent's Certified Administrative Record” pages
000467 – 000496 of the hearing of Judges Klein and Ragno,.
which destroyed [212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] or the lies of the
Respondent/Plaintiff that Petitioner landed in the US without
unexpired immigration documents…………………………………………………..12

• Motions for Stay of Deportation with this Court and
another Motions for Stay of Deportation and filing
fee waiver request dated January 13, 2009 with the
BIA. Under bribery and corruption BIA censored Motion for
Stay of Deportation to allow deportation of 3rd Petitioner and
others
See pages 000009 – 000023……………………………………………………....16

• To uncover reason why unexpired Biometric was not ready on
October 16, 2007, IJ and Boston Immigration Court censored the
only important hearing which was on June 5, 2007 and in place
IJ and Court manufactured June 4, 2007 to censor important
discussions, instructions, shared responsibilities and directions
to enable Petitioner redo its Biometric Test. See "Respondent's
Certified Administrative Record” pages 000601 –
000645…………………...............................................17-18

• ONLY line 2 of page 000601 of "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record" was falsified by the Immigration Court or
Respondent from June 4, 2007 to June 5, 2007? Lines 1, 3, 4 through
25 and end of page 000601 is June 4, 2007 and pages 000602
through 000645 are June 4, 2007. On August 19, 2009 Petitioner
was forcibly evicted from its apartment under organized plot in
collaboration with Lynn , MA Police Department. How? Wife
and husband were fighting to hold possession of the single family
apartment whereat Petitioner was sheltered at 33 Arlington Street
Apt.#1 Lynn , MA 01902 …read following pages to see breaking news
how the "Respondent's Certified Administrative Record" was removed
and altered merely exonerate Judge D’Angelo from FBI Investigation
-ix-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

and eventual conviction……………………………………………29 - 31

• Pages 000797 through 000826 of the "
Respondent's Certified Administrative Record" show that Petitioner
landed in the United States with unexpired United Nations
Refugees Travel Documents and Passports and that the
charge [( 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] Respondent /Plaintiff brought against
Petitioner was politically falsified after impounding and seizing
Petitioner unexpired immigration and other
documents……………………....................................31 -32

• Another waive and brand of falsification by the
IJ" Respondent's Certified Administrative Record” page 000887,
the written decision of Judge D’Angelo said, “On January 11, 2005,
attorney Fernando V. Narvaez Esq. filed a Notice of Entry of
Appearance of Attorney or Representative (Form EOIR-28) ON
THE Respondent’s behalf with the Boston Immigration Court .”
On January 11, 2005 Petitioner was in Canada . Petitioner landed
in the United States on September 29,
2005……………………………………................................33

INTERNATIONAL CASES AND STATUTES

Government of Nigeria v. Ken Saro-Wiwa (1995)…………14, 19,42
Government of Nigeria v. Dele Giwa (1986)……………14, 19, 42
Government of Nigeria v. Kudirat Abiola (1996)…………14, 19, 42
Government of Nigeria v. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume
(Federal High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 – present and
Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu &Asaba Delta State,
1991 – present, etc)……………………………………14, 19, 42
Government of Nigeria v. Maureen Ngozi Ofume
(Federal High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 – present
-x-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu Delta State 1991 –
present, etc)………………………………………………14, 19, 42
Government of Nigeria v. MKO Abiola (1998); etc…14, 19, 42

Echenim Ofume v. Isaac Mgbeke…………………………… 45

United Nations Convention of July 28, 1951 (Statute)………..51

MISCELLANEOUS

1. Negotiation and Conflict Resolution: 1999 - 2003
after the last Report (2003) of The United Nations High Commission for
Human Rights (UNHCHR), certain representatives of the Canadian and
Nigerian governments and known UNHCHR staff started pressing
Petitioner to take citizenship of Canada and in 2006 without UN staff
some people confronted Petitioner to add another condition which is to
relinquish bid for the President of Nigeria. Lead Petitioner refused
to accept all the proposals and less than 72 hours, the apartment ( 8
Hall Avenue , Braintree , Massachusetts ) was on fire and Petitioner
narrowly escaped the blaze. On February 3, 2006, Department of Social
Services (DSS) now called Massachusetts Department of Children and
Families (DCF) angrily entered Petitioner’s apartment to enter into
process to seize Petitioner’s children and to start another lawsuit.
Petitioner’s defence went from court to court up to the highest court
(Petition for Mandamus to The Supreme Judicial Court –SJC from
Massachusetts Superior Court Department Docket No.07-1207A). Also see
http://www.phillyimc.org/en/node/72702

2. Denial of services, sanction/embargo to create
multiple lawsuits as form of physical and psychological torture and
persecution. Shortlist of cases created in the United States and
Canada:

CANADA

a) S.H. No. 165814 – Supreme Court of Nova Scotia as filed;
-xi-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

(b) S.H. No. 194319 – Supreme Court of Nova Scotia as filed;
(c) C.A. No. 206463 – Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia as filed;
(d) C. A. No. 202013 – Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia as filed;
(e) SCC No. 29476 – Supreme Court of Canada ( Ottawa ) as filed;
(f) C.A. No. 209470 – Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia as filed;
(g) SCC No. 30054– Supreme Court of Canada ( Ottawa ) as filed;
(h) CA No. 212418 - Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia as filed
Etc.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
i. Immigration Court , JFK Federal Building , Boston MA - Ofume
family v. Government of America Lead file No. 97-446-370 . Three (3)
Administrative Appeals to the Office of Administrative Appeal (OAA);
two (2) Complaints to the Executive Office for Immigration Review -
Office of the Chief Immigration Judge, VA USA; Individual Hearing;
etc.
ii. Ofume family v. Department of Homeland Security et al - US
District Court, Boston, MA Docket Number: 1:07-cv-10085-GAO
Document 3-1 Filed 01/23/2007) including several pre-trial Motions/
Applications. 10 Defendants.
iii. DTA ( SUPERIOR COURT, LAWRENCE , MA - Ofumes v. DTA Civil Docket
No. ESCV2006-00381)
iv. Ofume family v. Boston Housing Authority - preparing for appeal
soon as decision is rendered per hearing on June 26, 2007.
77
LEAD FILE: 97-446-370
v. Ofume family v. Keyspan Inc. and District Sheriff - SUPERIOR
COURT SALEM , MA CIVIL ACTION NO. 2007 - 1198-D
vi. DTA ( SUPERIOR COURT, LAWRENCE , MA - Ofumes v. DTA Civil Docket
No. ESCV2006-00381) - 2007 Civil Appeal

-xii-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

vii. Ofume family v. Department of Social Services - SUPERIOR COURT
SALEM, MA CIVIL DOCKET # ESCV2007-0107-A
viii. Ofume family v. Registry of Motor Vehicles - Division of
Insurance - Appeal
ix. Ofume family v. Comcast Inc. - SUPERIOR COURT SALEM, MA CIVIL
DOCKET # ESCV2007-0107-A
x. Ofume family v. DTA APPEAL NO. 315921
xi. Ofume family v. Social Security Administration
xii. Ofume family v. Department of Homeland Security et al - US Court
of Appeals for the First Circuit, Boston, MA Docket Number: 1:07-
cv-10085-13 Defendants.
xiii. Ofume family v. Department of Homeland Security (VERMONT SERVICE
CENTER) - Application for Job Authorization, Adjustment of Status, etc
before the Commissioner (DHS).
Etc.

3. Inside and outside the United States of America,
Petitioner has been volunteering its time alone and gratis to join
domestic and international NGOs to advise and provide other
professional services to governments, communities, students, people in
need with minor and major barriers, how to stay action against the
state, people and how to get out of trouble. 100% of its advise has
been successful and unfailing. See http://www.phillyimc.org/en/node/74756
[( What we (NGOS under the leadership of Dr. Phillip Ofume) told Mr.
President of America,
NATO, European Union, African Union, Asian Union, and their allies)].

4. Petitioner’s case attracted wide array of domestic
and international public interests. See the following web links (over
45,000 articles in part highest hit is 1.52 billion:

a. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source =hp&q=ofume+v.
+ george+w.+bush+et+al&aq=o&oq=&aqi= Hit today (12/28/2009):
400,000,000

b. http://www.phillyimc.org/en/node/74756
c. http://groups.google.gy/group/google.public.support.general/topics?start=20&sa=N
d. http://groups.google.com/group/soc.org.nonprofit/browse_thread/thread/67b639a2edec4af0

-xii-
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

e. HIT TODAY (11/21/2009) : 1,220,000,000
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=AMERICA%3A+HEALTHCARE+FOR+ALL++VERSUS++AMERICAN++POLITICS++AND+POLITICS+IN+AMERICA+&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10
AMERICA: OBAMA'S HEALTHCARE REFORM EDGED WITH SHOW OF ACTIVISM

e. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=AMERICA%3A+HEALTHCARE+FOR+ALL++VERSUS++AMERICAN++POLITICS++AND+POLITICS+IN+
AMERICA &btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
HIT TODAY (12/30/2009) : 709,000,000

HIT TO DAY (08/20/2009 : 1,520,000,000
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=AMERICA%3A+HEALTHCARE+FOR+ALL++VERSUS++AMERICAN++POLITICS++AND+POLITICS+IN+AMERICA+%E2%80%93&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

AMERICA: HEALTHCARE FOR ALL VERSUS AMERICAN POLITICS AND POLITICS
IN AMERICA –
Reposted, Paris August 17, 2009
Ofume v. George W. Bush et als (THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
– One of the most and worst censored litigations against President and
others in the world to hide dictatorship and related cruelty)

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ei=2iY_S5XCGtKPlAepv_iQBw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAYQBSgA&q=ofume+v.+george+w.+bush+et+al%27s&spell=1

_____________________________________________________________

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
___________________________________________________________

Civil Appeal No. 09-1610
___________________________________________________________

IN REMOVAL
PROCEEDINGS

In the Matter of:

ERIC J. HOLDER, JR. (United States Attorney General)
RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF
___________________________________________________________

Petition for Review from the Decision of The Board of Immigration
Appeal Docket No. 97-446-370.
___________________________________________________________

BRIEF OF THE PETITIONER/RESPONDENT, OFUME FAMILY
(PHILLIP OFUME ET AL) IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER / RESPONDENT'S
PETITION FOR REVIEW URGING REVERSAL OF THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF
IMMIGRATION APPEAL
___________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

The major and minor jurisdictions of the trump up charge brought
against Petitioner are limited to 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA” or “the Act”) and failed
technology called Biometric is off-jurisdiction and IJ and BIA acted
off-jurisdiction and their decision must be reversed. The Application
is asylum in safe country because of past, present and future
persecution, torture and death inside and outside Nigeria by Nigerian
politicians and their allies because of Petitioner’s bid for the
President of Nigeria and campaign for civil liberties.

A. FOUR QUESTIONS PRESENTED

Whether the Immigration Judge (IJ), erred when he failed to allow
lawful flow of DUE PROCESS RIGHTS of the Petitioner to hear
Petitioner’s Application for Asylum, 99-page Supplemental Statement
and score of exhibits to determine whether or not there is well-
founded fear of past present and future persecution that was
objectively reasonable but in place ploughed into unknown/charged or
expired biometric test which remain expired at the instance of
Immigration Court and Judge. See Da Silva v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 1, 4
(1st Cir. 2005).

Whether BIA and IJ erred when they failed to rely on several credible
past, present and future physical and psychological and other
persecutions and tortures including on-going charges with treason and
other felonies against Petitioner (1st and 2nd Petitioners) which must
lead to death penalty upon conviction in Nigeria and forcible removal/
deportation of 3rd Petitioner/Respondent (Kleber Odimegwu Ofume, elder
son) on March 10, 2009 to Nigeria where the petitioner fear death and
other harms.
2

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Whether the Board of Immigration Appeal (BIA) erred for copying the
decision of the IJ without reviewing Petitioner's Application for
Asylum, 99-page Supplemental Statement and score of exhibits showing
past, present and future indicators of credible past, present and
future physical and psychological and other persecutions and tortures
aforelisted which Petitioner submitted to Boston Immigration Court or
IJ before the final hearing (10/16/2007) and also see
http://www.phillyimc.org/en/node/74902

Whether IJ erred when he decided to censor the only important hearing
which was on June 5, 2007 and in place IJ and Court manufactured June
4, 2007 to censor important discussions, instructions, shared
responsibilities and directions relating to how to redo Expired
Biometric Test (see below).

B. PETITIONER'S INTEREST

1. Please see the entire paragraphs of Petitioner's Petition
for Review, Notice of Appeal to the BIA, and Motion to Reopen. 1990s
- present, the physical and psychological persecutions and tortures
directed against the Petitioner (Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume and Mrs.
Maureen Ngozi Ofume) and their seven (7) children inside and outside
Nigeria accelerated in bad order and shape from worst to worst without
lapses to the extent of leading to the present charges of treason and
other political felonies against 1st and 2nd Petitioners and the
persecution escalated when the people of Nigeria
3

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610
requested lead Petitioner to bid for the President of Nigeria 2007
and 2011 to be the first citizen of the NIGER DELTA REGION to be the
President of Nigeria 1914 – present. Also under Non-governmental
Organizations (NGOs) work led DECLARATION under several domestic and
international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to declare that
the CIVIL WAR in his (Petitioner’s) homeland, NIGER DELTA REGION is
constitutional, just and enshrined in any domestic and international
laws of self-determination/defense. Directly and indirectly,
Petitioner's children are equally put in this crossfire to the
dangerous extent that the elder son (3rd Petitioner) of the Petitioner
was forcibly deported to Nigeria where the Petitioner fear physical
and psychological persecutions and tortures capable of resulting to
death. The bid of the lead Petitioner for the President of Nigeria and
inauguration of new political party and political movement also
increased domestic and international tension responding to the trend
of the secret physical and psychological persecutions and tortures
against Petitioner. (http://www.phillyimc.org/en/event/dr-phillip-
chukwuma-ofume-president-nigeria-2011-complete-political-manifesto or
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source= hp&q=ofume +v.+george+w.
+bush+et+al&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=).

2. One of the gruesome parts of this endless physical and
psychological and other persecutions and tortures is that 3rd
Petitioner was deported on March 10, 2009 which was the date scheduled
for his bail hearing before IJ (Matthew J. D'Angelo) of the
Immigration Court, Boston,
4
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

MA. No answer given to the question on reason why IJ D’Angelo who has
been petitioned nationally and internationally be allowed to take 3rd
Petitioner Bail Hearing. Lawyer/Attorney retained by parents, BIA, IJ
and Immigration Court , Boston , MA connived together to delay filing
and hearing of Motion for Stay of Deportation, Bail Motion, and Bail
Hearing (before BIA and Immigration Court ). When 3rd Petitioner was
in detention, under forma pauperis, right to self-representation was
denied while the prosecution maintained severe form of ex-
communication. Parents are capable of preparing bail/bond motions and
leave the right to self-defence/representation to detained child but
the right to file motion on behalf their detained child was denied by
the Immigration Court and US District Court, Boston MA . Under severe
forms of forma pauperis, parents contacted several pro bono attorneys
inside and outside the US District Court and Immigration Court and
parents' applications were denied. Reason that this case is pending
and no relief granted, Petitioner's security or safety is weak to the
uneven extent that the Nigerian politicians and their allies have
relied on this weakness to use their moneyed politics to render the
family homeless and forced to be sleeping in unsecured church in
Virginia (Cornerstone Faith Healing Christian Ministries).
Persecutorily, all Petitioner's application for homeless and non-
homeless shelters were denied to create vulnerable conditions that may
brew political assassination.

3. Petitioner is refugee and stateless person adopted by
the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and Amnesty
5

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

International (Int. Secretariat, London UK ). After the annulment of
the Nigeria 's June 12, 1993 Presidential Election won by Petitioner's
candidate, Chief MKO Abiola and detention of Chief Abiola, persecution
by Nigerian government against Petitioner expanded and Petitioner fled
and landed in Lome , Togo via Republic of Benin . More and more
expansion occurred in the persecution against the Petitioner when lead
Petitioned was requested by some Nigerians to bid for the President of
Nigeria 2007 and 2011. Petitioner’s bid for the President of Nigeria
and campaign for civil liberties in the NIGER DELTA REGION and
internationally expanded the physical and psychological persecutions
and tortures directed against the Petitioner.

4. On September 29, 2005 after lengthy persecution in
Canada 1998 - 2005 and under further persecutory plan to use
petitioner as bounty for oil/gas exchange in Nigeria purpose of
forcing Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume and Mrs. Maureen Ngozi Ofume to
return to Nigeria to face treason and other felony charges in
Nigeria , reliable information was received as in December 1996,
Petitioner bought flight ticket with itinerary of direct and non-stop
flight Halifax International Airport to Reagan Airport , Washington
D.C. USA. On September 29, 2005, en-route Washington D.C. Petitioner
was forced to stop at Boston Logan Airport and Petitioner's unexpired
United Nations Refugee Travel Documents and Passports; Academic and
Professional Qualifications; Torture/Persecution Newspapers,
Photographs, Medical/Doctor Certificate/Report, etc were impounded
and
6
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

seized by the Respondent/Respondent.

5. After these massive seizures, charge [( 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] of
arriving or landing in the United States without unexpired documents
was brought against the Petitioner. In-between the proceedings on
January 25, 2006, Immigration Judge, Eliza C. Klein issued an
important disclosure Order on the Respondent/Plaintiff thus,
commanding the government of America (Respondent/Plaintiff) to
disclosure documents in its possession and same be filed with the
Court on before March 16-30, 2006. ONLY documents disclosed are
Petitioner's unexpired United Nations Refugee Travel Documents and
Passports. Based on this disclosure, on October 16, 2007, Government
of America (Respondent/Plaintiff) lost its charge against the
Petitioner of landing in the US without unexpired documents and
NOTHING is left in this case to override a serious application for
safe country under well-founded fear of past present and future
persecution that was objectively reasonable and draw wide array of
national and international public interests.

6. On October 16, 2007 the secretly imposed presiding IJ Matthew J.
D'Angelo created fictitious date of hearing (06/04/2007) to hide or
cover the most important hearing in all Judge D'Angelo's hearings
(secret/overt). The ONLY hearing in which discussion and directions as
to issue of the process to redo Petitioner's EXPIRED BIOMETRIC TEST
was on June 5, 2007. There was no hearing on June 4, 2007.
7

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

7. On June 5, 2007 to enable Petitioner redo the expired Biometric
Test the IJ D'Angelo shared responsibilities into several parts, thus
what and what the Immigration Court , IJ, Petitioner, Federal Surgeon
and Nebraska Service Center (NSC) would do to facilitate the redoing
process of the Petitioner’s Biometric Test. During the period
September 2005 through January 2009, there was one(1) Federal Surgeon
in the City of Lynn, MA whereat Petitioner's resided and the federal
physician or surgeon imposed punitive and unnecessary conditions on
refugees and other applicants that desire to do biometric test or
immigration medical examination. After the January 2009, immigration
information advised that two more federal surgeons were appointed in
Lynn , MA and conditions mentioned above were in greater part relaxed.
This condition enable Petitioner to redo its biometric test and would
be submitted as part of the evidence in support of this Petition for
review.

8. Petitioner (pro se) sought per Motion to submit to this
Honourable Court Certified Record of its Biometric Test as NEW
EVIDENCE in this case but for no reason other than claim that the the
"evidence in question (BIOMETRIC TEST) was not introduced into the
record on which the removal order is based" whereas review of the
decisions of the IJ and BIA and Respondent’s Certified Administrative
Record BIOMETRIC TEST was mentioned from page to page of the removal
order and biometric test variously restated in BIA’s decision (see
below) .
8

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

9. Restating that during the haring on June 5, 2007 which IJ,
Immigration Court and Respondent/Plaintiff censored, the IJ D’Angelo
gave instruction/direction as to how petitioner would work with IJ,
Nebraska Service Center, federal surgeon and the Boston Immigration
Court and in conclusion the IJ further directed Petitioner to appear
before him (IJ) and the Clerk of the Court anytime if there were
further concerns. Severally, Petitioner appeared in Boston Immigration
Court with the intention to see the IJ D’Angelo and Boston Immigration
Court to request them to do what the Nebraska Service Center and
Federal Surgeon requested Petitioner to do to enable redo the
Biometric Test but each time, Petitioner was removed by Police.
Petitioner’s request was polite and do not require police presence.
What the Petitioner requested in all its visit is written phrase that
“BIOMETRIC TEST IS REQUIRED IN THIS CASE”.

10. After January 2009 there was change because the new
government appointed additional two physicians or federal surgeons in
Petitioner’s town ( Lynn , MA ). After the Petitioner has done the
Biometric Test or Medical Examination before Federal Surgeon,
Petitioner Pro se applied to this Court to list the new evidence and
pleaded for conference to enable the Court enter the tests as EXHIBIT
but the Motion was denied and appeal was impossible because Petitioner
was rendered homeless and sleeping from street to street.

11. Ofume was not charged under any BIOMETRIC TEST law and
the Prosecution did not plead BIOMETRIC TEST at any point of the
charge
9

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

and also during the entire proceedings before the Immigration Court ,
Boston MA or over two years Respondent/Plaintiff did not effect
amendment to include BIOMETRIC TEST. After the Respondent/Plaintiff
lost its case or charge against the Petitioner on October 16, 200,
under political reason, Judge D'Angelo used expired Biometric to deny
relief sought by the Petitioner and without considering the weight of
Petitioner’s application.

12. In America , Ofume's application for asylum was deemed
abandoned by an Immigration Judge Matthew M. D'Angelo because of an
EXPIRED BIOMETRIC TEST which remained expired at the instance of Judge
D'Angelo and the Clerk of Immigration Court.

13. They (Judge & Clerk) refused and failed to write, sign
and stamp a phrase, "BIOMETRIC TEST IS REQUIRED IN THIS CASE" to
enable the family redo the EXPIRED BIOMETRIC TEST as requested by the
Nebraska Service Center . Particularly, in Petitioner’s Application
for Asylum because of US Patriot Act and incident of September 11,
2001, 2006 – 2009 Nebraska Service Center, Federal Surgeon and others
have been requesting for this phrase to perform Immigration Medical
Procedure. Under the government of President Barack H. Obama several
Federal Surgeons were appointed in Lynn , MA and several harsh
conditions which existed under previous governments were relaxed and
Clerk of court reduced some of argument in taking, filing and
stamping immigration motions and other application/petition.
10
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

14. This change allowed Petitioner to redo its Biometric
Test on September 24, 2009 and sealed copies of the completed and
unexpired BIOMETRIC TEST is attached in Petitioner classified or
sealed addendum and will be delivered to the Clerk of this Court with
Petitioner’s Brief. Petitioner request review jury to enter these
documents into evidence as NEW EVIDENCE in support of Petitioner’s
Petition for Review.

15. Between January 26, 2006 and September 8, 2006 the
worst part of the interest of Petitioner in this case is the
overloaded or excessive discretion and political clout of the IJ
D’Angelo which led to all time severe form of harm to case and abuse
of the discretion of Judge of record as follows:

a. With excessive unlawful power, Judge D’Angelo conducted secret
court and hearings outside jurisdiction ( Florida ) and inside
jurisdiction ( Massachusetts ) without NOTICE TO APPEAR on the
Petitioner. The Clerk of Court and the IJ have the civic and postal
addresses of the Petitioner.

b. Under secret arrangement, Judge D'Angelo was assigned to
Petitioner's case without Court’s notice of direction and other
information to the Petitioner to show that Judge D'Angelo has replaced
Judge Klein who heard Petitioner's case on January 25, 2006 and issued
the Order of disclosure mentioned above. Orders of Judges Thomas M.
Ragno and Eliza

11
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

C. Klein deeply angered the Respondent/Plaintiff or Petitioner's
political rivals and these judges were astute or clean Judges and they
drop out from the case. Order of Judge Thomas M. Ragno was
disrespected when 3rd Petitioner a rider of the consolidated case
(Dockect No. 97-446-370) was removed to Nigeria on March 10, 2009
which was date of his bail hearing and against the direction of Judge
Ragno that Petitioner is one family and if there was deportation that
they should be deported to one country. See "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record pages 000467 – 000496 of the hearing of Judges
Klein and Ragno.

c. January 26, 2006 through September 7, 2006, secretly Judge D'Angelo
named/retained attorney in Florida and heard Petitioner's case in
secret courtrooms located in Florida and Massachusetts without NOTICE
TO APPEAR on the Petitioner. Further information revealed that in
these secret courtrooms, Judge D'Angelo received and heard several
applications and motions from unknown parties and issued several
outrageous orders/decisions including the pattern relating to the
Judge D'Angelo's order (10/16/2007) of scattered deportation of the
Petitioner's family and all these orders/decisions were concealed and
kept top secret. After Petitioner received this classified information
of hearings in secret courtrooms, it petitioned the Immigration Court
and suddenly Petitioner was summoned on September 8, 2006 to appear
before Judge D'Angelo. The tactic of the hearing violates any DUE
PROCESS RIGHTS because in majority of time during hearing each time
Petitioner desires to speak about important issue in
12
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

its case Judge D’Angelo turns of the tape recorder. On September 8,
2006 the first time Petitioner's appeared before Judge D'Angelo and he
was proud to inform Petitioner that he has been hearing its case in
Massachusetts and Florida with unapproved Attorney called Mr. Fernando
Narvaez.

d. September 8, 2006 through June 5, 2007, to challenge several
extra-judicial action of Judge D’Angelo the Petitioner/Respondent
filed several appeals and complaints with Chief of Immigration Judge
and Administrative Appeal Office. First Administrative Appeal (AAO)
was against the Decision of Judge D’Angelo dated September 08, 2006;
the Second Appeal was against the Decision of Judge D’Angelo dated
March 6, 2007; and Third Appeal was against the Decision of Judge
D’Angelo dated June 5, 2007. September 2006 - present these appeals
remain unheard. Complaints to the OFFICE OF THE CHIEF IMMIGRATION
JUDGE against the Decisions of Judge D’Angelo dated September 8, 2006,
March 6, 2007 and June 5, 2007 and against the secret courtroom
hearings, decision and other of Judge D’Angelo. September 2006 -
present, these complaints remain unheard. With the exception of the
written decision appealed (01/07/2008), September 8, 2006 through
October 16, 2007 100% of the decisions/orders of Judge D’Angelo were
oral decisions/orders.

16. Reason of the discovery of forgery on fake date of Hearing,
June 4, 2007 whereas the Hearing was June 5, 2007, per pre-review
Motion, Petitioner sought to have Respondent /Plaintiff's
ADMINISTRATIVE

13
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

RECORD supplemented and corrected because this hearing is the only
IMPORTANT HEARING presided over by Judge D'Angelo and the hearing is
the heart or soul and body of Petitioner's Petition for Review. There
was no hearing on June 4, 2007. Biometric Test is the ONLY case before
the BIA and also before this Honourable Court and reason why unexpired
Biometric Test was not available before Judge D'Angelo is here and
there across the hearing on June 5, 2007. The action of the
Immigration Court and Judge D'Angelo is purposely designed to hide
reason why unexpired Biometric was not available before Judge
D'Angelo. Apart from the said pre-review Motion, Petitioner filed
complaint with US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to investigate
this suspected forgery.

17. First question presented above shows that Petitioner's
application in the United States is ASYLUM or seeking SAFE PLACE to
save its life or prevent the first question above which has occurred
severally in Nigeria and affected the citizens of the NIGER DELTA
REGION or South/South Region of Nigeria. See Government of Nigeria
v. Ken Saro-Wiwa (1995); Government of Nigeria v. Dele Giwa (1986);
Government of Nigeria v. Kudirat Abiola (1996); Government of Nigeria
v. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume (Federal High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 –
present and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu &Asaba Delta State, 1991 –
present, etc); Government of Nigeria v. Maureen Ngozi Ofume (Federal
High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 – present and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu
Delta State 1991 – present, etc);Government of Nigeria v. MKO Abiola
(1998); etc. The holder of Petitioner’s regional human and natural
resources have set up longstanding
14
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

plan to cleanse major citizens of the NIGER DELTA REFGION.

18. The bail motion of Kleber was assigned to the Judge D’Angelo
who hold keen and visible political interest in Petitioner’s asylum
case. Again, Judge D’Angelo and the attorney retained for the child
(Kleber Ofume) delayed bail hearing to enable ICE or Respondent/
Plaintiff prepare Kleber’s secret deportation. On the date of the bail
hearing (03/10/2009 at 10.00 a.m.) Kleber was deported to Nigeria .
(see http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q =Kleber+Ofume
+deportation+to+ Nigeria +&btnG=Google+Search&aq=o&oq=&aqi=)

19. In chain of endless persecution against Petitioner, in
addition to the charges of treason and other political felonies, 3rd
Petitioner was deported to Nigeria on March 10, 2009 and this date was
the date scheduled for his Bail Hearing. 3rd Petitioner/Respondent was
arrested, detained and ex-communicated merely for requesting USCIS to
correct the error made on his date of birth by the Immigration and
Custom Enforcement (ICE). Kleber Ofume or 3rd Petitioner has no
criminal record and never been convicted of any crime or person
against person and state. He is full time student at The North Shore
Community College, Lynn , MA and aspiring to earn his Associate Degree
of Hotel Management, year 2010; deadly homelessness directed against
Petitioner. Under highhanded persecution, Petitioner filed several
Motions for Stay of Deportation with this Court and another
15
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Motions for Stay of Deportation and filing fee waiver request dated
January 13, 2009 with the BIA. See pages 000009 – 000023 of the
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record. But as bias as BIA has
been through out Petitioner’s appeal, BIA failed to respond staying
deportation of Kleber Ofume and allowed ICE to enjoy the opportunity
to deport Kleber to Nigeria on the date of Kleber’s Bail Hearing.

C. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

Immigration Judge (IJ), Matthew D’Angelo failed to allow lawful flow
of DUE PROCESS RIGHTS of the Petitioner in nature to hear
Petitioner’s Application for Asylum, 99-page Supplemental Statement
and score of exhibits to determine whether or not there is well-
founded fear of past present and future persecution that was
objectively reasonable but in place IJ and BIA held on to unknown/
uncharged or expired biometric test which remain expired at the
instance of Immigration Court and Judge. See Da Silva v. Ashcroft, 394
F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2005).

BIA and IJ failed to rely on several credible past, present and
future physical and psychological and other persecutions and tortures
including on-going charges with treason and other felonies against
Petitioner (1st and 2nd Petitioners) which must lead to death penalty
upon conviction in Nigeria;
16
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

series of failed physical and other failed assassination including
community attacks; water and food poisoning; present conditions in the
United States; homelessness and forced to be sleeping street to street
and barred by police to sleep in the sanctuary of its church (CHURCH
OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS); politically designed sanction
on over 98% of Petitioner’s means of livelihood in Togo, Canada and
US and forcible removal/deportation of 3rd Petitioner/Respondent
(Kleber Odimegwu Ofume, elder son) on March 10, 2009 to Nigeria where
the petitioner fear death and other harms; etc.etc.etc.

The duty of the Board of Immigration Appeal (BIA) which include but
unlimited to power to review whether there are credible past, present
and future physical and psychological and other persecutions and
tortures failed and outrageously neglected for no just reason. These
grounds are located in Petitioner’s Application for Asylum, 99-page
Supplemental Statement and score of exhibits showing past, present and
future indicators of credible past, present and future physical and
psychological and other persecutions and tortures aforelisted which
Petitioner submitted to Boston Immigration Court, BIA and IJ.

To uncover reason why unexpired Biometric was not ready on October
16, 2007, IJ and Boston Immigration Court censored the only important
hearing which was on June 5, 2007 and in place IJ and Court
manufactured June 4, 2007 to censor important discussions,
instructions, shared responsibilities and directions. See
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record” pages
17
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

000601 – 000645.

So far and so bad, this case and its outcome to the present time, is
nationally and internationally a notorious litmus test of negative or
excessive discretion of judge in US judicial system and an arm-
twisting or oppressive injustice or adjudication, thus from time to
time earned the United States of America acute form of outrageous
adjudication by political and personal interest clout and misuse of
judicial power by IJ and BIA. Without iota of doubts, it will lead to
indelible stain on the entire American justice and judicial system.
See above when Judge of Record has summoned the courage to hear
Petitioner's case for several months in secret courtrooms located in
Florida and Massachusetts with unapproved attorney, Fernando Narvaez
and without NOTICE TO APPEAR on the Petitioner and variously issued
several decisions and orders absentia against Petitioner. Court has
full civic and mailing addresses of the Petitioner. Against this
conduct of Judge D'Angelo, Petitioner's three (3) appeals to the
Office of Chief Immigration Judge and three appeals to the Office of
Administrative Appeal (OAA) were permanently unattended. Because this
conduct was not reprimanded, on October 16, 2007 the same Judge
D'Angelo refused to grant relief in Petitioner's case and in place of
granting relief, he manufactured uncharged prong which is expired
biometric test and used this self-designed path to order scattered
deportation of the Petition to different countries - Canada , USA and
Nigeria against the Order of Judge Thomas M. Ragno. On the final
18
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

individual hearing, October 16, 2007 Judge D'Angelo had nothing left
in the case because the disclosure of Petitioner's unexpired
immigration documents destroyed Respondent/Plaintiff's case. Judge
Ragno and other people that know the value of family know that
scattered deportation is the worst persecution and psychological
torture against nuclear and extended families.

The case of snail and systemic genocide directed against the
Petitioner and other citizens of the NIGER DELTA REGION of Nigeria are
the best informant to this Honourable Court and speak for itself about
the devastating punch on exemplary judicial system. These cases drew
storm of wide array of the domestic and international public outcry
and interest. In microscopic shortlist, See Government of Nigeria v.
Ken Saro-Wiwa (1995); Government of Nigeria v. Dele Giwa (1986);
Government of Nigeria v. Kudirat Abiola (1996); Government of Nigeria
v. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume (Federal High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 –
present and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu &Asaba Delta State, 1991 –
present, etc); Government of Nigeria v. Maureen Ngozi Ofume (Federal
High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 – present and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu
Delta State 1991 – present, etc);Government of Nigeria v. MKO Abiola
(1998); etc.. All these innocent and armless citizens of the NIGER
DELTA REGION have been directly and indirectly killed and sealed and
Petitioner queue up waiting for their turn. This evidence is
sufficient to seek upright determination of the US Asylum law and
United Nations Convention of July 28, 1951 which have saved several
people like the Petitioner because of the consequence of the charges
19
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

of Treason and other felonies in Nigeria . Each time learned and
outspoken citizens of the NIGER DELTA REGION are charged with treason
and other felonies to find easy path to kill them.

The task before this Honourable Court is that the persecution and
cruelties directed against Petitioner by the government of Nigeria and
its allies are persistent and lineup in nature of past, present and
future. At present 1st and 2nd Petitioners are facing treason and
other felony charges in Nigeria and this preparation to kill them soon
as they are deported to Nigeria under paid proceedings and kangaroo
judicial system.

On June 5, 2007 redoing Petitioner’s Expired Biometric Test was order
by Judge D’Angelo as shared responsibility between the Immigration
Court Boston , MA ; IJ; Petitioner; Nebraska Service Center ; and
Federal Surgeon.

Petitioner can not automatically become Immigration Court Boston, MA;
IJ; Nebraska Service Center; and Federal Surgeon to do all what is
required to enable the Petitioner redo the Expired Biometric Test.
Petitioner did its part by responding to the instruction of the IJ and
sent all necessary immigration papers and copies of its Application
for Asylum to the Nebraska Service Center and going to one existing US
Federal Surgeon located in Lynn, MA. US Federal Surgeon and Nebraska
Service Center instructed Petitioner to
20

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

bring written statement indicating that, "BIOMETRIC TEST IS REQUIRED
IN THIS CASE" to enable the family get appointment to redo the EXPIRED
BIOMETRIC TEST.

Expired Biometric Test is not part of the Immigration charge [212(a)
(7) (A)(i)(I)] brought against Petitioner. Consciously argued that
Expired Biometric Test is not sufficient to override a case which has
outcome of death penalty and by hanging and death by public firing
squad and asylum case with several credible past, present and future
physical and psychological and other persecutions and tortures.

To determine whether or not Judge D'Angelo erred, charged case [212(a)
(7) (A)(i)(I)] and uncharged case (Biometric Test) must be put on
review scale as to determine they are legally relevant and in
association to determine Petitioner's application for asylum or safe
country. In State v. Alexander, 875 S.W. 2d 924, 928 (Mo.App.1994);
State v Rousan, 961S.W.2ND 831, 844(mo.banc); State v. Dennis, 990S.W.
2nd 78,81(Mo.App.1999), Respondent/Plaintiff abandoned its principal
and only case [212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] or failed to use its Immigration
charge [212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] to deny Petitioner's Relief .

In further relevance or connectivity finding, on September 29, 2005,
October 5, 2005 and October 6, 2005 US Immigration Officials and US
Asylum Officer interviewed and heard Petitioner and thereafter
complete Biometric
21
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610
Test was performed on the Petitioner. On October 7, 2005 Petitioner
was granted CREDIBLE FEAR OF PERSECUTION OR TORTURE. October 12, 2005
through October 12, 2006 Petitioner was paroled and the Parole was
successful and unfound wanting in any misdoing. At this point, to make
Biometric Test headstone of this case and use it to deny application
for asylum which is sought to safe life is wholly manifest injustice
and the decision of the IJ and BIA must be reversed in their
entirety.

Viewing the conducts of the Immigration Court, Boston and particularly
Judge D'Angelo's secret carriage of Petitioner's case and the
heartless conducts such hearing its case in two secret courtrooms in
Massachusetts and Florida with unapproved attorney, Fernando Narvaez,
use of expired Biometric Test to dismiss a case of life saving or
asylum, the conduct of Judge D'Angelo must be seen as being
PREJUDICIAL. See State v. Masden, 990 S.W.2d 190,193(Mo.App.1999);
State v Evans, 992 S.W.2d 275, 290(Mo.App.1999); State v. Nastasio,
957 S.W. 2d 454.459 (Mo.App. 1997). These cases went contrary to
Appellant's prayer because of connectivity thus, contrary to
Petitioner's case.

Under life saving efforts by the Petitioner, when more US Federal
Surgeons were appointed in Lynn to take care of Asylees and other
immigrant in Lynn , these Surgeons would testify as to efforts made by
Petitioner to complete its Biometric Test on
22

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

September 24, 2009 and further effort to apply to this Court for
conference to enter the completed biometric test into evidence as NEW
EVIDENCE. See attached Petitioner's Separate Volume of Addendum filed
under seal.

The ONLY immigration charge brought against the Petitioner is
limited to 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(“INA” or “the Act”) and that Expired Biometric Test has never been
part or whole part of this charge and lacks the momentum to override
application for asylum which contrary to granting it would have 100%
assurance of leading to death penalty in Nigeria. BIA and IJ allowed
sidewalk or uncharged issue to takeover main road or application for
asylum or request for safe country because of certainty of assured
evidence that failure of this asylum case in the United States would
lead to the death of seven (7) children and their two (2) parents
(Petitioner).

D. STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND LIABILITY FINDINGS

1. In support of this Brief, the Petitioner moves to adopt the
following supplemental statement of the Case:

a. Petitioner's Application for Asylum, 99-page Supplemental
Statement and over 150 exhibits including several scaring photographs
showing images of physical and psychological torture and persecution)
in support of
Petitioner's Application for Asylum in the United States of America
23
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

b. Petition for Review to The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

c. Notice of Appeal from a decision of an Immigration Judge
(01/07/2008) denying Petitioner Motion to Reopen and the lead and only
vexatious, trump up and politicized case of landing in the United
states without unexpired documents which started following the
impounding and seizure of Petitioner's unexpired United Nations
Refugees Travel Documents and Passports and scores of other valid
documents and other materials in support of its landing in the United
States and Application for Asylum on September 29, 2009. On October
16, 2007 the charge of the government failed but reason of the oil
politics of Nigeria now in which the lead Petitioner bids for the
President of Nigeria 2011.

d. Petitioner's Objection to Released "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record" because several falsified hearing and
documents and mutilated pages purpose of intentional obstruction of
justice.

e. Petitioner's request for further copies of "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record."

f. Petitioner’s Motion for Stay of Deportation.

g. Motion to enlarge date of submission of Petitioner's Brief
24

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

h. Petitioner's Pre-Review Motion for the return of 3rd Petitioner,
Kleber Ofume's who was politically deported on March 10, 2009.

2. Highly politicized Application for Asylum because of the lead
petitioner’s bid for the President of Nigeria 2007 and 2011;
declaration that the civil war in the Niger Delta Region is lawful and
constitutional under the Constitution of Nigeria and UN international
law. In this case two Judges, Thomas M. Ragno and Eliza C. Klein
resigned from the case and Counsels for the Respondent/Plaintiff
remain divided and severally replaced or reassigned. On October 16,
2007 after ’ Application for Asylum (FORM 1 -589) succeeded without
opposition from the prosecution, IJ and Respondent Plaintiff, but the
Immigration Judge (IJ) Matthew J. D’Angelo denied ALL Relief because
of an EXPIRED BIOMETRIC TEST which remain expired at the instance of
the IJ, Clerk of Court and USCIS ( Nebraska ).

3. January 26, 2006 - October 16, 2007, June 5, 2007 was the only
important hearing which Petitioner' was allowed to appear before Judge
D'Angelo thus following Judge D'Angelo's hijack of Petitioner's
asylum case and conducted several secret hearings in two different
secret courtrooms located in Massachusetts and Florida in
collaboration with unapproved attorney. June 4, 2007 was created by
Judge D'Angelo and Immigration Court , Boston , MA to censor shared
responsibility between the immigration court and petitioner, Nebraska
service center, federal surgeon and IJ. "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record" used June
25
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

4, 2007 to hide June 5, 2007 hearing to the extent that what was
discussed and ordered particularly discussion and order of shared
responsibility and others disappeared and failed to be part of the
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record.”

4. The moneyed and political conduct of the IJ and Immigration
Court which pushed them as alcohol on October 16, 2007 to order
deportation of the petitioner to three (3) countries is contrary to
the firm and judicious Order of Judge Thomas M. Ragno and
Constitution and Human Rights. On November 16, 2005 Judge Ragno issued
an important Order relating to the Consolidation of the Petitioner's
case and consolidated under single docket No. 97-446-370 and further
ordered that the petitioner's family is one and if deportation is
entered Petitioner must be deported to one country but 3rd Petitioner
was forcibly deported to Nigeria where they fear death and other
harms.

5. OPPOSITION TO “RESPONDENT
CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD”

a. Purported record (hereinafter "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record" ) bears D.J. No. 39-36-3087 and imposed on
Petitioner and The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Docket
No. 09-
26

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610
1610 and Petitioner's Alien Numbers (A#) to claim what the
Respondent/Plaintiff called "Respondent's Certified Administrative
Record" whereas this "record" was in part politically falsified in
collaboration with the IJ D'Angelo, BIA, Immigration Court and
Petitioner's political rivals purpose of path to persistently
persecute Petitioner, disrupt lead Petitioner's bid for the President
of Nigeria 2007 and 2011 and find quick plan to deport Petitioner
(particularly 1st and 2nd Petitioners) to Nigeria to face treason and
other political felonies which will terminate Dr. & Mrs. Ofume’s
life. See direct and indirect treason brought against Petitioner and
other citizens of the Niger Delta Region.
See http://www.phillyimc.org/en/ event/niger-delta-region-nigeria-
tactical-organized-genocide-ex-president-george-w-bush-et-als,
http://nigerdeltasolidarity.wordpress. com/2009/05/22/the-government-
of-nigeria-and-its-acts-of-genocide-terror-against-the-people-of-the-
niger-delta/ , http://punditz.typepad.com/niger delta_solidarity _gr/
2009/05/stop-nigeria-s-genocide-against-the-ijaws-of-the-niger-delta-a-
call-for-immediate-global-action.html ,http://
nigerdeltasolidarity.wordpress. com/2009/05/20/stop-military-assault-
in-niger-delta-now/

b. In the purported official "Checklist for Review of
Administrative Records" checked by "S. Newman" (handwritten)
November, 2009 and edited on February 10, 2009 a mighty claim that
100% of the "original administrative record" and all the copies are
correct whereas:

i. US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT: S. Newman claimed that
he/she "check multi-paged documents (Making sure all pages are
there). A large and extensive page - 000601 through 000645, and Table
of
27
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Content, and S. Newman claimed that the hearing on June 4, 2007 is
checked, edited and said that they are correct. This claim was
objected by the Petitioner as being incorrect and that the hearing was
June 5, 2007. Shocking, on behalf US Immigration Court , Boston , MA
US Court of Appeal for the First Circuit, Boston MA took spokemanship
position to say that pages 601 through 645, Table of Content, and S.
Newman claimed were not correct (See Order of this Court dated:
12/02/2009). Also in support of the forgery of June 4, 2007 paragraphs
2 and 3 of the decision of the BIA or page 001034 of "Respondent's
Certified Administrative Record" BIA re-echo that Judge D’Angelo’s
hearing was on June 4, 2007. Judge D’Angelo’s Decision petitioned
and signed by Judge D’Angelo did not deny that June 4, 2007 was
created by himself and the Boston Immigration Court . Pages 2, 3, and
4 of his 4-page decision, Judge D’Angelo various mentioned June 4,
2007 and Judge D’Angelo and Boston Immigration Court have not come up
to say the contrary. .

ii. The Complaint of the Petitioner to FBI and US Court of Appeals
for the First Circuit was addressed to Judge D'Angelo, Immigration
Court , Boston , MA and Respondent /Plaintiff. These Respondents did
not oppose Petitioner's opposition that the Respondent/Plaintiff,
Immigration Court and IJ forged line 2 of page 000601 of "Respondent's
Certified Administrative Record" after the Lynn Police Department
forcibly removed the large documents with over 1169 pages to unknown
destination on August 19,
28

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

2009. On August 19, 2009 the defendant (Dr. Phillip C. Ofume) was not
present in the apartment to remove the package containing the large
documents.

iii. ONLY line 2 of page 000601 of "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record" was falsified by the Immigration Court or
Respondent from June 4, 2007 to June 5, 2007? Lines 1, 3, 4 through
25 and end of page 000601 is June 4, 2007 and pages 000602 through
000645 are June 4, 2007. On August 19, 2009 Petitioner was forcibly
evicted from its apartment under organized plot in collaboration with
Lynn , MA Police Department. How? Wife and husband were fighting to
hold possession of the single family apartment whereat Petitioner was
sheltered at 33 Arlington Street Apt.#1 Lynn , MA 01902 . This fight
yielded two litigations (Massachusetts Superior Court Department with
jurisdictional power and Northeast Housing Court without
jurisdictional power). The landlord of the Petitioner is the
Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA) and
Metropolitan Boston Housing Partnership (MBHP). In 2009 wife sued
lead Petitioner (Dr. Phillip C. Ofume) for possession in wrong court
and duplication of the possession suit brought against Petitioner in
June 2007. Husband, DTA and MBHP sued in 2007 by Petitioner in
Massachusetts Superior Court Department because of uninhabitable
conditions of the apartment. On August 14, 2009 reason of FEAR to
loss her (wife’s) case against lead Petitioner because of lack of
jurisdiction, she filed handwritten and signed motion withdrawing her
eviction and possession motion. On August 18, 2009 her withdrawal
29
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Motion was heard by Judge David Kerman and allowed. Copies of the
Motion were stamped and served on Petitioner and other parties. On
August 19, 2009 at about 8.00 a.m. lead Petitioner traveled to
Boston , MA and between 11-12 a.m. Lynn Police Department raided
Petitioner’s apartment and without lead Petitioner and removed
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record" and all other
properties in the apartment to unknown destination.

iv. After the Police raid mentioned above, Petitioner applied for
further copies through this Court and Respondent/Plaintiff. Copies
were sent and when Petitioner reviewed the copies page by page,
Petitioner found that Respondent/Plaintiff, Immigration Court and IJ
forged line 2 of page 000601 of "Respondent's Certified Administrative
Record" and abandoned June 5, 2007 and created June 4, 2007 to
exonerate IJ from the wrap of the FBI investigation and damaged the
important hearing on June 5, 2007 but changing line 2 of page 000601
without changing bottom page of page 000601 and over 45 pages or pages
000602 through 000645 and failed change 24 lines of page 000601 and
remaining 45 pages of the hearing on June 4, 2007. Also page 000827
further confirms that the IJ and Immigration Court forged June 4, 2007
to cover the only important hearing (June 5, 2007) presided over by
Judge D’Angelo. The court seal or stamp clearly showed June 4, 2007.

c. Pages 00646 through 000681 which were claim as hearing on
October
30
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

16, 2007 are fabricated because on October 16, 2007 the IJ within few
minutes he requested for the names and other personal particulars of
parties, thereafter he received usual secret signal and rose for over
one (1) hour for consultation and returned and abandoned the hearing
thus, indirectly to show that Respondent/Plaintiff lost its charge
against Petitioner. In place of dismissing Respondent/Plaintiff case,
IJ emerged with the idea of expired biometric and swiftly rose and
announced another one hour break to further consult some people. Over
one hour, IJ returned and declared Petitioner application for asylum
as being abandoned because of expired and wild as this IJ would,
ordered deportation of children and parent to three countries. IJ
D’Angelo sanctioned the opportunity to hear Petitioner’s Application
for Asylum (Form I-589 and 99-page supplemental statement and exhibits
in support of application). In computation of the two appearances of
the IJ on October 16, 2007 the discussion lasted few minutes and to
manufacture pages 00646 through 000681 is a big insult to US judicial
system. In addition to the fact that the transcriber is not qualified
to transcribe non-white proceedings some statement which Petitioner is
able to decipher are nonsense and sign of racist stereotype.

d. Pages 000797 through 000826 of the "Respondent's Certified
Administrative Record" show that Petitioner landed in the United
States with unexpired United Nations Refugees Travel Documents and
Passports and that the charge [( 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] Respondent /
Plaintiff brought against Petitioner was
31
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

politically falsified after impounding and seizing Petitioner
unexpired immigration and other documents. Petitioner arrived in the
US on September 29, 2005 and review of its immigration documents shows
that the documents are valid for about one(1) year.

e. Pages 000915 through 000972 show that Petitioner has been filing
Application for Asylum (Form I-589) since August 8, 2003 but corrupt
immigration court and immigration officials have been receiving bribe
from Petitioner’s political opponents and be censoring these
applications for asylum (Form I-589) to claim similar lies as IJ
D’Angelo that Petitioner filed its application for asylum in June 2007
whereas the last application for asylum of several applications for
asylum (Form I-589) which Petitioner filed with the immigration courts
and immigration officials was filed with the immigration court,
Boston , MA on September 1, 2006.

f. Page 001042 of the "Respondent's Certified Administrative Record”
shows that Petitioner has been filing different Applications for
Asylum (Form I-589) since August 8, 2003. All United Nations Refugees
Travel Documents and Passports which expired in 2004 were used for
Petitioner’s flee Canada to the United States on August 8, 2003
whereas the United Nations Refugees Travel Documents and Passports on
pages 000797 through 000825 which were valid until June 29, 2006 were
used by the Petitioner for the recent flee on September 29, 2005.
32

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

g. "Respondent's Certified Administrative Record” page 000887,
the written decision of Judge D’Angelo said, “On January 11, 2005,
attorney Fernando V. Narvaez Esq. filed a Notice of Entry of
Appearance of Attorney or Representative (Form EOIR-28) ON THE
Respondent’s behalf with the Boston Immigration Court.” On January
11, 2005 Petitioner was in Canada . Petitioner landed in the United
States on September 29, 2005.

6. FURTHER OPPOSITION TO THE DECISION OF THE BIA OR IJ

a. January 7, 2008 is another hearing date forged by the Boston
Immigration Court in collaboration with the Respondent/Plaintiff. See
para 3 page 2 of the decision of the BIA and page 001035 of
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record”. After October 16,
2007 there was no appearance before Judge D’Angelo and Motion to
Reopen was received and heard under usual secret proceeding without
Petitioner.

b. After the hearing on January 25, 2006 which was presided over by
Judge Klein, January 26, 2006 through September 7, 2006 unknown IJ in
Petitioner’s case failed to allow Petitioner see him or her. January
26, 2006 through time when certain anonymous court official told
Petitioner that there was an on-going secret proceedings in its case,
each time Petitioner comes to Boston Immigration Court , the
administration informed
Petitioner that there is no Judge assigned to its case. At this
point, petitioner petitioned Boston Immigration Court and the petition
forced the
33
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Respondent/Plaintiff and Boston Immigration Court to expose the secret
Judge and September 8, 2006 was the first meeting with the secret
Judge Matthew D’Angelo. Before September 8, 2006 Petitioner has filed
several Applications for Asylum (Form I-589) and received by the
administrator and assistant clerk of the Boston Immigration Court and
always they (assistant clerk of the Boston Immigration Court )
received Petitioner’s applications, motions and other documents but
100% of the time, they refused to stamp the documents and enter other
endorsements. The administrator persistently showed sign of personal
interest in Petitioner’s case and frequently used police to scare and
remove Petitioner but Petitioner continued to excise its DUE PROCESS
RIGHTS by written and appearing before the office of the Boston
Immigration Court to file documents, ask questions and make other
written and oral applications.

c. After the failure of Judge D’Angelo to hear/see Petitioner’s
Applications for Asylum (Form I-589) and 99-page supplemental
statement and several exhibits January 26, 2006 through September 7,
2006 and also after October 16, 2007 Judge D’Angelo continued to hide
and put off all individual conference and hearing with the Petitioner.
Same hiding tactics the IJ used to avoid Petitioner prior to October
16, 2007 during the time Petitioner was requesting the Judge D’Angelo
(then unknown) to write, sign and stamp the phrase, BIOMETRIC TEST IS
REQUIRED IN THIS CASE as requested by the Nebraska Service Center and
Federal Surgeon. After October 16,
34

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

2007 as well as prior October 16, 2007 all written and oral requests
to meet Judge D’Angelo were stopped via use of police force by the
Boston Immigration Court .

d. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c ) (2008) (Affidavit) and 8 C.F.R. §
1003.23 (c ) (New facts or evidence) - Petitioner’s Motion to Reopen
8 C.F.R. §3.2(c) (3)(ii) was Verified and filed with Affidavit and
SWORN in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §1746. See subparagraph 6(b)Judge
Matthew D’Angelo’s STANDING ORDERS. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23 (c ) was filed
with several New facts or evidence. See pages 000158 – 000190 of
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record.” These evidences are
new because there not part of any documents filed between November 16,
2005 (first appearance before Immigration Judge) through October 16,
2007.(last or final appearance and hearing before Immigration Judge)

E. ARGUMENT

Factual historic bad faith must be cleared and argued
to determine the endless unusual conditions on the ground in the NIGER
DELTA REGION and the questionable reason why Respondent/Plaintiff,
Judge Matthew D’Angelo and BIA have used uncharged, irrelevant and
unfactual issue or expired Biometric Test and other irrelevant issue
such as placing Petitioner on racist terrorist watch list to override
Application for Asylum in
35
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Safe Country (hereinafter, “United States of America acclaimed global
campaigner for justice, human rights, rule of law, freedom, democracy
and related campaign”) and particular application for asylum with
several credible past, present and future physical and psychological
and other persecutions and tortures (see below).

The foreign and domestic sponsored or paid persecutions
against Petitioner and other citizens of the NIGER DELTA REGION have
escalated without lapse since 1935 when the first oil exploration
license was granted by the British Colonial Administrators to Shell
Oil Company to explore and take home to UK oil revenue of this region
of Nigeria . Since then the secret policies and practices of these
administrators and their allies have been to kill and suppress all
learned and civil liberties campaigners that desire to aspire to high
offices in Nigeria or question economic, political, social,
environmental and human or cultural rights of the citizens of the
region. Petitioner is leader and major stakeholder in the NIGER DELTA
REGION aspiring to be the President of Nigeria 2007 or 2011. Colonial
to post-colonial era NOTHING HAS CHANGE to the limited extent that
death changes the conditions of every leader and campaigner and other
citizens of the region.

score of exhibits to determine whether or not there is well-founded
fear of past present and future persecution that was objectively
reasonable but in place IJ D’Angelo and BIA held on to unknown/
uncharged or expired biometric test which remain expired at the
instance of Immigration Court and Judge D’Angelo. See Da Silva v.
Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2005).

BIA and IJ failed to rely on several credible past,
present and future physical and psychological and other persecutions
and tortures submitted to the Boston Immigration Court and IJ
D’Angelo including on-going charges with treason and other felonies
against Petitioner (1st and 2nd Petitioners) which must lead to death
penalty upon conviction in Nigeria (See Government of Nigeria v. Ken
Saro-Wiwa (1995); Government of Nigeria v. Dele Giwa (1986);
Government of Nigeria v. Kudirat Abiola (1996); Government of Nigeria
v. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume (Federal High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 –
present and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu &Asaba Delta State, 1991 –
present, etc); Government of Nigeria v. Maureen Ngozi Ofume (Federal
High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 – present and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu
Delta State 1991 – present, etc);Government of Nigeria v. MKO Abiola
(1998); etc.); series of failed physical and other failed
assassination including community attacks; water and food poisoning;
present conditions in the United States; homelessness and forced to be
sleeping street to street and barred by police to sleep in the
sanctuary of its church (CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS)
37
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

because of the paid action of the IJ D’Angelo and BIA in the United
States; politically designed sanction on over 98% of Petitioner’s
means of livelihood in Togo, Canada and in the United States of
America because of the moneyed and politicized action the IJ D’Angelo
and BIA and forcible removal/deportation of 3rd Petitioner/
Respondent (Kleber Odimegwu Ofume, elder son) on March 10, 2009 to
Nigeria where the petitioner fear death and other harms; etc.etc.etc.

The duty of the Board of Immigration Appeal (BIA) which
include but unlimited to power to review fact and law was grounded to
the extent of failure to review conditions as to whether there are
credible past, present and future physical and psychological and other
persecutions and tortures. This duty was fatally and outrageously
neglected for no just reason. These grounds are located in
Petitioner’s Application for Asylum, 99-page Supplemental Statement
and score of exhibits showing past, present and future indicators with
factual and current histories of credible past, present and future
physical and psychological and other persecutions and tortures
aforelisted which Petitioner submitted to Boston Immigration Court,
BIA and IJ.

To uncover reason why unexpired Biometric was not ready
on October 16, 2007, IJ and Boston Immigration Court censored the only
important hearing which was on June 5, 2007 and in place IJ and Court
38

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

manufactured June 4, 2007 to censor important discussions,
instructions, shared responsibilities and directions. See
"Respondent's Certified Administrative Record” pages 000601 – 000645.

Petitioner fled Nigeria in December 1996 after persistent
or endless physical and psychological tortures and persecutions and
since then in Togo, Canada, etc the government of Nigeria refused to
grant lead Petitioners (Dr. & Mrs. Ofume) and their entire family
amnesty and never visited Nigeria contrary to SOLANGE LEVEILLARD
RAVIX, ET AL. v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL, United States
Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 08-1128.

Apart from the treason and other political felony charges
brought against Dr. & Mrs. Ofume, over three forms of treasons and
felonies were brought against Dr. Ofume and other leaders of the
NIGER DELTA REGION (see Federal High Court, Abuja Nigeria) because Dr.
Ofume led international NGOs to declare that the on-going CIVIL WAR
between the nation of Nigeria and nation of the Niger Delta is
constitutional and lawful under Nigeria Constitution and UN
International law of self-defence and self-determination; that the
citizens of the Niger Delta Region has right to quit the federation of
Nigeria; Obasanjo and Yar’Audua be brought before the UN International
Criminal Court under Rome Convention of July 28, 1998 for committing
direct and indirect genocides against the citizens of the Niger Delta;
etc.
39

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Under a very visible political gain and alliance,
Judge D’Angelo and BIA ignores the screening as to the credibility of
the level of past, present and future persecution on account of race,
religion, nationality, membership in a social group, or political
opinion. Judge D’Angelo and BIA ignored Petitioner’s Applications for
Asylum (Form I-589) and 99-page supplemental statement and several
exhibits filed with the Boston Immigration Court before the final
hearing on October 16, 2007. In these submissions, there are several
well-founded fear of PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE psychological and
physical tortures and persecutions that were sufficiently objectively
reasonable. See Da Silva v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2005).
Reason that these moneyed and criminal Nigerian politicians,
lawmakers, leaders and their allies have been fleeing along the flee
axis of the Petitioner to disrupt Petitioner’s lawful activities, the
IJ and BIA could have used the action of these criminals against the
Petitioner in the United States if the IJ and BIA are unable to tap
the torture and persecution resources oversea. North-South-East-West
of Nigeria where Petitioner’s relations and extended families live
inside and outside Nigeria are monitored via telephone, e-mail, etc
and each time they are located, these criminals and their allies use
direct and indirect measures to intimidate them and severe contact
with Petitioner.

1993 – present, after chain of intimidation directed
against Petitioner’s relations
40

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

and extended families, only two extended family members left the
underground and continued to communicate with Petitioner. In Nigeria ,
only one was allowed to work and the other one has been monitored
everywhere to make sure no employer employ him. Several months ago,
when the remaining that was working with American International
Insurance, Lagos Nigeria persisted in communicating with the
Petitioner, she was fired and now they are still troubling her and
penetrated her nuclear family with the intention to force divorce of
her marriage as these criminals have done to majority of the active
citizens of these region inside and outside the United States of
America. The nuclear and extended families of the 2nd Petitioner (Mrs.
Maureen N. Ofume) are mistreated and divided into piece as the
families of the lead Petitioner. 3rd Petitioner is hunted and chased
place to place including blocking his access to right to work and get
other services across Nigeria because they accused him of
communicating with his parents and siblings and sending information
about the pains he suffers in Nigeria and speaking about the
presidential bid of his parents. This Court (US Court of Appeal for
the First Circuit) and the President of America have been petitioned
to return him to America because his deportation is unlawful and
unconstitutional. US Court of Appeal for the First Circuit is biased
against Petitioner because of Petitioner’s campaign for democracy
which this court and others claimed made President Barack H. Obama to
defeat their preferred candidates (Senators Hilary Clinton, John
McCain, etc).
41

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Under failed charge [( 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] against
the Petitioner, IJ and BIA abandoned these major grounds and relied
on expired biometric test which is not part of the charge and another
question at issue whether empty and unrelated charge or evidence is
capable of overriding a serious case of an Application for Asylum
which is directly connected with lives of seven children and two
parents that will be sentenced to die by public firing squad or
hanging until pronounced or certified dead by physicians. It has
been standing secret agreement between the longstanding puppet
leaders, politicians and lawmakers of Nigeria and foreign allies that
all leading members of the NIGER DELTA REGION charged with treason
must be sentenced to death and swiftly hanged and in prison given
poison to die or directly and indirectly assassinated. See completed
and on-going cases: Government of Nigeria v. Ken Saro-Wiwa (1995);
Government of Nigeria v. Dele Giwa (1986); Government of Nigeria v.
Kudirat Abiola (1996); Government of Nigeria v. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume
(Federal High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000 – present and Magistrate Court
Owa Oyibu &Asaba Delta State, 1991 – present, etc); Government of
Nigeria v. Maureen Ngozi Ofume (Federal High Court Abuja Nigeria 2000
– present and Magistrate Court Owa Oyibu Delta State 1991 – present,
etc);Government of Nigeria v. MKO Abiola (1998); etc.

These charges are designed by the government of Nigeria against 1st
and 2nd Petitioners /Respondents and other citizens of this oil/gas
rich and impoverished region as secret plan to eliminate or cleanse
Dr. & Mrs.
42
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Ofume and majority of the NIGER DELTA REGION stakeholders, and efforts
must be made by the government of America and UN International law
particularly the Convention of July 28, 1951 to stop this systemic
genocide or ethnic cleansing. In Abuja , Nigeria the secret criminal
court documents of the Government of Nigeria show that July 1999
through present, over one thousand one hundred and thirty six (1,136)
citizens of the NIGER DELTA REGION have been charged with treason and
other felonies. The research and investigation conducted by the
petitioner's agents in Nigeria show that 1st Petitioner is #17 and 2nd
Petitioner is #228 (see secret court documents called absentia charges
and proceedings - The Federal High Court, Abuja , Nigeria ).

Under a very visible political gain and alliance,
Judge D’Angelo and BIA ignore the screening as to the credibility of
the level of past, present and future persecution on account of race,
religion, nationality, membership in a social group, or political
opinion. Judge D’Angelo and BIA ignored Petitioner’s Applications for
Asylum (Form I-589) and 99-page supplemental statement and several
exhibits filed with the Boston Immigration Court before the final
hearing on October 16, 2007. In these submissions, there are several
well-founded fear of PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE psychological and
physical tortures and persecutions that were sufficiently objectively
reasonable. See Da Silva v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2005).
Reason that these moneyed and criminal Nigerian politicians,
lawmakers, leaders and their allies have been fleeing along the
43
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

flee axis of the Petitioner, large domestic and international interest
holders questioned reason why the IJ and BIA failed to use the
present action of these criminals against the Petitioner in the
United States if the IJ and BIA are unable to tap the torture and
persecution resources oversea. North-South-East-West of Nigeria where
Petitioner’s relations and extended families inside and outside
Nigeria are monitored via telephone, e-mail, etc and each time they
are located, these criminals and their allies use direct and indirect
measures to intimidate them and severe contact with Petitioner.

NO CHANGE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE NIGERIA : In Petitioner
case, the IJ and BIA clearly found but deliberately sanctioned all
credible and imminent threats amounting to severe forms of torture
and persecution directed against the Petitioner. Because of the action
or decisions of the BIA and IJ Petitioner became more and more
vulnerable to the extent of allowing these criminals that have removed
several billion of dollars of the wealth of Nigeria and in part
invested this money into political assassination, terrorism, rendering
Petitioner homeless and expose to bitter cold to kill them without
stitches. See Un v. Gonzales, 415 F.3d 205, 210 (1st Cir. 2005).
1993 – present, after chain of intimidation directed against
Petitioner’s relations and extended families, only two extended family
members left the underground and continued to communicate with
Petitioner. In Nigeria , only one was allowed to work and the other
one has been monitored everywhere to make sure no employer employs
him. Several months ago, when the remaining one that was working with
American
44
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

International Insurance, Lagos Nigeria persisted in communicating with
the Petitioner, she was fired. Flee of lead Petitioner (Dr. Phillip C.
Ofume) and police harassment may have triggered the sudden ill-health
and death of the father of Dr. Ofume who was sound and healthy and
was head and paramount leader of Petitioner’s Community in the Niger
Delta Region (see Nigeria Supreme Court case - .Echenim Ofume v. Isaac
Mgbeke – Land Trespass under Customary or Traditional Land Use Decree
of Nigeria). Release of the news of the death of Dr. Ofume’s father
was blocked for over one year and moderate securities warned Dr. Ofume
to stay away from Nigeria . In Canada , with the support of the United
Nations, Dr. Ofume applied for voluntary repatriation directly to
President Olusegun Obasanjo and apart from the fact that President
Obasanjo refused to sign the amnesty, moderate securities warned Dr.
Ofume not to visit west Africa and Nigeria and that all plans are in
place to arrest and detained him that appearance and proceedings
before the Abuja Federal Court will be swift. The family of the lead
Petitioner (Mrs. Maureen N. Ofume) is also badly shattered and divided
by national and international secret operatives and many were forced
to go underground to save their lives.

Recently,1993 Petitioner’s physical and psychological
tortures and persecutions escalate worst to worst with PAST, PRESENT
AND FUTURE momentum including recent charges of treason and other
political felonies purpose of highly conspired plot to kill lead
Petitioners (1st and 2nd
45
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Petitioners); notwithstanding that economic persecution (child
benefits, social security card, healthcare, Identification card, job
authorization, telephone and other communications, cash benefit, food
stamps, shelter or permanent home, etc) is not relevant when over 98%
of means of livelihood in the US were sanctioned thus additionally,
on August 19, 2009 Petitioner was rendered homeless, after weeks of
sleeping from street to street, sought protection in its church
(Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’) sanctuary, Revere, MA
but after one night Petitioner was forcibly removed by Revere Police
Department and Petitioner continued to sleep street to street in
Washington, D. C. and sleeping in another Christian Church sanctuary
in Fredericksburg , VA. ; restating that without criminal record and
conviction of any criminal act, on March 10, 2009 forcibly deported
3rd Petitioner to Nigeria where parents are facing treason and other
political felonies. 3rd Petitioner is now hiding here and there in
Nigeria . Recently or 2000 – present, escalation of the Petitioner’s
physical and psychological tortures and persecutions escalate worst to
worst because lead Petitioner’s bid for the President of Nigeria 2007
and 2011.

The history of the physical and psychological tortures
and persecutions directed against lead Petitioners (Dr. & Mrs. Ofume)
and their family shows that there is NO TIME LAPSE in the scale of the
PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE physical and psychological tortures and
persecutions against Petitioner. Particularly, lead Petitioners
suffered and continue to suffer inside and outside Nigeria and other
detention/prison now
46
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

with alarming record of passing through in and out of prison/
detention for 300 times. For example, 1993 – present, any emerging
tomorrow, in Nigeria, Togo, Canada and in the US because of the action
or decisions of the BIA and IJ, Petitioners suffered and continues to
suffer and escaped several plots of assassination, food and water
poisonings, community attacks, and the family fled Canada to the
United States and these rivals crossed border into the United States
and created this case and over 30 lawsuits and back to oversea
(Nigeria) new and old political criminal charges including treason and
other political felonies have been brought against lead Petitioners
which are sure to terminate their lives soon as they return to Nigeria
(See above)

Unlike the case of Ravixes which this Court heard and
found, TIME LAPSE in the scale of the PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE
physical and psychological tortures and persecutions against them;
Petitioner’s case has NO TIME LAPSE in the scale of the PAST, PRESENT
AND FUTURE physical and psychological tortures and persecutions
against Petitioner:
Solange, Emile, and the two children (SOLANGE
LEVEILLARD RAVIX, ET AL. v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL,
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 08-1128).
This family was charged with offense of remaining in the United States
more time allowed [( 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B)] but went further to
apply for asylum and withholding of removal supported with another
prong which is
47
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

humanitarian ground or CAT.

In the United States to be entitled to grant of asylum,
applicant must establish a well-founded fear of future persecution on
account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a social group,
or political opinion. Petitioner is persecuted on account of race,
religion, nationality, membership in a social group, or political
opinion. Lead Petitioner started opposing the mistreatment against
Moslems since 1972 and its family is Christian (Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints) and Moslem and Petitioner is hated because of
its religious belief particularly that Sharia law is good to save
corrupt and indecent society on first part; Petitioner hail from the
race or region known as the NIGER DELTA REGION and the entire citizens
of this region are suffering systemic genocide on second part;
Petitioner is membership of Nigerian social group called Ika Awareness
Movement and Niger Delta Region or Nigerian Liberation Movement on
third part; Lead Petitioner Political Opinion is hated by Nigerian
politicians, lawmakers, leaders, foreign and domestic oil/gas
companies and their foreign and domestic grantors on fourth part; on
ground of nationality Petitioner’s nation or NIGER DELTA which has
over 95% of the wealth of Nigeria but impoverished is hated and the
civil liberties fighters and campaigners including Petitioner are
branded terrorist as tool to implement genocide and race/ethic
cleansing on fifth part; etc.
48

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Inside and outside the United States , no case other
than Petitioner’s case with outrageous physical and psychological
tortures and persecutions with application for asylum is severe and
captured domestic and international public interests as Petitioner’s
case. See breaking news: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=
ofume+v.+george+w.+bush+et+ al&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=TODAY
(12/29/2009): HIT 357,000,000. This serious case in which several
lives fear death and the entire citizens of the region or homeland of
the Petitioner or NIGER DELTA REGION fear death or systemic genocide
because of the oil/gas in their region and the call for environmental
protection and self-determination.

Domestically and internationally, United States of
America is known for saving the lives of persecuted and tortured
people and peoples facing related harm. Under this condition and
effort, Expired Biometric which did not expire at the instance of the
failure of the Petitioner to present unexpired biometric and even at
other edge, even if Petitioner was charge under expired biometric,
under this global life saving efforts no court in the United States of
America can send people or Petitioner to die because of expired
biometric test which remain expired at the instance of the IJ,
Immigration Court, Federal Surgeon, and Nebraska Service Center.
Petitioner has completed part of its responsibility to get unexpired
Biometric Test but IJ, Immigration Court , Federal Surgeon, and
Nebraska Service
49
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Center (see below) failed to accomplish their part of this shared
responsibility.

Petitioner further argues, that comparatively, this
case with past, present and future physical and psychological
tortures and persecutions closely and directly pointed on Petitioner
particularly the heavy weight of the present and pending charges of
treason and other felonies, deadly homelessness and targeting minors
or Petitioner’s children with the intention to summarily cleanse the
entire family, DUE PROCESS RIGHTS were suppressed in judicial
screening to know the relevance of Biometric Test which could have
been done and presented by Petitioner on October 16, 2007 if IJ,
Immigration Court, Federal Surgeon, and Nebraska Service Center had
accomplished their part of these shared responsibilities as Petitioner
has done. IJ violated due process rights of the Petitioner by not
allowing Petitioner to defend its Application for Asylum (completed
and signed Application for Asylum – Form I-589 and 99-page
supplemental statement and exhibits in support of application) to know
whether uncharged and unnecessary issue or expired biometric is
sufficient to override a case relating to the endangered lives of nine
people in the United States. Petitioner’s case is different from the
case of McCreath v. Holder, No. 08-2276 because,

a. BIA and IJ used unwarranted discretion without respect for
Petitioner’s due process rights to screen fact and law regarding the
50
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

power of expired biometric test and the power of death or genocide and
also power to save the lives of nine (9) people in a constitutional
democratic institution (nation) like the United States of America ;

b. BIA under used its agency power when it copied IJ decision
without reviewing the past, present and future harms which have
endlessly confronted Petitioner – see above, Petitioner’s present and
pending charge with treason and other felonies which must lead to
death; homelessness under bitter/severe cold; and forcible deportation
to country where Petitioner fear death and other harm in
breach of the United Nations Convention of July 28,
1951;

c. BIA and IJ rulings were not supported by any evidence and
thus could not serve as any fundamental and other basis to override a
case which has potential of leading to death of nine (9) innocent and
armless children, men and women.

Now every evidence point at asylum case which seeks
safe place to save life and Biometric Test is not necessary under well
founded asylum case with past, present and future persecution
including on-going treason charge which must lead to death of several
people in Petitioner’s family. Therefore, when low-key or uncharged
issue such as renew of biometric test, Judges inside and outside any
constitutional judiciary has discretion to heed partial verdict which
will enable the Judge to correct IJ and Court failure to
51
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

issue the phrase that BIOMETRIC TEST IS REQUIRED IN THIS CASE thus,
in place of cutting down the case as an abandoned case and indirectly
sentenced the Petitioner to death by swiftly ordering scattered
deportation of Petitioner to three different countries without mercy
and respect for any US constitution, Bill of Rights and UN
international law (see UN Convention of July 28, 1951).

Immigration charge against Petitioner was brought by the
Respondent/Plaintiff under [( 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] and the Respondent/
Plaintiff did not pursue this charge to asserted a valid defense at
trial to get conviction and also the Respondent/Plaintiff failed on
October 16, 2007. Also Respondent/Plaintiff had over two(2) years and
did not amend its charge [( 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] against Petitioner to
include Biometric Test and the charge was allowed to die and rest
permanently. IJ and BIA erred in granting the Government's motion for
judgment on the pleadings because, according to the facts alleged by
defendants, they could have asserted a valid defense at trial. On
October 16, 2007 another attorney represented the Respondent/Plaintiff
and on Petitioner’s Motion to
Reopen a different attorney represented the Respondent/Plaintiff. On
the October 16, 2007 when Petitioner requested hearing on merit of its
completed and signed and verified Application for Asylum – Form I-589
and verified 99-page supplemental statement and exhibits in support of
application, attorney for the Respondent/Plaintiff did not oppose and
when Judge D’Angelo forced another break, the Attorney for the
52
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Respondent/Plaintiff admitted in protest against the conduct of the
Judge and said “you (Dr. Ofume) have done this case better than
several attorneys in this country” During Judge D’Angelo long break,
the attorney went to an office within the JFK Building to get several
copies of the NEW EVIDENCE (in part letters and materials which
Petitioner mailed to Nebraska Service Center and copies to the office
of District Attorney, Court and others). These documents are part of
the NEW EVIDENCE mentioned above which were attached as exhibits in
support of Petitioner Motion to Reopen.

FURTHER GROUNDS OF REVIEW BY COURT OF RECORD -

NOTHING was done by the BIA and IJ because in determining Petitioner’s
petition for review a review court with standing record must go down
the drain of the fact and law of the case before it to find out that
if its charge was merit type such as the impetus of being supported
by authentic exhibits. See Lee v. City of Los Angeles , 250 F.3d 668,
688-89 (9th Cir. 2001). Additionally, a court with responsive standing
record need not “accept as true allegations that are merely
conclusory, ‘copied’, unwarranted deductions of fact, or unreasonable
inferences.” Also see Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979,
988 (9th Cir. 2001).

From point to point, before and after 1993 through present
and
53

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

beyond, there is well-founded evidence of persecution and physical or
direct fear of persecution on account of Petitioner's political belief
and association, ethnicity and race , campaign for civil liberties,
etc. See Caal-Tiul v. Holder, No. 08-2464 (09/10/2009). The present
charge of treason and other felony charges are cook up against 1st and
2nd Petitioners to kill them and stop them from emerging as the first
President hail from this oil/gas rich and impoverished region, NIGER
DELTA. Unlike Matovu v. Holder, No. 08-2391 (08/21/2009) and Lopez-
Castro v. Holder, No. 08-1895 (08/19/2009), from the Respondent/
Plaintiff's failed charge [( 212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] to the shared
responsibility on how to renew Petitioner's Biometric Test and the
present serial systemic cleansing plot against the Petitioner and
other citizens of the NIGER DELTA REGION of Nigeria, charge with
treason and felony charges against the Petitioner and several citizens
of this region, there is proof of past, present and future harms
against Petitioner.

The conditions of the Petitioner in Nigeria , Togo ,
Canada and United States of America are determining factors to confirm
that the persecution against Petitioner has no TIME LAPSE and become
worst and worst day by day. The passages and landing of the
Petitioner's persecutors from country to country and the ability of
these persecutors to buy service providers, politicians, lawmakers,
etc inside and outside Nigeria to the extent of rendering them
homeless in the United States and forced them to be living and
sleeping in bare church floor without bed, mattress, warm clothes,
etc. is sufficient to determine strong serial and endless past,
present and future
54
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

persecution which will lead to death when Petitioner will be sent
investigators to Nigeria to face treason and other felony charges.
The worst miscarriage of justice is that BIA and IJ allowed irrelevant
issue (Biometric Test to overrule these serious asylum case. See
Hussain v. Holder, No. 08-2214 (08/10/2009).

Boston Immigration Court and BIA, denial of the
entire relief sought by the Petitioner because of Expired Biometric
with several new evidence is wholly based on the BIA and IJ's Judge
D'Angelo's or Immigration Court 's personal political interests for
Canada and others, business in Nigeria and their collaborating allies.
In September 2009 when more Federal Surgeons were appointed in
Petitioner's city ( Lynn , MA ) and certain policy/practice changed on
how to do Biometric Test, Petitioner used the opportunity to redo the
test and applied for pre-review conference to enter the test as NEW
EVIDENCE.

IMPORTANCE OF NEW EVIDENCE AND TIME OF ADMISSION

Petitioner has done its Biometric Test on September 24, 2009. The
question which maybe asked is whether Petitioner's new CERTIFIED
BIOMETRIC TEST is OLD or NEW or MATERIAL EVIDENCE in
55
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

this Petition? Petitioner's CERTIFIED BIOMETRIC TEST dated September
24, 2009 is new and material evidence in this case. The age of the
evidence under contest is not important but whether it can cause
delivery of justice or save life and society or change the course of
the case as path to justice.

Petition further argues with solemn plea that this
honourable court do its determination, by applicable standard for new
and material evidence established by Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App.
171, 174 (Vet. App. 1991). In accordance with this case law,
Petitioner's position is that NEW or MATERIAL EVIDENCE requires that
there be "a reasonable possibility that the new evidence, when viewed
in the context of all the evidence, both new and old, would change the
outcome."

From page to page and paragraph to paragraph, the
decisions of the IJ and BIA and the entire Petitioner's Appeal and
Petition for Review directly and indirectly based its submissions on
IMMIGRATION BIOMETRIC TEST or MEDICAL EXAMINATION. Without reason, BIA
copied the decision of the IJ and what the Petitioner appealed is one
decision created by the IJ and copied by the BIA.

Reason that Petitioner stated and restated BIOMETRIC
TEST from point to point in Petitioner's Notice of Appeal and Petition
for Review therefore EXPIRED BIOMETRIC TEST becomes the ONLY grounds
of the
56
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Petition for Review and Petitioner has adequately unearthed reason
unexpired biometric test was not available on October 16, 2007.
Petitioner emerges with the argument that its asylum case is the type
which is widely known as persistent physical and psychological
persecution and torture and that politicized personal interest or
uncharged interest of the IJ which is BIOMETRIC TEST is not sufficient
to send Petitioner to die in Nigeria where Petitioner is charged with
treason and other political felonies. Per the evaluation of the
importance of Biometric and Identity Management for advancing Science
and enhancing operations (see US Executive Order November 23, 1993 or
horn of Mr. President to control US National Science and Technology
Council – NSTC) scores of criticism were launched against the failure
of this science in needy time to secure the work of Homeland
security. Question of the failure of Biometric following the
post-9/11 and the disappointment earned so far brought angry NSTC
Director, John H. Marburger, III (Letter to Colleagues dated
09/11/2008) wrote, “While federal efforts in biometric technologies
predate the terrorists attacks of September 2001 by several decades,
this report focuses on progress made since then.”

The IJ and BIA raised issue of IMMIGRATION BIOMETRIC
TEST or MEDICAL EXAMINATION and is major part of the administrative
record and it's bona fide part of the IJ's removal order because the
removal order tagged "ABANDONED" because of recent or unexpired
biometric test. The question is who and who are responsible? Hearing
on
57
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

June 5, 2007 which was censored and covered with fictitious hearing
dated June 4, 2007 by the IJ and Boston Immigration Court is cure to
shared responsibility by IJ D’Angelo and who to blame for the absence
of unexpired Biometric Test on October 16, 2007.

The weight of the case argued above and the action of
the Petitioner to immediately redo the medical examination or
biometric test when more federal surgeons were appointed in Lynn, MA
and several conditions imposed by the former federal surgeon or
government in part waived, Petitioner swiftly redid its immigration
biometric test or medical examination. BIA and IJ ought to have
handled the case with care because it involves several God given lives
of innocent children, men and women (hereinafter, “Petitioner”).

Under this crucial point, the route to save life must
be taken by justice and life saving court and the only way to do this,
is to take new evidence which is completed and sealed immigration
biometric test or medical examination which will be part of the
Petitioner's "new collateral challenge" in this case and widely
evidenced good ground to list this evidence. See Calderón v.
Thompson, 523 U.S. 538 (1998); see also In re Davis, 2009 WL 2486475
(U.S. Aug. 17, 2009) (appellant's original petition for writ of habeas
corpus remanded to district court to consider alleged new evidence of
innocence, eighteen (18) years after conviction for murder of a police
officer). In outright dissent, Justice Scalia questioned whether any
of
58
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

"the allegedly new evidence" was in fact new,... In the Petitioner's
case Petitioner's sealed and approved immigration BIOMETRIC TEST or
medical examination by APPROVED US Federal Surgeon is totally NEW
EVIDENCE.

The scaring point is the faces of the Petitioner and
onlookers because US law courts have persistently advocated for
exemplary justice with pious example. Under this case, it’s simple for
this type of judicial system to lay foundation for good example
because if the decisions below were based on the charge [212(a)(7) (A)
(i)(I)] brought against the Petitioner, the route to reverse the
decision below (court and agency) maybe more uneven but here comes an
uncharged footprint from nowhere and called EXPIRED BIOMETRIC TEST
which is used under political interest to sentence seven (7) children
and their two (2) parents to death in Nigeria where justice is worst
than kangaroo landing scheme.

This case, and its outcome below and if downside
repeated above will be more disgusting and cause enormous judicial
embarrassment for the judicial giant of the world. It is one of the
most read cases in the world and below before IJ and BIA is a
notorious example of oppressive injustice, abnormal and excessive use
of the discretion of Judge of record thus, culminating in an
outrageous politicized or moneyed adjudication. Domestic and
international interests have already rated the positions of the IJ and
BIA as a gruesome stain on American justice in greater part because
59
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

the Respondent/Plaintiff was given two opportunities to amend its case
and it failed to plead Biometric Test as part of the charges brought
against the Ofume family on November 16, 2005 and thereafter.

On June 5, 2007 the imposed IJ Matthew J. D'Angelo spent
several minutes to do the discussion on division of labour (Adam
Smith) between the Immigration Court and Nebraska Service Center and
Federal Surgeon and IJ and Petitioner. Petitioner has perfectly and
excellently done its part in this shared responsibility and thereafter
Petitioner can not become Immigration Court, Nebraska Service Center,
Federal Surgeon and IJ. If Immigration Court and IJ had done their
parts, Petitioner with large family with minimum income under severe
poverty level would have swiftly completed its part immediately to
feed its starving and poor family.

Petitioner further argues that if Biometric Test is
not part of the charges brought against the Petitioner therefore,
Biometric Test can not be imported into the case purpose of
generating tool to dismiss Petitioner’s application for asylum which
comes with death and other vicious harms..

Following the refusal of the Judge & Clerk to
write, sign and stamp a phrase, "BIOMETRIC TEST IS REQUIRED IN THIS
60
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

CASE" to enable the family redo the EXPIRED BIOMETRIC TEST as
requested by the Nebraska Service Center, Petitioner has accomplished
its obligation in this case and reason that Petitioner can not
takeover the job of the IJ, Immigration Court, Nebraska Service
Center, Federal Surgeon, etc.

Also Petitioner has no official and other powers to force
the Federal Surgeon to perform the test and also Petitioner is
powerless to force Nebraska Service Center and other local branches to
issue BIOMETRIC TEST appointment to enable the Ofume redo its
Biometric test. Fear to die in Nigeria and the bitter starvation of
the entire family of petitioner because of lack of relief in this case
show that if the IJ, Immigration Court, Nebraska Service Center and
Federal Surgeon have fulfilled their own obligation and
responsibility, Petitioner would have swiftly rush to redo its
Biometric Test. Reason of death and harsh starvation and poverty which
tie them head to toe Petitioner/Respondent is very eager to redo the
BIOMETRIC TEST but the IJ and Clerk of Court refused to write, sign
and stamp the phrase, BIOMETRIC TEST IS REQUIRED IN THIS CASE. The US
Federal Surgeon that performed and completed the immigration medical
examination or Biometric Test on September 24, 2009 would testify to
the fact that Petitioner responded to scores of medical tests and
multiple instructional drills to make complete tests within less than
two weeks.
61

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Domestic and international publics that perused the decision of the
BIA and IJ were alarmed that the BIA agreed with the decision of the
IJ on two serious weak and trump up claim following:

a. Uncharged and unconnected parts or Biometric Test of a case or
application for safety or asylum which stands on dangerous and deadly
grounds that if the application is denied would lead to the death of
the accused person or Petitioner. In-between search for fact and law
BIA limited its decision to direct copy of the IJ decision and both
BIA and IJ limited its decisions to unconstructive credibility finding
and failed to discuss Petitioner's eligibility for relief which is
life saving or search for safe country because of the hunt for its
life by cruel regime and also failed to unite the family in response
to US Constitution/Bill of Rights and UN Convention on the Right of
the Child. See Kartasheva v. Holder, No. 08.2243 (09/11/2009).

b. More and more the big lies that Petitioner's Motion to Reopen (8
C.F.R. § 3.2(c)(3)(ii) filed and denied under the IJ’s falsified
allegation that the Motion was not supported by AFFIDAVIT whereas the
Motion was verified or Sworn under Oath and filed in accordance with
28 U.S.C. § 1746. On November 16, 2005 Consolidation of this case by
Judge Thomas M. Ragno
62
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

requires that one affidavit be filed comprising the entire family (see
above – hearing and order of Judge Ragno on November 16, 2005 and this
what Petitioner has done also in accordance with Judge D’Angelo
STANDING ORDER (see above).

Notwithstanding that the Respondent/Plaintiff lost its
charge against Petitioner on October 16, 2007 and Judge D'Angelo did
not allow the Petitioner to talk, defend its application for asylum
and over 120 exhibits (see pre-final hearing supplemental submission -
99 pages) but Judge D'Angelo cornered the final hearing into
unconnected and uncharged claim of expired biometric and tagged
Petitioner's case as being ABANDONED whereas maintained 100% assiduity
through out the proceedings.

The moneyed and political conduct of the IJ and
Immigration Court which pushed him on October 16, 2007 to order
deportation of the petitioner (seven children and Dr. & Mrs. Ofume) to
three (3) countries is contrary to the firm and judicious Order of
Judge Thomas M. Ragno. On November 16, 2005 Judge Ragno issued an
important Order relating to the Consolidation of the Petitioner's case
and consolidated under single docket No. 97-446-370 and further
ordered that the petitioner's family is one and if deportation is
entered Petitioner must be deported to one country. Under persistent
persecution under paid action by Nigerian government and its allies,
against
63

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

the country of deportation designated by the Petitioner, on March 10,
2009, 3rd Petitioner was forcibly deported to Nigeria where they fear
death and other harms.

F. RELIEF

For ONLY reason of substantial evidence that past, present and future
physical and psychological persecutions and tortures exist without
TIME LAPSE and are known and visible inside and outside public places
and draw massive public interests and in strong escalation following
the inauguration of Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume’s bid for the President
of Nigeria 2007 and 2011 and declaration in Petitioner’s native
homeland, NIGER DELTA REGION that the on-going CIVIL WAR in the
Region is lawful and constitutional under domestic and international
laws of self-defence and self-determination and led to emergence of
terrible charges of treason and other felonies which must lead to
death sentence upon conviction with punitive recommendation of death
by hanging or public firing squad; forcible deportation of the first
child of Petitioner’s family to Nigeria where Petitioner fear death
and other harms; past and present heartless rendering Petitioner
homeless under bitter cold (January 27, 2006 – present); etc

Respecting the foregoing, Petitioner requests this honourable Court to
reverse the politicized decisions of the BIA and IJ. Petitioner’s
asylum case
64
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

relates to politicized case on which Nigerian politicians, lawmaker,
government and their allies have used money to derail course of
justice and rule of law purpose of terminating the life of future
president of Nigeria or lead Petitioner, Dr. Ofume before election
2011. See http://www.phillyimc.org/en/event/dr-phillip-chukwuma-ofume-president-nigeria-2011-complete-political-manifesto

Further reason of the forgoing, Petitioner requests this honourable
Court to save its life by seeing beyond the scope of the BIA and IJ
political ideology and sympathy for Petitioner ‘s political opponents
and reverse the decisions of BIA and IJ pursuant to the United Nations
Convention of July 28, 1951 (Definition through Articles 1 – 28) US
version on the rights and status of Refugees and Asylees; United
Nations Convention Relating to the Status of refugees (“CRSR” ) and
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”) because of homelessness under bitter
cold; US Immigration and Nationality Act Title 8 Chapter 12,
Subchapter II, Part I Section 1159 – Adjustment of Status of Refugees
to enable Petitioner save its life in the United States; Title 8
Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part I Section 1158 (3)(c) including
Section 1157; US Federal Tort Claims Act particularly 28 U.S.C.
sections 2674 and 2675 (a); Title 5 U.S.C sections 702 and 704; etc.;
United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title II 42 U.S.C. sec. 200a
(a) and 42 U.S.C. sec.
65

Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

200a(b)(1); Title III 42 U.S.C. sec. 200c et seq.; Title VI 42 U.S.C.
sec. 200d et seq.; The Constitution of the United States of America -
42 U.S.C. sec. 1983; Eight Amendment to the United States
Constitution; etc.

G. CONCLUSION

Specific reason of the foregoing, Petitioner urge this Court to
reverse the decisions of the BIA and IJ PURPOSE of path to save the
life of seven (7) children and two (2) parents.

Respectively submitted,

______________________
Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D. – Representative/Advocate for the Ofume
Family or Petitioner
5933 Plank Road,
Fredericksburg, VA 22407

Dr. Phillip C. Ofume, and Mrs. Maureen N. Ofume
and seven children ,

66
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

Tel. (781) 556-1464
E-mail: limpt...@gmail.com,
globalaids_hiv...@yahoo.co.uk
Webs.: http://www.phillyimc.org/en/event/dr-phillip-chukwuma-ofume-president-nigeria-2011-complete-political-manifesto;
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=ofume +v.+george+w.+bush
+et+als&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi= ;
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=ofume+v.+george+w.+bush+et+al&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi

______________________________________________________________________

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
_______________________________________________
Civil Appeal No. 09-1610
_______________________________________________

IN REMOVAL
PROCEEDINGS

In the Matter of:

ERIC J. HOLDER, JR. (United States Attorney General)
RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF
_____________________________________________________________

Petition for Review from the Decision of The Board of Immigration
Appeal Docket No. 97-446-370.
_____________________________________________________________

BRIEF OF THE PETITIONER
____________________________________________________________

1
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

_______________________________________________________________

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH
TYPEFACE AND LENGTH LIMITATIONS
______________________________________________________________

1. This brief has been prepared using:

[X] 14 point proportionally spaced, typeface such as Times New Roman.

Specify software name and version, typeface name, and point size below
(Times New Roman - 14 Point):

[ ] 10 _ characters per inch, monospaced typeface (such as Courier or
Courier New). Specify software name and version, typeface name, and
character per inch below (for example, Wordperfect 8, Courier 10 _
CPI):

2. EXCLUSIVE of the corporate disclosure statement; table of contents;
table of citations; addendum; and the certificate of service, this
brief contains:

[ ] _________ pages (may not exceed 30 pages for opening or answering
brief or 15 pages for reply brief); OR

[X] 12,900 words (may not exceed 14,000 words for OPENING or
PRINCIPAL brief or 7,000 for brief reply); OR

[ ] _________ lines of monospaced type (may not exceed 1,300 lines for
opening or answering brief or 650 for reply brief; may be used ONLY
for briefs prepared in monospaced type such as Courier or Courier
New).

I understand that a material misrepresentation can result in the Court
striking the brief or imposing sanctions. If the Court so directs, I
will provide a copy of the words or line print-out.
2
Ofume v. Eric H. Holder - Civil Appeal No. 09-1610

The difficulty which I encountered is that the case has assembled
large documents since year 2003 and I tried but failed to over
summarize the brief under paper reduction act. It will amount to
obstruction of justice and disadvantage Petitioner if I eliminate
major content of the case. Finally, I tried to make the brief contain
some of the major fact to present reasonable principal brief.

____________________
Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D. Pro se

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Phillip Ofume, certify that I caused copies of the Petitioner’s
brief; Table of Content; appendix; Certificate of Compliance; and
Petitioner’s Separate Volume of Addendum Containing Sealed Documents
to be “FILED UNDER SEAL” to be served by Regular mail, on the
Respondent/Plaintiff’s Attorney:

Tim Ramnitz - Attorney
Tony West - Assistant Attorney-General (Civil Division)
Barry J. Pettinato - Assistant Director
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Immigration Litigation
P. O. Box 878, Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044
Tel. (202) 616-2686
Fax: (202) 305-4829

_____________________
Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D. – Representative/Advocate for the Ofume
Family

December 30, 2009.

Further copies to:
3

anita

unread,

Jan 2, 2010, 2:42:03 PM1/2/10

Good day. My name is Anna. I live in Slovakia in Central Europe. I´m
searching for a contact to my family. Their names are Albert Palof,
Mary Palof. My great-grandma was her sister. I have their address, but
on the Internet, their house was not there. Number of their house was
6520, but on net is only the number 6522, and 6518. Please, help me. I
would like to find someone from my family. How and where I can to
contact them. Has the USA some list of citizens? Or can I find family
tree somewhere? Thank you.

0 new messages