Petition for Rehearing — Gregory Shawn Mercer, Petitioner v. E. A. Vega

No. 20-348

3fn f&fje

Supreme Court of tfje tHniteb States

GREGORYS. MERCER,

Petitioner,

vs.

E. A. Vega, et ol.

Respondents.

On Petition For Writ Of Certiorari To The United

States Court Of Appeals for The Fourth Circuit

PETITION FOR REHEARING

Gregory Shawn Mercer,

Petitioner, pro se

3114 Borge Street

Oakton, Virginia 22124

202-431-9401

1

PETITION FOR REHEARING

This is a 12/1/20 Petition for Rehearing in

accordance with SCOTUS Rule 44.2 of Petitioner’s

9/11/20 731-Page (includes cover) Petition for Writ of

Certiorari which was intercepted by agents of

Respondents after it was filed with/delivered to the

SCOTUS Guard behind the SCOTUS Building on

.9/11/20 at or about 2:55 pm. This was a 9/11/20

Obstruction of Justice involving fraudulent use of the

two SCOTUS Guard Booths behind the SCOTUS

Building on 2nd Street, NE, Washington, DC.

Petitioner’s 648-Page Appendix was removed from his

9/11/20 Petition for Writ of Certiorari by agents of

Respondents. A 12-Page Unauthorized Prejudicial

Appendix was substituted for Petitioner’s 648-Page

Petition for Writ of Certiorari Appendix by agents of

Respondents. Page number two (2) stating "8,995

Words” was removed from Petitioner’s associated

9/11/20 4-Page (includes cover) Certificate of

Compliance by agents of Respondents. The first five

(5) pages including the Adhesive “Clerk-Stamped”

Cover Page stating "TB468 RECEIVED SUPREME

COURT U.S. POLICE OFFICE 2020 SEP 11 P 2:55”

were removed from Petitioner’s associated 9/11/20 7Page Certificate of Service. Then Petitioner’s three

SCOTUS Filings (9/11/20 Petition for Writ of

Certiorari and Appendix with associated Certificates

of Compliance and Service) were returned to the

SCOTUS Clerk who entered onto the SCOTUS

Website what was received from the SCOTUS Police

Office at the SCOTUS Clerk’s Office. This was the

only in-person filing method available to Petitioner for

his SCOTUS documents on 9/11/20. For more specific

2

details about the Obstruction of Justice by agents of

Respondents using the two SCOTUS Guard Booths

when Petitioner filed on 9/11/20, please see attached

10/27/20 “Affidavit of Gregory Shawn Mercer”

and attached 10/28/20 “Corrected Affidavit of

Kashavera S. Williams. ”

This 9/11/20 Obstruction of Justice by agents of

Respondents fraudulently using the two Guard Booths

behind the SCOTUS Building was a violation of the

intent of SCOTUS Rule 1.2 (protecting SCOTUS

Filings from Obstruction of Justice/Fraud after those

Filings have been received by the SCOTUS). Current

SCOTUS Rule 1.2 has not been substantially modified

since at least 1989 (Petitioner filed in-person a

previous SCOTUS Case No. 94-21066 inside the

SCOTUS Building). In order to keep current with the

changing in-person filing methods to the SCOTUS

Clerk’s Office, current SCOTUS Rule 1.2 needs to be

updated. In-person filing methods to the SCOTUS

Clerk’s Office changed between 1994 and 2020. Inperson fifing methods to the SCOTUS Clerk’s Office

now necessitate personally handing SCOTUS Filings

to a SCOTUS Guard behind the SCOTUS Building at

a SCOTUS Guard Booth on 2nd Street, NE,

Washington, DC. This requirement was due to past

episodes of Anthrax contained in delivered mail and

the current COVID-19 Pandemic (Mask required) as

Petitioner understands it. This Petition for Rehearing

with two attached AFFIDAVITS explains in detail

the current vulnerability of SCOTUS documents filed

in-person at the SCOTUS. Petitioner adopts and

incorporates the entire Appendix attached hereto as

if rewritten verbatim hereat:

3

1989 SCOTUS Rule 1.1 - “The Clerk shall

maintain the Court’s records and shall not

permit any of them to be removed from the

Court building except as authorized by the

Court. Any pleading, paper, or brief filed with

the Clerk and made a part of the Court’s records

may not thereafter be withdrawn from the

official Court files. ...”

2019 SCOTUS Rule 1.2 - “The Clerk maintains

the Court’s records and will not permit any of

them to be removed from the Court building

except as authorized by the Court. Any

document filed with the Clerk and made a part

of the Court’s records may not thereafter be

withdrawn from the official Court files. ...”

This Petition for Rehearing concerns an

intervening circumstance of a substantial or

controlling effect after Petitioner filed his three

SCOTUS documents: 9/11/20 Petition for Writ of

Certiorari and Appendix with associated Certificates

of Compliance and Service.

This Petition for

Rehearing concludes with a signed CERTIFICATE

that it is presented in good faith and not for delay

§1746

followed by a signed 28 U.S.C.

DECLARATION that this entire Petition for

Rehearing is true and correct.

Petitioner was born in Houston, Texas (Harris

County) and fives in Northern Virginia. In accordance

with U.S. Amendment XIV [A214], Petitioner is both

a United States Citizen and a Virginia Citizen entitled

to and protected by the Federal Rights in the

Constitution of the United States being the first ten

4

U.S. Amendments to that U.S. Constitution known as

the U.S. Bill of Rights [A217]. On 3/28/18, Petitioner

invoked his U.S. Amendment VII Right to Trial by

Jury [A214] in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia (herein and hereafter “VAED”) by

filing through counsel Gregory S. Mercer u. E.A. Vega.

Case No. l:18-cv-346-LO-TCB.

In the VAED,

Petitioner’s 3/28/18 Complaint was dismissed without

prejudice by 4/3/18 Order [A27-29] so Petitioner again

invoked his U.S. Amendment VII Right to Trial by

Jury [A214] in the same Case No. l:18-cv-346-LOTCB by filing his 4/16/18 First Amended Complaint

[A286-293] which states:

“PRAYER FOR RELIEF - WHEREFORE,

Plaintiff Gregory S. Mercer, by counsel,

demands for: ... C. Trial by Jury [A292-293].”

The nine Justices of this SCOTUS take two

oaths (5 U.S.C. §3331 and 28 U.S.C. §453) to support

and defend the Constitution of the United States

inclusive of U.S. Amendment VII and to administer

justice equally without respect to persons:

., do solemnly swear (or affirm)

that I will support and defend the Constitution

of the United States against all enemies, foreign

and domestic; that I will bear true faith and

allegiance to the same; that I take this

obligation freely, without any mental

reservation or purpose of evasion; that I will

well and faithfully discharge the duties of the

office on which I am about to enter. So help me

God.”

“I,

5

j do solemnly swear or affirm

that I will administer justice without respect to

persons, and do equal right to the poor and to

the rich, and that I will faithfully and

impartially discharge and perform all the

duties incumbent upon me as (Associate/Chief)

Justice of the Supreme Court of the United

States, according to the best of my abilities and

understanding, agreeably to the constitution

and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

“I,

In a Summary Judgment Proceeding where

Judges or Justices decide whether or not there exists

one or more Jury Question(s) that must proceed to a

Jury Trial and in order not to infringe on the invoked

U.S. Amendment VII Right to Trial by Jury (not

Bench Trial) of the non-moving Party that invoked

this Right, the accepted legal standard is for the

Judges or Justices to give the Party that invoked the

Right to Trial by Jury (here the Plaintiff/Previous

Plaintiff) the benefit of the doubt by viewing all facts

and any justifiable inferences from those facts in the

fight

most

favorable

to

the

non-moving

PlaintiffTPrevious Plaintiff. From Petitioner’s 9/11/20

Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Pages 21-22:

“The Fourth Circuit and this SCOTUS have

already ruled about procedures in Summary

Judgment Proceedings. Anderson v. Liberty

Lobby. Inc.. 477 U.S. 242, 248-49, 106 S.Ct

2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) (“A fact is material

when proof of its existence or nonexistence

would affect the outcome of the case, and an

issue is genuine if a reasonable jury might

6

return a verdict in favor of the nonmoving party

on the basis of such an issue.”) [A58-59, D3,

024]. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith

Radio Cory„ 475 U.S. 585-88 n. 10 & 11, 58687, 106 S.Ct 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986) “A

party moving for summary judgment has the

initial burden of establishing the basis for its

motion and identifying the evidence which

demonstrates the absence of a genuine issue of

material fact. Id. Once the moving party

satisfies its initial burden, the opposite party

may show, by means of affidavits or other

verified evidence, that there exists a genuine

dispute of material fact.”) [A102-103, D3, G5,

H5, J40, 023-24],

U.S. v. Carolina

Transformer Co.. 978 F,2d 832, 835 (4th Cir.,

1992) (“In reviewing a summary judgment

motion, the court must “draw all justifiable

inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.”)

[Al57-158, G5-6, H5, 32, 50, J40, L42, 024].”

According to Respondent E.A. Vega’s 7/30/19

Informal Response Brief in the appeal of Petitioner’s

VAED Summary Judgment Proceeding in the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (herein and

hereafter “Fourth Circuit”), this accepted legal

standard to give the non-moving Previous Plaintiff the

benefit of the doubt is reviewed de novo in the

FOURTH CIRCUIT as Petitioner expects this

SCOTUS will now review Case No. 20-348 herein de

novo:

“This Court reviews the District Court’s ‘grant

of summary judgment de novo, viewing the facts

7

and the reasonable inferences therefrom in the

light most favorable to the nonmoving party.’

Bonds v. Leavitt, 629 F.3d 369, 380 (4th Cir.

2011) (citation omitted). Under Rule 56(c) of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary

judgment may be granted when the pleadings

and evidence show that there is no genuine

issue as to any material fact. Celotex Cory, v.

Catrett. 411 U.S. 317, 322 (1986) [A61, K17,

L77, 01].”

Therefore, Gregory S. Mercer v. E.A. Vega. et al.,

SCOTUS Case No. 20-348 herein is a de novo appeal

of a 3/15/19 to 5/24/19 Summary Judgment Proceeding

in VAED Case No. l:18-cv-346-LO-TCB where

Petitioner was the non-moving Plaintiff filing a

5/22/19 belated Disputed Statement of Facts [A339399, H6-49, L24-54]. Petitioner’s 5/22/19 belated

Disputed Statement of Facts was presented as a

“FRCP Rule 59 Motion for New Trial; Altering or

Amending a Judgment / / Three Additional Motions

on Pages 5-6 and Paragraphs 188 & 189 [A339-399,

H6-49]” following what Petitioner argued was

ABUSE OF DISCRETION by the VAED via a

footnote in its 4/24/19 Memorandum Opinion [A32-43

at A42, Gl-9 at G8], 4/24/19 Order [A43-44], and

4/25/19 Judgment [A44-45J. This VAED Summary

Judgment Proceeding was appealed from 5/24/19 to

2/3/20 in the FOURTH CIRCUIT as Case No. 19-1584

where Petitioner argued there was CLEAR ERROR

by the VAED because the VAED Judge had reviewed

by 5/24/19 VAED Order [A187-189] Petitioner’s

5/22/19 FRCP Rule 59 Motion to alter or amend the

VAED

Judgment

containing

ABUSE

OF

8

DISCRETION. The reviewed 5/22/19 FRCP Rule 59

Motion documented Petitioner’s belated Disputed

Statement of Facts [A339-399, H6-49, L24-54].

Despite the review of Petitioner’s 5/22/19 belated

Disputed Statement of Facts in the VAED Summary

Judgment Proceeding, the VAED Judge had not

viewed Petitioner’s Disputed Facts drawing any

justifiable inferences from those Disputed Facts in the

light most favorable to Petitioner which was the

accepted legal standard of the FOURTH CIRCUIT

and this SCOTUS [A58-59, 61, 102-103, 157-158].

Petitioner petitioned the FOURTH CIRCUIT as he

now petitions this SCOTUS to grant his VAED 5/22/19

FRCP Rule 59 Motion upon remand to the VAED.

With 9/11/20 Obstruction of Justice by agents of

Respondents via fraudulent use of the two SCOTUS

Guard Booths behind the SCOTUS Building which

Petitioner believes was actually a Virginia State

Police Operation conducted on SCOTUS Grounds,

Respondents have created the appearance of an

unwritten Undisputed Statement of Facts which

Petitioner counters with a SCOTUS Disputed

Statement of Facts (this Petition for Rehearing)

containing “affidavits or other verified evidence” being

an attached 10/27/20 “Affidavit of Gregory Shawn

Mercer” and an attached 10/28/20 “Corrected

Affidavit of Kashavera S. Williams.” Respondents’

unwritten Undisputed Statement of Facts are: 1) that

Petitioner on 9/11/20 at or about 2:55 pm did not file a

648-Page Appendix with his [Corrected] Petition for

Writ of Certiorari but 2) instead filed Respondents’ 12Page Unauthorized Prejudicial Appendix with his

[Corrected] Petition for Writ of Certiorari then 3)

9

omitted page two (2) of his associated Certificate of

Compliance indicating that Petitioner’s 7/14/20 to

9/11/20 correction to his 9/11/20 [Corrected] Petition

for Writ of Certiorari brought the Word Count from

13,618 Words to 8,995 Words in accordance with

SCOTUS Rule 33.1(g) and 4) that Petitioner failed to

serve three copies of his 9/11/20 [Corrected] Petition

for Writ of Certiorari on the three Respondents but

instead had relied on the fact that Petitioner had

previously served on Respondents three copies of his

7/2/20 Petition for Writ of Certiorari without the

needed 9/11/20 corrections by mail and private process

server on 7/2/20.

While the argument above establishes that the

accepted legal standard in this SCOTUS de novo

appeal of the 3/15/19 to 5/24/19 VAED Summary

Judgment Proceeding then the 5/24/19 to 2/3/20

FOURTH CIRCUIT Summary Judgment Proceeding

would require this SCOTUS to view all Petitioner’s

Disputed Statement of Facts concerning events of

9/11/20 herein and any justifiable inferences from

those 9/11/20 Disputed Facts in the fight most

favorable to Petitioner, Petitioner points out further

facts and justifiable inferences including the agents of

Respondents’ greatest errors.

• The Adhesive “Clerk-Stamped” Cover Page of

the Certificate of Service for Petitioner’s 9/11/20

Petition for Writ of Certiorari on the SCOTUS

Website does not having a matching “TB468

RECEIVED SUPREME COURT U.S. POLICE

OFFICE 2020 SEP 11 P 2:55” sticker but has a

7/3/20 date because agents for the Respondents

10

clearly violated the intent of SCOTUS Rule 1.2

by removing an actual “Clerk-Stamped”

document from the SCOTUS along with 653

other pages of Petitioner’s documents as

detailed in Petitioner’s 10/27/20 Affidavit;

• Petitioner is of the understanding that four

Justices are needed to grant a Petition for Writ

of Certiorari but five might be needed to grant

a Petition for Rehearing according to SCOTUS

Rule 44.1 (not 44.2) so agents of Respondents’

Obstruction of Justice/Fraud might be

rewarded by this SCOTUS inappropriately.

• See attached USPS receipts

Where

Petitioner served/delivered Respondents in

triplicate his 7/2/20 749-Page (includes cover)

double-sided Petition for Writ of Certiorari

including its 648-Page double-sided Appendix

on or about 7/2/20 then served Respondents in

triplicate his 9/11/20 [Corrected] Petition for

Writ of Certiorari by 27 double-sided

Replacement Pages without major corrections

to the 648-Page Appendix (three Pages edited —

See Petition for Writ of Certiorari Pages 12-13

not pages xii-xiii) which corrected/eliminated 18

pages from the 7/2/20 Petition for Writ of

Certiorari to lower the Word Count from 13,618

Words to 8,995 Words in the 9/11/20 [Corrected]

Petition for Writ of Certiorari, the 7/2/20 USPS

receipt (13 Lb 10.6 Oz; 13 Lb 10.2 Oz; 3rd

Respondent serviced by Private Process Server)

compared with the 9/11/20 USPS receipt (1 Lb

11

4.1 Oz; 1 Lb 2.7 Oz; 1 Lb 4.2 Oz) is indicative of

the fact that 3 [(648/2) - 12] = 936 additional

pages of a 7/2/20 648-Page double-sided

Appendix in triplicate were mailed/delivered to

Respondents on 7/2/20 (exact difference was

actually 1051 pages) - Petitioner’s 9/11/20-filed

648-Page Appendix was much more massive

than only 12 pages or only six double-sided

pages as agents of the Respondents wish this

SCOTUS to believe.

J

• Where Petitioner has argued that the Virginia

Government is

a

Confederate

Police

Government (as opposed to a Confederate Army

Government) that does not respect the U.S.

Supremacy Clause [A218] (See Petition for

Writ of Certiorari Pages 27-34 not Pages xxviixxxiv), Petitioner herein alleges that the

Virginia State Police conducted an extrajurisdictional

9/11/20

Police

Operation

characterized by Obstruction of Justice/Fraud

on SCOTUS Grounds in complete disrespect of

the Sovereignty of this SCOTUS and consistent

with Petitioner’s argument in his 9/11/20

Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Pages 27-34.

• That the SCOTUS Guards in their enforcement

duties which are hampered by Citizens’ Federal

Rights would have an affinity for the Virginia

State Police or Virginia Government such that

the SCOTUS Guards might be expected by

Respondents to be helpful where Petitioner

12

argues in his 9/11/20 Petition for Writ of

Certiorari on Page 33 (not xxxiii) that:

“Virginia needs a

Constitutional

Convention to rewrite the 1971

Constitution of Virginia, Article VI,

Sections 1, 2, and 7 at a minimum so that

the People elect their own Judges and the

Supreme Court of Virginia ALWAYS

(within reason) enforces Virginia and

Federal Rights. The current Virginia

Judicial Branch ought to be decapitated

for gross incompetence. Likewise, the

current Virginia Police Forces ought to

be decapitated for incompetence and

abuse of the People.”

• That SCOTUS Guards may be trained to handle

desperate SCOTUS Litigants then report back

to the nine SCOTUS Justices allowing those

Justices to gain a fuller knowledge of a case so

Justice may be best administered.

Petitioner believes that he should be granted

appropriate Punitive Sanctions as determined by this

SCOTUS for the Obstruction of Justice/Fraud carried

out on SCOTUS Grounds in disrespect of the U.S.

Supremacy Clause [A218] by agents of Respondents

who Petitioner believes were Virginia State Police

Officers.

Petitioner has no way to verify if this 12/1/20

Petition for Rehearing does or does not get intercepted

by agents of Respondents other than by reading what

13

is uploaded to the SCOTUS Website. The SCOTUS

Website, Case No. 20-348, 7/2/20 “Appendix” has 12

Pages that were inserted into Petitioner’s Appendix byagents of Respondents on 9/11/20. These 12 Pages

under “Appendix” are not Authorized by Petitioner,

should be deleted then replaced with Petitioner’s

Authorized 648-Page Appendix attached hereto.

Petitioner moves this SCOTUS to upload to the

SCOTUS Website this entire Petition for Rehearing

with its entire previously adopted and incorporated

Appendix which (short of further Obstruction of

Justice) includes: 1) 10/27/20 6-Page Affidavit of

Gregory Shawn Mercer; 2) 10/28/20 1-Page Corrected

Affidavit of Kashavera S. Williams; 3) 1-Page of

USPS 7/2/20 and 9/11/20 receipts; 4) 9/11/2020 83Page Petition for Writ of Certiorari; 5) the missing

9/11/20 648-Page Appendix; 6) 9/11/20 4-Page

Certificate of Compliance with Page two (2); and 7)

9/11/20 7-Page Certificate of Service with copy of

removed “Clerk-Stamped” cover page.

14

CERTIFICATION OF PRESENTATION IN

GOOD FAITH AND NOT FOR DELAY

I certify that this Petition for Rehearing is

limited to intervening circumstances of a substantial

or controlling effect, is limited to other substantial

grounds not previously presented, is presented in

Good Faith, and is not presented for delay.

On the 1st day of December, 2020

GREMERCER. pro se

28 U.S.C. §1746 DECLARATION / SIGNED

I certify under penalty of perjury under the

laws of the United States of America that the

foregoing is true and correct.

Respectfully Submitted,

On the 1st day of December, 2020

GREgjQRY S. MERCER, pro se

3114 Borge Street

Oakton, Virginia 22124

202-431-9401

AFFIDAVIT OF GREGORY SHAWN MERCER

Pro se Petitioner for SCOTUS Case No. 20-348,

Gregory S. Mercer vs. Eliezel A. Vega, et al.

I Gregory Shawn Mercer, am documenting facts related to my

personal 9/11/2020 filing of my 731-Page Petition for Writ of Certiorari

to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at the

Supreme Court of the United States’ Southern Guard Booth nearest to

East Capitol Street & 2nd Street, NE, Washington, DC. While I have

filed many SCOTUS documents over the years including after SCOTUS

documents needed to be filed outside at the Supreme Court of the

United States’ Northern Guard Booth nearest to A Street & 2nd Street,

NE, Washington, DC, due to fear of anthrax on Court Filings, I have

never filed before 9/11/2020 any SCOTUS documents at the Supreme

Court’s Southern Guard Booth nearest East Capitol Street & 2nd

Street, NE, Washington, DC. I now believe this anomaly on 9/11/2020

at or about 2:55 pm was part of a bold and carefully designed fraud

against me which I explain below.

The Fourth Circuit denied my 12/12/2019 Informal Petition for

Rehearing on 2/3/2020 setting a 90-day deadline according to SCOTUS

Rule 13.1 or until 5/3/2020 to file my Petition for Writ of Certiorari in

the SCOTUS. By the 3/19/2020 SCOTUS Order due to COVID-19, this

deadline was extended to 7/2/2020. I concentrated on writing my 648Page Appendix first then finished up with my 9,000-word Facts and

Argument Sections last. On 6/28/2020,1 realized I was running over

the 9,000-word limit for my Facts and Argument Sections so I wrote an

Application with the Fourth Circuit’s assigned Circuit Justice (Chief

Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.) to extend the 9,000-word limit which I

filed at the Supreme Court’s Northern Guard Booth on 2nd Street, NE.

By SCOTUS Rule 33.1(d), this Application to Extend the Word Limit

was required to be filed 15 days before 7/2/2020 or by 6/17/2020 which

was no longer possible on 6/28/2020. I ultimately filed at the Supreme

Court’s Northern Guard Booth on 2nd Street, NE, a 749-Page Petition

for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the

Fourth Circuit in the SCOTUS on 7/2/2020 which had 13,618 words in

the Facts and Argument Sections.

Between 7/2/2020 and 7/13/2020, either SCOTUS Chief Justice

Roberts or a SCOTUS Clerk working for Chief Justice Roberts became

aware of my 648-Page Appendix, reviewed my 13,618-word Facts and

Argument Sections, then denied my 6/28/2020 Application to Chief

Justice Roberts (the Fourth Circuit’s Circuit Justice). By 7/14/2020

Letter from the SCOTUS Clerk Scott S. Harris, I was asked to rewrite

the Facts and Argument Section to comply with the 9,000-word limit,

according to SCOTUS Rule 33.1(g) and given 60 days to make this

correction to my 7/2/2020 Petition for Writ of Certiorari or on or before

9/12/2020.

On or about 7/28/2020,1 became employed for the first time since

being Falsely Convicted on 3/27/2007 of Assaulting Virginia State Police

Trooper Kenneth S. Houtz on 6/9/2006 (See 9/11/2020 Appendix Pages

A344, A348, & A352 at Paragraphs 23, 37, 53, & 54). I was hired by the

2020 Census and worked until counting Fairfax County, Virginia

residents was completed then I was transferred by the 2020 Census to

count residents in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania until 10/5/2020. I served

my Corrected Petition for Writ of Certiorari by Replacement Pages to

my 7/2/2020 Petition for Writ of Certiorari on my three Respondents on

9/10/2020 and prepared to re-file a complete Corrected Petition for Writ

of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth

Circuit at the Supreme Court’s Northern Guard Booth on 9/11/2020.

After making copies at FedEx Office in Fairfax, Virginia creating

duplicate copies of my 731-Page Corrected Petition for Writ of

Certiorari with duplicate copies of Compliance/Service Certificates, I

drove to 7008 Little River Turnpike in Annandale, Virginia to pick-up

Kashavera S. Williams from her place of employment just after 2:00 pm

on 9/11/2020. I then drove with Kashavera S. Williams to the Supreme

Court’s Northern Guard Booth nearest to A Street & 2nd Street, NE,

Washington, DC to file 742 Pages of SCOTUS documents which

quantity was a subject of discussion between us. The 742 Pages with

duplicates for myself filled an entire FedEx Office Box and included: 1)

my 731-Page (including cover) Corrected Petition for Writ of Certiorari

to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; 2) my 4Page (including cover) Certificate of Compliance for Petition for Writ of

Certiorari (8,995 words); and 3) my 7-Page (including cover) Certificate

of Service for Petition for Writ of Certiorari (attaching my previous

7/2/2020 or 6/32/2020 Certificate of Service and my previous 7/3/2020 or

6/33/2020 Amended Certificate of Service). This latter 7-Page

Certificate of Service together with Affidavit of Kashavera S. Williams

is critical evidence of the FRAUD asainst me at the SCOTUS about to

occur as described below.

I drove with Kashavera S. Williams and parked at or about A

Street & 2nd Street, NE, Washington, DC facing North near the

Supreme Court’s Northern Guard Booth. I took my FedEx Office Box

full of SCOTUS documents to be filed to the Supreme Court’s Northern

Guard Booth where the Guard instructed me to proceed to the Supreme

Court’s Southern Guard Booth nearest to East Capitol Street & 2nd

Street, NE, Washington, DC to file my SCOTUS documents. I returned

to my car with my SCOTUS documents, explained to Kashavera S.

Williams that I needed to file my SCOTUS documents at the Supreme

Court Guard Booth behind us on 2nd Street, I did a U-turn further

North on 2nd Street, I did a three-point turn further South on 2nd

Street, and then I re-parked facing North on 2nd Street, NE near

Supreme Court’s Southern Guard Booth closer to East Capitol Street. I

walked to the Supreme Court’s Southern Guard Booth and thereat filed

my SCOTUS documents beginning with producing my Virginia Driver’s

License as ID to one of the Guards (there were at least three or four

Guards), placing six Adhesive Court Clerk Stickers with “2020 SEP 11

P 2:55” and hand-written “TB468” on them upon the SCOTUS copies

and my copies of the three SCOTUS documents to be filed, added to the

FedEx Box a piece of cardboard with the $300 Court Fee and a FedEx

Thumb Drive containing electronic copies of my Petition with Appendix

taped to the cardboard, and placed my FedEx Box with only the

SCOTUS copies of the three documents along with $300 check and

FedEx Thumb Drive into a clear plastic bag supplied by the Guard,

gave my bagged FedEx Box to the Guard, and returned to my car where

Kashavera S. Williams was waiting for me.

I drove to Philadelphia later that night exhausted pulling over to

sleep on the way at or about 11:00 pm near Maryland’s Northern

Border on 1-95. I remained in Philadelphia almost exclusively until

10/5/2020. I did receive SCOTUS Clerk Scott S. Harris’ 9/15/2020

Letter identifying Gregory S. Mercer v. E.A. Vega, et al. as SCOTUS

Case No. “20-348” which letter also returned my FedEx Thumb Drive

and I then served copies of this 9/15/2020 SCOTUS Clerk Letter on my

three Respondents on 9/21/2020 notifying them that Mercer V. Vega, et

aL had been placed on the SCOTUS Docket (this service included a

Potential Respondent Waiver Form to each Respondent). On or about

10/6/2020,1 learned two Respondents had waived their Response. The

third Respondent neither waived a Response nor Responded by his

10/15/2020 deadline.

On or about 10/22/2020,1 discovered files I did not recognize on

my FedEx Thumb Drive which spontaneously copied themselves onto

my computer with virus-like behavior and this Thumb Drive was

missing files I had previously loaded onto it on 9/11/2020. The SCOTUS

Website: 1) did not contain my 648-Page Appendix with my complete

Disputed Statement of Facts from the 2019 VAED Summary Judgment

Proceeding on Appeal but had instead a 12-Page Prejudicial

Replacement Appendix which: 2) had for 4/24/2019 VAED

Memorandum Opinion blank pages as pages 8 & 9 omitting a

FOOTNOTE central to my ABUSE OF DISCRETION Argument

against the VAED; 3) excluded the 5/24/2019 VAED Order (VAED

Document #40) central to my CLEAR ERROR Argument against the

VAED; 4) omitted page 2 of my Certificate of Compliance indicating

that my 9/11/2020 Petition was 8,995 words for the Facts and

Argument Section (Compliant with SCOTUS Rule 33.1(g)); and 5)

omitted the first 5 pages of my 9/11/2020 Certificate of Service leaving

only my previous 7/3/2020 or 6/33/2020 Amended Certificate of Service.

The fact that my 9/11/2020 Certificate of Service was not on

the SCOTUS Website necessarily involves a Guard or SCOTUS

Clerk other than myself to either remove my 7-Page 9/11/2020

Certificate of Service from the SCOTUS entirely or fail to upload

this 9/11/2020 Certificate of Service to the SCOTUS Website in

order to portray me as being negligent. However, I have an

Adhesive Court Clerk Stamped copy of this 9/11/2020 Certificate of

Service with “2020 SEP IIP 2:55” and hand-written “TB468” on the

Adhesive Court Clerk Stamp. This is solid proof that a FRAUD

against me involving the two Supreme Court Guard Booths on 2nd

Street, NE, Washington, DC was designed to intercept my SCOTUS

documents before they were filed WITH THE SCOTUS CLERK and

then: 1) Remove my 648-Page Appendix with my complete Disputed

Statement of Facts from the 2019 VAED Summary Judgment

Proceeding on Appeal; 2) Substitute a 12-Page Prejudicial Appendix for

my 638-Page Appendix; 3) Remove Page 2 of my Certificate of

Compliance about the 8.995-word Fact and Argument Section; 4)

Remove the first 5 pages of my 9/11/2020 Certificate of Service; and 5)

Reconfigure my FedEx Thumb Drive with a virus.

The Remedy here is not to allow Fraud to Prevail obstructing fair

and impartial Justice but to give me as the Petitioner leave to re file my

three SCOTUS documents with 28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration that the

Re-fihngs are exact duplicates of what was served to Respondents on

9/10/2020 then filed at the Supreme Court’s Southern Guard Booth on

9/11/2020 where parties sympathetic to the Opposition waited

masquerading as SCOTUS Guards. Petitioner believes significant

Sanctions are due him including refusal to allow Respondents to now

file Responses after previously waiving those Responses plus financial

Sanctions against Respondents paid to Petitioner. Petitioner’s

Conference by the now 9-Justice Court should be postponed until

Mercer vs. Vega, et al., Case No. 20-348 has had a fair and impartial

review by the SCOTUS Clerk Pool and all Justices of this Court.

Attached is a copy of my 7-Page 9/11/2020 Adhesive Court Clerk

Stamped Certificate of Service (contains “2020 SEP 11 P 2:55” and

hand-written “TB468”) that proves the FRAUD against me on

9/11/2020 justifying re-filing my: 1) 9/11/2020 731-Page Petition for

Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; 2)

9/11/2020 4-Page Certificate of Compliance for Petition for Writ of

Certiorari; and 3) 9/11/2020 7-Page Certificate of Service for Petition for

Writ of Certiorari.

I would welcome the opportunity to produce my 7-Page 9/11/2020

Adhesive Court Clerk Stamped Certificate of Service to SCOTUS

Clerk Jeff Atkins for inspection. It verifies the occurrence of the fraud

against me described above. It would not surprise me that the SCOTUS

knows what happened on 9/11/2020 and is waiting to figure out what I

want to do about the situation. It is my solemn prayer at least. I am

moving this SCOTUS to allow me to re-file my three 9/11/2020

documents as they were filed on 9/11/2020 through SCOTUS Clerk

Jeff Atkins who I know and believe trustworthy. I am asking the

11/6/2020 SCOTUS Conference be for this purpose and a latter

SCOTUS Conference decide the merits of my Petition for Writ of

Certiorari after a fair and impartial review by the SCOTUS Clerk Pool.

RY SHAWN MERCER

VIRGINIA

COUNTY / CITY OF FAIRFAX

Before me Affiant Gregory Shawn Mercer swears and affirms

under penalty of perjury in accordance with Federal and Virginia Law

upon personal knowledge and belief that the foregoing “Affidavit of

Gregory Shawn Mercer, Pro se Petitioner for SCOTUS Case No. 20-348,

Gregory S, Mercer vs. Eliezel A. Vega, et al” is true and correct

occurring as stated above. Sworn this 27th day of October, 2020.

NOTARY

My Commission Expires: o?^

N!Ti BAND!

NOTARY PUBLIC

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR. 31,2024

COMMISSION # 7699340

CORRECTED AFFIDAVIT OF KASHAVERA S. WILLIAMS

On the afternoon of September 11th, 2020, my boyfriend Gregory

S. Mercer picked me up from my former job at the Fairfax County

Methadone Treatment Center located at 7008 Little River Turnpike in

Annandale, Virginia a little after 2:00 pm. We then drove downtown to

the back of the Supreme Court of the United States building where

there is a guard house at 2nd and A Streets, NE. Mr. Mercer tried

twice that day to file a petition that had 700 plus pages in the Supreme

Court. After exiting the vehicle with his petition for the first attempt,

Mr. Mercer returned to the vehicle with his petition unfiled.

When I inquired about what had happened, Mr. Mercer told me he

had been informed by the guard at the first guard house that Court

documents were currently not accepted there. He had to go to the next

guard house closer to East Capitol Street, NE to file. Mr. Mercer drove

us down 2nd Street, NE, to where he was able to successfully file his

petition on the second try. I remained in the vehicle at both locations.

o

KASHAVERA S.WILLIAMS

VIRGINIA

COUNTY / CITY OF FAIRFAX

Before me Affiant Kashavera S. Williams swears and affirms

under penalty of penury in accordance with Federal and Virginia Law

upon personal knowledge and belief that the foregoing “Corrected

Affidavit of Kashavera S. Williams” is true and correct occurring as

stated above. Sworn this 28th day of October, 2020.

/

NO

My Commission Expires:

3>)f2©'2^1>

DEEPAK JOSHI

NOTARY PUBLIC

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC. 31 2023

________COMMISSION # 7237806

NORVIEW

1112 GREEN ST

NORFOLK, VA 23513-9998

516521-0582

(800)275-8777

07/02/2020 12:49 PM

Product

UNITED STATES

POSTAL SERVICE.

39711/2020

Unit

Pr i ce

Price

PM 2-Day

1

$18,30

Domestic

\

RICHMOND. VA 23219

Weight:13 Lb 10.6 Oz

Expected Delivery Day

Wednesday 07/08/2020

USPS Tracking #

.9505 5152 1862 0184 2770 68

Insurance

Up to $50.00 included

$18,30

PM/2-Day

- Domestic

Qty

1

$18.30 '

Product

$0.00

$18.30

12:05 AM

Qty Unit Price

Price

PM 2-Dsy

1

Richmond. VP. 23219

Height=1 lb 4.10 oz

Expected Delivery Day

Mon 08/14/2820

USPS Tracking ft

9502 S0SS 3791 0254 2509 01

$8.25

Certified

Total

PM 2-Day

Norfolk, VA

S3.55

$11.80

i

$8.25

23510

Weight:; Ib 2,70 oz

Expected Delivery Day

Mon 09/14/2020

USPS Tracking ft

9502 6088 5731 0255 2509 24

Certified

Total

^ RICHMOND, VA 23219

Weight:13 Lb 10.2 Oz

. Expected Delivery Day

\ Wednesday 07/08/2020,

\ USPS Tracking #

-Q505 5152 1862 0>84 2770 75

Insurance.

$0.00

Up to $50.00 included

Total:

08KT0N

19443 WHITE GRANITE DR

GAKTON, VA £2124-9398

(800)275-8777

$36.6(

Credit Card Remitd

$36.

Card Name:MasterCard

Account #:XXXXXXXXXXXX6763

Approval #:01548S

Transaction #:114

AID:A0000000041010

Chip

AL:MasterCard

PIN:Not Required

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Due to limited transportation

availability as a result of

nationwide COVID-19 impacts

package delivery times may be

extended. Priority Mail Express®

service will, not change,

$3.55

$11.80

PM 2-Dsy

1

Richmond, VA 23219

UieightU lb 4,28 oz

Expected Delivery Day

Mon 09/14/2020

USPS Tracking ft

9502 S06G S7SI 0255 2509 48

insurance

Up to $50 80 included

Certifled

Total

$3.55

$11.80

Grand Total:

$35.40

MasterCard

Ace cunt ft:XXXXXXXXXXXXS7S3

Approval #:0?6S3S

Transaction #:85S

Receipt ft:00085S

810=80000000041010

AL=MasterCard

PIN .'Net Required

$35.40

$8.25

$0.80

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Includes up to $50 insurance

Text your tracking number to 28777

(2USPS) to get the latest status.

Standard Message and Data rates may

apply. You may also visit www.usps.com

USPS Tracking or call 1-800-222-1811,

Save this receipt as evidence of

insurance. For information on filing

an insurance claim go to

https://www.usps.com/he1p/c1 aims.htm

Preview your Mail

Track your Packages

Sign up for FREE 0

www.inf ormeddelivery.com

All sales final on stamps and postage.

Dof i inHc f nr rti

e^r-w-i

w

a******** ft ft****##**#**.

^as*****!***#*#

Oue to limited transportation

availability aa a result of

nationwide COVID-19 impacts

package delivery times may be

extended. Priority Mail Express©

service will hot change.

**fca**M»«»*«I*#*S**r***X*r***#**#***l*

Includes up tG $53 insurance

Text ycur tracking number tc 28777

(2U3PS) to get the latest status.

Standard Message 3r,d oe;a ratea may

apply. You may also visit wuiw.usps.com

USPS Tracking or call 1-800-222-13U.

Save -his receipt as evidence of

insurance. For information on filing

an.insurance claim oo to

Chip

Additional material

from this filing is

available in the

Clerk's Office.