U.S. DISTRICT COURT
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #16-cv-01053-CRC
CRUMPACKER v. CIRAOLO-KLEPPER et al
Assigned to: Judge Christopher R. Cooper
Date Filed: 06/06/2016
16-cv-00420 DWAILEEBE v. MARTINEAU
16-cv-01384 MORRIS v. McMONAGLE
16-cv-01458 MCGARVIN v McMONAGLE
16-cv-01768 PODGORNY v. CIRAOLO-KLEPPER
16-cv-2089 DeORIO v. CIRAOLO-KLEPPER
Mark Crumpacker lives in the Los Angeles, California area and is a highly-skilled technician who maintains and repairs the tools and equipment used by doctors and dentists in their everyday medical practice.
Mark sought assistance filing his lawsuit after battling the IRS, DoJ and the notoriously corrupt U.S. District Court Judge Percy Anderson for years as a Defendant.
He waged a valiant fight, but, despite entering evidence into the record proving that his alleged federal income tax liability was created by fraud, the Court ruled in favor of the IRS, and his fully-paid for home was seized and sold at auction. His work truck and most of his tools and diagnostic instruments were also seized. He now rents a small room from a stranger and struggles to service his clients with his remaining tools.
His case is an administrative nightmare caused entirely by the District Court and serves as a textbook example of DoJ and Judicial Branch collusion, judicial malfeasance, denial of Due Process and violations of numerous federal criminal statutes by Government attorneys and Federal judges.
The following is a rundown of the facts:
June 6, 2016 - Original Complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and assigned to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan.
August 15, 2016 - DoJ filed its Answer and Counterclaim (Countersuing Mark Crumpacker, Michael Ellis and me and requesting that the Court enjoin, or stop, us from filing, or assisting in the filing of any more cases without requesting permission from the Court to do so.)
September 12, 2016 - Crumpacker/Ellis/McNeil filed their Answer and Cross-Counterclaim, responding to the DoJ's Counterclaim and also joining DePolo, Dwaileebe, Morris, McGarvin and Podgorny to the case as Co-Plaintiffs. [NOTE: The Answer and Cross-Counterclaim was never entered into the record by the Court Clerk].
September 29, 2016 - DoJ filed a Notice of Related Cases.
September 30, 2016 - Ellis filed a Motion for Summary Judgment.
October 3, 2016 - The case was reassigned from Judge Tanya S. Chutkan to Judge Christopher R. Cooper.
October 7, 2016 - DoJ filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted.
October 14, 2016 - Ellis filed a Revised Motion for Summary Judgment.
October 17, 2016 - Crumpacker filed an Objection to the Consolidation of his case to Judge Cooper and Motion to Recuse Judge Cooper.
October 21, 2016 - Judge Cooper issued an ORDER consolidating Crumpacker, Morris, Dwaileebe, McGarvin and Podgorny onto his docket. The Order also DENIED the “Motion to Sua Sponte Sanction DoJ Attorneys” in Dwaileebe v. Martineau, et al. (16-CV-420). Most shocking, however, is the final paragraph in that order in which Judge Cooper states “It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Counterclaim Defendants in Crumpacker, Case No. 16-1053 – Michael Ellis, Robert McNeil, and Mark Crumpacker – shall file either an Answer or a dispositive motion with respect to those counterclaims on or before November 18, 2016, on the Crumpacker docket only.” The problem is this. Judge Cooper ordered us to file an answer to the Government’s counterclaim by November 18, 2016, but, we had already done so on September 12, 2016. So, I sent a letter to the U.S. District Court Clerk’s office requesting a copy of the Crumpacker docket sheet and, when I received it, our Answer was missing. I then called the Clerk’s office to inquire about it and was told that all documents had been transferred from Judge Chutkan’s chambers to Judge Cooper’s chambers and that’s where our “Answer and Cross-Counterclaim” was then. It was then that we realized Judge Cooper was withholding documents to keep them from being entered into the record.
October 21, 2016 - Judge Cooper issued an ORDER denying Crumpacker's Objection to Consolidation and Motion to Recuse.
October 23, 2016 - McNeil filed a “Notice of Attempted Filing of Rule 60 Motion to Vacate Judgment in 14-471” (Ellis v. Commissioner) based on Judge Amy Berman Jackson's rewriting of Ellis' allegations to justify her dismissal of his case, and that her errant "facts" were being used as precedent by the DoJ as justification for dismissing all cases complaining of the IRS' record falsification scheme.
October 23, 2016 - McNeil filed an Objection to United States' Motion to Dismiss Crumpacker.
November 4, 2016 - Co-Plaintiffs filed a Rule 23(f) Petition for Permission to Appeal Denial of Class Certification and Appointment of Counsel.
November 4, 2016 - Co-Plaintiffs filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Prohibition.
December 5, 2016 - Judge Cooper issued an ORDER denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay pending the outcome of the Writ of Mandamus.
December 31, 2016 - Judge Cooper issued an ORDER finding as moot Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment.
December 31, 2016 - Judge Cooper issued an ORDER granting DoJ's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. On the same day, Judge Cooper also issued an identical one-sentence “ORDER Granting the DoJ’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction” in 16-CV-420 Dwaileebe v. Martineau, et al., 16-CV-1384 Morris v. McMonagle, et al., 16-CV-1458 McGarvin v. McMonagle, et al., and 16-CV-1768 Podgorny v. McMonagle, et al.
Now is when things get interesting.
In early January, I contacted each of the Plaintiffs and asked them to email me a copy of their December 31st dismissal order from Judge Cooper so I would have a complete file of all documents. Each of them sent me a 2-sentence Order, with no Memorandum Opinion attached, explaining the reason(s) for the dismissal. Prior to these cases, all Plaintiffs had received one. This Memorandum typically provides case cites and other information supporting the Judge's opinion and forms the basis for an appeal.
Meanwhile, I was curious about the status of 16-CV-2089 Norma DeOrio v. Ciraolo-Klepper, et al. This case had been filed on October 17, 2016, but, no government response had been filed in the record. So, on January 10, 2017, I called the Clerk's office for the U.S. District Court in D.C. to inquire about the status of the case and was told that, on December 8, 2016, Ms. DeOrio’s case was consolidated with the above-referenced cases and assigned to Judge Christopher Cooper. I was also told the case had been dismissed on December 31, 2016 along with the others. Believing that the dismissal would be in the same form as the others, I then asked if there would be a Memorandum Opinion issued, stating the reason for the dismissal. The Clerk’s office transferred my call to Ms. Davis, Judge Cooper’s Case Administrator. I asked Ms. Davis if there would be a Memorandum Opinion issued, stating the reason for the dismissal and her response was "No, that is the only order that will be issued.”
On January 18th, I emailed Ms. DeOrio's son and asked him to send me a copy of Norma's dismissal order and was told she never received it. I immediately called and talked to Judge Cooper's Court Deputy (Ms. Lauren Jenkins) who confirmed that Judge Cooper issued the Order of Dismissal on December 31, 2016. She was not in the office during that time, however, and the Court records she reviewed did not show the date the Order was mailed to Norma. She said it would have been sent First Class mail, however, which does not have a tracking number. I informed her that Ms. DeOrio had not received the Order and asked if she would mail it again, and Ms. Jenkins agreed to do so.
On January 27, 2017, Ms. DeOrio's son emailed Norma’s copy of Judge Cooper’s Order to me. When I opened the document, however, I was shocked to see a five-page Opinion and Order, signed by Judge Cooper on December 31, 2016, with case cites and a full explanation of the reasons he dismissed the case. I was also shocked to see that, beginning on the first page and continuing to the second, the Opinion and Order listed the names of Plaintiffs Dwaileebe, Morris, Crumpacker, McGarvin, Podgorny, and Norma DeOrio. This document was only mailed to Norma DeOrio and was never sent to the other five Plaintiffs.
Now, the story goes back to 16-1053 Crumpacker v. Ciraolo-Klepper, et al.
On January 23, 2017, Judge Cooper issued to the Government an Order to Show Cause, which stated: "Seeing no response to the Defendants' counterclaims, [see Minute Order on 9/8/2016] the Court hereby ORDERS Defendants to show cause in writing by January 30, 2017 why the counterclaims should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 1/23/2017 [McNeil NOTE: At this point, Judge Cooper still has not acknowledged our Answer and Cross-Counterclaim filed on September 12, 2016].
January 26, 2017 - Crumpacker filed a Rule 59(e) Motion to Alter/Amend the December 31, 2016 Judgment dismissing the case.
January 30, 2017 - DoJ Attorney Ryan McMonagle filed a Response to the Show Cause Order issued by Judge Cooper on January 23rd. In his response, Mr. McMonagle admitted that, on or about September 22, 2016, the United States had been served with an answer to its counterclaim by the counterclaim defendants (us). He also admitted that, although the United States had been served with an answer and purported cross-counterclaim, "that pleading does not appear on the Court's docket." In fact, Mr. McMonagle had attached a copy of our Answer and Cross-Counterclaim as Exhibit A to his response to the Show Cause Order. Based on this information, Mr. McMonagle also filed a "Declaration" stating "Because I received by mail a purported 'answer' from the counterclaim defendants, I do not believe I could in good faith represent to the Court that the counterclaim defendants have 'failed to plead or otherwise defend' the United States' counterclaim. Accordingly, the United States has not sought the entry of a default judgment.' He then requested that Court extend the deadline for the United States to file a dispositive motion from January 30 to February 28, 2017.
January 31, 2017 - In light of the Government’s Response to Order to Show Cause, Judge Cooper issued a Minute Order in which he: 1) deemed our Answer and Cross-Counterclaim to have been properly filed as of January 30, 2017 [NOTE: which is 4 1/2 months after we actually filed it and thirty days after he improperly dismissed the case without ever reading or considering it]; 2) granted the Government leave to file a dispositive motion on its counterclaims by February 28th, and; 3) also ordered Counterclaim Defendants (us) to file an opposition on or before March 14, 2017.
January 31, 2017 - Judge Cooper issued a Minute Order denying the January 26th Rule 59(e) Motion to Alter/Amend Judgment.
Due to the Clerk's failure to file our Answer and Cross-Counterclaim into the record back in September 2016; dismissing six (6) cases without ever considering our Answer; and the multiple false statements he made in his Orders, Judge Cooper had huge mess to clean up.
So, we decided to help him.
February 16, 2017 - In the case 16-1053 Crumpacker v. Ciraolo-Klepper, et al, we filed a Motion to Notice and Admonish Clerk’s Service Error, Loss of Documents, Etc. with the Clerk of Court for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This Motion was accompanied by the following Exhibits:
Supplemental Rule 59 Motion
Declaration of Robert A. McNeil
USPS Proof of Service – September 12, 2016, 3:20 p.m.
And for Refiling to Correct the Record:
Plaintiffs’ Answer to Counterclaim and Cross-Counterclaim
Plaintiffs’ Seven (7) Declarations in Support of Cross-Counterclaim
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify a Class and for Appointment of Counsel Paid by the Government
McNeil Declaration with Evidence of IRS’ Institutionalized Record Falsification Program
February 28, 2017 - DoJ attorney McMonagle filed his Motion for Permanent Injunction against Michael Ellis and Robert McNeil (i) barring the counterclaim defendants from filing future legal challenges against the IRS or Department of Justice without first obtaining leave of court; and (ii) directing counterclaim defendants Ellis and McNeil to conspicuously post a copy of the injunction on McNeil’s website, www.RAM-v-IRS.com.
February 28, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants’ Motion to Certify a Class and for Appointment of Counsel Paid by Government, was entered onto the Court docket, despite the fact it was mailed to the Court five months earlier on September 12, 2016.
February 28, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants’ (Crumpacker, McNeil and Ellis) Answer of Counterclaim and Original Cross-Counterclaim was entered onto the Court docket, despite the fact it was mailed to the Court five months earlier on September 12, 2016.
February 28, 2017 - Judge Cooper DENIED Leave to File Plaintiffs’ Motion to Notice and Admonish Clerk’s Service Error, Loss of Documents, Etc., mailed to the Court on February 16, 2017.
February 28, 2017 - Judge Cooper GRANTED leave to file Cross-Counterclaim Plaintiffs' Supplemental Rule 59e Motion to Correct Clear “Errors” and Manifest Injustices.
March 2, 2017 - Judge Cooper DENIED Cross-Counterclaim Plaintiffs' Supplemental Rule 59e Motion to Correct Clear “Errors” and Manifest Injustices, Motion to Certify a Class and for Appointment of Counsel Paid by Government, and GRANTED DoJ’s Motion to Dismiss Cross-Counterclaim.
March 13, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants filed their Opposition to Motion for Permanent Injunction.
March 21, 2017 - DoJ attorney Ryan McMonagle filed the Government’s Reply in Support of its Motion for Permanent Injunction.
March 22, 2017 - Mark Crumpacker filed his Notice of Appeal in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
March 29, 2017 - U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia assigned Case #17-5054 to the Crumpacker appeal.
April 19, 2017 - Judge Cooper GRANTED the Government’s Motion for Permanent Injunction and issued his Order and Memorandum Opinion.
April 26, 2017 - Judge Cooper DENIED Counterclaim Defendants Leave to File their Response to U.S. Reply In Support of Motion for Permanent Injunction.
May 22, 2017 - Judge Cooper GRANTED Counterclaim Defendants Leave to File their Rule 59 Motion to Alter and or Vacate Sanctions.
June 2, 2017 - DoJ attorney McMonagle filed United States’ Memorandum in Opposition to Counterclaim Defendants’ Motion to Alter or Vacate Judgment.
August 8, 2017 - U.S. Court of Appeals (USCA) for the District of Columbia, on its own motion, Ordered that USCA cases 17-5054, 17-5055, 17-5056, 17-5057, and 17-5058 be held in abeyance pending the U.S. District Court’s disposition of Counterclaim Defendants’ Rule 59 Motion to Alter and or Vacate Sanctions.
August 9, 2017 - Judge Cooper issued a Minute Order denying Counterclaim Defendants’ Rule 59 Motion to Alter and or Vacate Sanctions.
August 14, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants’ Supplemental Record on Appeal was transmitted to USCA per Judge Cooper’s August 9, 2017 Minute Order.
August 16, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants filed Notice of Appeal as to Order to Rule 59 Motion to Alter and or Vacate and paid $505.00 filing fee.
August 22, 2017 - U.S. District Court transmitted the Notice of Appeal to USCA.
August 23, 2017 - USCA established case number 17-5191.
September 18, 2017 - DoJ attorney Ryan McMonagle filed Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Counterclaim Defendants Should Not Be Held in Contempt, with Memorandum in Support and text of Proposed Order. [Note: This Motion was filed in retaliation for our filing Case 17-cv-1720 McNeil v. Harvey, et al., which DoJ claimed was a violation of Judge Cooper’s April 19, 2017 Injunction.
September 18, 2017 - DoJ attorney Ryan McMonagle filed Exhibit A: 17-cv-1720 Original Complaint to Motion for Order to Show Cause Why McNeil and Ellis Should NOT Be Held In Contempt.
September 28, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants filed Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Counterclaim Defendants Should Not Be Held in Contempt.
October 3, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants filed MOTION for Recusal of the Honorable Christopher Cooper.
October 11, 2017 - DoJ McMonagle filed Reply to Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Counterclaim Defendants Should Not Be Held in Contempt.
October 11, 2017 - DoJ McMonagle filed Memorandum in Opposition to Counterclaim Defendants’ Motion for Recusal of the Honorable Christopher Cooper.
October 20, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants filed Reply to DoJ’s Memorandum in Opposition to Counterclaim Defendants’ Motion for Recusal of the Honorable Christopher Cooper.
October 20, 2017 - Judge Cooper GRANTED LEAVE TO FILE Counterclaim Plaintiffs’ Surreply to Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Counterclaim Defendants Should Not Be Held in Contempt.
December 13, 2017 - Counterclaim Defendants filed Motion to Correct the Record (regarding alleged late filing of May 15, 2017 Rule 59 Motion).
December 15, 2017 - Judge Cooper issued a Minute Order Granting Counterclaim Defendants’ filed Motion to Correct the Record.
December 22, 2017 - DoJ attorney Ryan McMonagle filed Second Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Counterclaim Defendants Should Not Be Held in Contempt, with Memorandum in Support and text of Proposed Order.
January 3, 2018 - Judge Cooper Granted DoJ’s Second Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Counterclaim Defendants Should Not Be Held in Contempt and Ordered Counterclaim Defendants McNeil and Ellis to appear before the Honorable Christopher R. Cooper in Courtroom 27A on March 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM to show cause why they should not be held in contempt for failing to obey the order of permanent injunction entered against them by this Court on April 19, 2017.
January 4, 2018 - Set/Reset Hearings: Show Cause Hearing set for 3/1/2018 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27A before Judge Christopher R. Cooper.
January 8, 2018 - Supplemental Record on Appeal transmitted to US Court of Appeals re Order on Motion to Amend/Correct, USCA# 17-5191.
January 8, 2018 - REPLY to opposition to motion re 56 MOTION for Recusal filed by MICHAEL BEALS ELLIS, ROBERT A. MCNEIL. "LEAVE TO FILE GRANTED" by Judge Christopher R. Cooper.
January 9, 2018 - MINUTE ORDER: The Court granted Counterclaim Defendants leave to file 66 Reply to Opposition re: Motion for Recusal and 67 Surreply re: Motion for Order to Show Cause on October 20, 2017 but neglected to forward the stamped pleadings to the Clerk for filing on the docket. Both documents are deemed to have been filed on October 20, 2017.
January 9, 2018 - MANDATE of USCA as to Case Number 17-5054 Consolidated with 17-5055, 17-5056, 17-5057, 17-5058. (Attachments: # 1 order filed September 13, 2017)
January 9, 2018 - ORDER of USCA as to Case Number 17-5054 Consolidated with 17-5055, 17-5056, 17-5057, 17-5058.
January 23, 2018 - ORDER of USCA ORDERED that the motion for judicial notice be dismissed as moot, the motion for rebriefing be denied and that appellants reply brief is now due within 14 days from the date of this order as to 50 Notice of Appeal filed by MICHAEL BEALS ELLIS, ROBERT A. MCNEIL. USCA Case Number 17-5191.FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus be dismissed as moot in part and denied in part.
January 24, 2018 - Judge Cooper ORDER directing the Clerk's office to open a miscellaneous case to adjudicate issues related to 44 the April 19, 2017 Pre-Filing Injunction issued against Robert McNeil and Michael Ellis.
January 24, 2018 - Judge Cooper ORDER denying 56 Motion for Recusal. A copy of this Order shall also be filed on the docket in case number 18-mc-00011, which has been opened to adjudicate issues related to the April 19, 2017 Pre-Filing Injunction in this matter.
January 24, 2018 - SHOW CAUSE (2) Issued as to MICHAEL BEALS ELLIS, ROBERT A. MCNEIL pursuant to Order to Show Cause.
May 16, 2018 - MANDATE of USCA as to 50 Notice of Appeal filed by MICHAEL BEALS ELLIS, ROBERT A. MCNEIL ; USCA Case Number 17-5191.
May 16, 2018 - ORDER of USCA for Case Number 17-5191.
August 15, 2018 - MANDATE of USCA as to 50 Notice of Appeal 16-5334 Consolidated with 16-5335, 16-5336, 16-5337, and 16-5338.
August 15, 2018 - ORDER of USCA for cases 16-5334, 16-5335, 16-5336, 16-5337, and 16-5338.
Following are the Docket Sheets containing links to all the documents filed in this case:
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
17-5191 USCA Docket Sheet