Petition for Rehearing — Christina Alessio, Petitioner v. United Airlines, Inc., et al.

Supreme Court briefDec 7, 2023

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

NO. 23-224

In the

Supreme Court of the Anited States

of Pte De

CHRISTINA ALESSIO,

Petitioner,

Vv.

UNITED AIRLINES, INC.,

Respondent.

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Cuyahoga County

PETITION FOR REHEARING

Christina Alessio

Petitioner Pro Se

1970 N. Cleveland-Massillon Rd.

Unit 589

Bath, OH 44210

(330)-338-7052

December 7, 2023

SUPREME COTIRT PRESS + (888) 958.5705 + BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

RECEIVED

DEC 13 2023

OFFICE OF T

SUPREME douse

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .............ccccccccccseeesseeeeseees ll

PETITION FOR REHEARING ..........cc:ccccccsssseseeesecees 1

REASONS TO GRANT

PETITION FOR REHEARING..............cccseseeeee 2

CONCLUSION ............ccccessssssrsccssvecsssnssescesssseseessessesves 8

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

United States Constitution ..........cccccccceeeeeeeeeeees 1,2,6

USS. Const, art. Loo. .ccccccccssssssscssssssvecssseceeseeseeeaeeees 6

USS. Const, art. Uassiissssssssccrusaceveeisicesanssizsvsiossenssavteseccs 6

US'S. Const. art. TID... ccc ccccsscessssnseccsscsreesseeseenareees 6

STATUTES

28 U.S.C. § 1746 sevccscsssessusssescsuccnuscncassesvasscnasssuisusneses 10

AD U.S.C. § 5124. ccccccsesssecssscsssecssessuessesssecssesssesessessseen 5

JUDICIAL RULES

Sup. Ct. R. 28.8.0... ccsscesssccssscevssssvesseesssseseterseeees 1

Sup. Ct. R. 44 v.cceccccccscssessessessessessesscsessessssecsessucsvecevevee 1

PETITION FOR REHEARING

THE SUPREME COURT of the UNITED STATES

of AMERICA, per Rule 44, allows a Petition For

Rehearing, with Respect to the Decision of the Court.

The Petition For Rehearing, Case No. 23-224, is

being Respectfully Submitted within the 25 days

required of the Courts Decision, on December 7,

2023, in Honor to Never Forget the Anniversary of

Pearl Harbor. Political Self Interests and Monetary

Gain, at the Expense of Human Life is a Crime and

Eventually, will be Held Accountable in a Much

Greater Way by their Creator. Prayers to All, and a

Request for Peace in our World Today.

The Court’s Decision on November 20, 2023,

states: “Petition DENIED.”

Petitioner Pro Se, is Requesting the PETITION

FOR REHEARING be GRANTED, in Honor of the

General Air-Traveling Public’s Safety and Health

from Chemical Inhalation Exposure in Commercial

Aircraft Cabins.

THE SUPREME COURT of the UNITED STATES

of AMERICA, per Rule 28.8, requires that Oral

Arguments are Presented only by Attorneys who are

Members of the Bar, with our America’s Supreme

Court.

Therefore, in order to Uphold THE UNITED

STATES CONSTITUTION: “To Protect the People”,

Petitioner Pro Se is Respectfully Requesting an

Attorney, a Member of the Bar to the SUPREME

COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, to be assigned

to the Petitioner's Case No. 23-224, for this Case to

be GRANTED for Oral Argument.

B-

REASONS TO GRANT

PETITION FOR REHEARING

Respectfully,

Petitioner Believes: “IN GOD WE TRUST”.

Petitioner Believes: “EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER

THE LAW”.

Petitioner Believes: “DUE PROCESS”.

Petitioner Believes: “THE UNITED STATES

CONSTITUTION: “To Protect the People”.

Petitioner Believes: All 14 “COMPELLING

REASONS” in REPLY BRIEF.

Petitioner Believes: PROTECTING our SKIES

and LAND with Powerful Environmental Commitments

by the Respondent’s Programs:

e Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF)

e kKEco-Skies: (Example) Recycling Aluminum

Cans in Aircraft Cabin.

Respondent communicates every year more than

150 Million Customers (People) Fly Around the World

on Respondent’s Airline. Petitioner is Respectfully

Suggesting an Additional Environmental Commitment

Program from the Respondent.

e 100% Safe and Transparent Aircraft

Cabin Products for Cleaning, Disinfecting,

Sanitizing and Air-Freshening “The Flying

Living Room” (The Petitioner’s Reference

Name for the “Aircraft Cabin” shared with

Customers!).

Petitioner Believes: PROTECTING THE PEOPLE

~ Specific to this Case, The General Air-Traveling

Public’s Safety and Health (Air-Quality) in the

Aircraft Cabin.

Respectfully,

Why Use a Chemical Cleaner in the Aircraft

Cabin that Communicates:

“PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENT:

HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC

ANIMALS.”? (On the Back of the Label)

Why Use a Chemical Disinfectant in the

Aircraft Cabin that Communicates:

“PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENT:

HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC

ANIMALS.”? (On the Back of the Label)

Why Use a Chemical Disinfectant in the

Aircraft Cabin that Communicates:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Pesticide Registration Number on the First

Page of the Safety Data Sheet?

Why Use a Chemical Hand Sanitizer in the

Aircraft Cabin Intended NOT TO RINSE

OFF YOURS HANDS?

Why Use an Antimicrobial Process to Treat

the Magazine placed in every Seatback

Pocket on the Aircraft?

e Why Use an Air-Freshener in the Aircraft

Cabin that Communicates on the Safety

Data Sheet:

SECTION 3: Composition/Information on

ingredients

3.1. Substances Not applicable.?

Petitioner began Communication with the

Respondent regarding, Safety and Health concerns

of Approving Chemical Substance Products used

inside the Aircraft Cabin (Global Environment), of

which Communication was also Made Respectfully,

with the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) Union

for years (First Hearing: June 29, 2010) up to and

including before:

1. SCOTUS: Case No. 19-395

2. COVID-19 (Global Pandemic)

Petitioner Respectfully, further Reached out to our

Government Agency: Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC), for an Outside Third Party

Opinion. With Respect, the EEOC could not certify the

Respondent was in Compliance with the Statutes

(Reference Case No. 19-395: App.94a-95a. and Case

No. 23-224: App.44a-45a.)

Petitioner has Since, April 18, 2017, Held the

Responsibility with this Knowledge Given from the

EEOC, an Obligation, Duty and Responsibility to

Continue to Reach Out to our Government at the

Federal and State Lower Courts to Respectfully

Request an Answer to a Federal Question that the

EEOC could Not Certify, in the Interest of the General

Air-Travelers Public Safety and Health, in the Air.

The Federal Question:

Respectfully, is the Respondent in Compliance

with the Federal Statute: HAZARD MATERIAL

TRANSPORTATION ACT, Title 49 U.S. Code 5124,

Approving Chemical Cleaning, Disinfecting,

Sanitizing and Air-Freshening Substance

Products, used inside the Aircraft Cabin?

Petitioner having reached a second time, the

Highest Court in the Land, is Respectfully Hoping

to Receive an Answer to The Federal Question,

Believed to be a Public Civil and Human “Need to

Know”, “Right to Know”.

Petitioner Believes the Answer is Needed for the

Respectful and Simple Sake of the Safety and Health

of the General Air-Traveling Public.

Petitioner is being Very Clear, this Case is Not

About Me. Its about WE.

“WE THE PEOPLE”. People Traveling in the

Air and Breathing Chemical Substance Products

During the Flight.

Petitioner Believes the United States Federal

Government should know All Products being Used

Inside Commercial Aircraft Cabins and that All

Products should have a “Certificate of Compliance”

from our Legislative Branch, with “100%

Transparency”.

Petitioner believes in the United States Federal

Government, which include 3 Co-Equal Branches.

Articles I, II, II, Respectfully Found in the

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION of AMERICA:

Article I. Legislative Branch

Article II. Executive Branch

Article III. Judicial Branch

Petitioner believes each Branch has a Duty and

Responsibility to Work Together to Ensure American

Citizens’ Civil and Human Rights are being Protected.

Petitioner has Respectfully Communicated Ability

at Best the Law and Facts.

Case No.19-395, to All 3 Branches of Government.

Case No. 23-224, again with the Judicial Branch

in Hopes of Receiving an Answer to The Federal

Question of which the EEOC, could not certify.

Petitioner Believes, THE UNITED STATES

CONSTITUTION: To Protect the People.

Petitioner Believes, “Transparency is the

Best Policy”.

Petitioner Believes with an Answer to The

Federal Question, by the Supreme Court of the

United States Judicial Branch, that the 118th

Legislative Branch be required to provide all Air-

Travelers with a “Certificate of Compliance” that

includes: All Product Names Used Inside the Aircraft

Cabin for Cleaning, Disinfecting, Sanitizing and Air-

Freshening (with Safety Data Sheets) Approved by

the Respondent for the Aircraft Cabin, because Safety

is Top Priority.

With Great Respect, this PETITION FOR

REHEARING will be Included in Petitioners AMERICA,

THE JURY ~ Fifth Sequel, to preserve the record for

Public Knowledge, and for the Respectful Truth be

Told. History is on the Record.

Respectfully, Case No. 19-395 (Before COVID-19)

and Case No. 23-224 (After the Global Pandemic

of COVID-19), Simply Still Requesting 100%

Transparency.

With the Upmost Respect, may it be Concluded

that this PETITION FOR REHEARING, not be

GRANTED, may it then be that maybe one day “WE

THE PEOPLE”, will Come Together for Sake of the

Public’s Safety and Health in the Aircraft Cabin.

Respectfully maybe, just maybe, one day the General

Air-Traveling Public will Come Together and Become

~ AMERICA, THE JURY.

CONCLUSION

With the Upmost Respect, the Petitioner Pro se,

would Sincerely like to take this Opportunity to Thank

You for Your Time and Service “For The People”, with the

Full Review of Case No.23-224, from the Highest

Court in the Land, THE SUPREME COURT of

the UNITED STATES of AMERICA.

Most Honorable Chief Justice John Roberts