FDA Appeal for Oral Argument
No. 99-16746
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________________________________
PAUL W. MASON
Plaintiff and Appellant
v.
DONNA SHALALA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH
AND
MICHAEL FRIEDMAN, ACTING DIRECTOR OF FDA
Defendants and Appellees
_________________________________________________________
ON APPEAL FROM
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DIST. OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIV.
HON. JEREMY FOGEL PRESIDING
U.S.D.C. No. C-97-20686 JF
_________________________________________________________
APPELLANT'S MOTION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR
ORAL ARGUMENT; CITATION OF NEW AUTHORITY
_________________________________________________________
Paul W. Mason, In Pro Per
P O BOX 1417
Patterson, CA 95363
Tel: (408) 897-3023
Fax: (408) 897-3028
paulmason@mgwater.com
Plaintiff-Appellant Mason hereby (a) Motions for Oral
Argument, (b) sets forth reasons why oral argument should be
heard in this case, (c) presents a citation of new, pertinent, and
significant Supplemental Authority.
Prof. Jerry Goldman studied the Ninth Circuit Screening
Program, and concluded that the perception of justice may be
compromised by screening;1 i.e., lack of oral
argument. Perception of justice is crucial in this case, which
involves a FDA blunder and coverup of 10,000,000 deaths since
1930, with needless deaths continuing at a rate equal to the
entire Viet Nam War every 100 days. If this Appeal should be
dismissed without oral argument, it would most likely appear to
some people as an exhaustion of legal remedy, capping the
previous exhaustion of the FDA's administrative remedy, and thus
leaving no recourse but direct physical remedy against the
death-causing agencies.
While I am not willing to make the same sacrifices that John
Brown made, I do have over 100,000 web-visitors per annum to my
Magnesium Web Site at http://www.mgwaters.com, with an average
visit time of 2.5 minutes each, and with many repeat visitors
spending many hours on my site. At least a few of these visitors
may feel a need to do something to stop a Crime Against Humanity,
as did John Brown 150 years ago, or Raoul Wallenberg 55 years
ago. Oral argument may be a useful signal that the judicial
system does work, and is willing and able to stop a crime against
humanity, and that the heroics of a modern John Brown will not be
required.
NEW, PERTINENT, AND
SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY:
On 12/31/00, President Clinton signed the 1998 Rome Treaty
providing for an International Court of Justice to prosecute
genocides and crimes against humanity in those instances in which
national courts fail to stop any genocide or crimes against
humanity. While this treaty is not expected to be ratified by the
Senate any time soon, it does raise the expectation that this
court must be
equal to the challenge of stopping this American genocide and
crime against humanity, without supervision or oversight from the
International Court of Justice.2
Respectfully submitted,
Paul Mason, Appellant pro se January 10, 2001
_________________________
Jerry Goldman, Appellate Justice Economized: Screening and Its
Effect on Outcomes and Legitimacy, in Restructuring Justice 138
(Arthur D. Hellman ed., 1990). See also, Paul D. Carrington et
al., Justice on Appeal 17 (1976).
http://app.comm.uscourts.gov/report/comments/GOLDBLA0.htm
January 1, 2001. U.S. Newswire, Statement by the President,
released by the White House. (see attached copy).
This page was first uploaded to The Magnesium Web Site on
March 21, 2001
http://www.mgwater.com/
Healthy Water
Association--USA