This explosive exposé reveals how U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright II unlawfully struck verified federal filings, obstructed civil rights removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1), and defamed the Petitioner as a "sovereign citizen" without cause. The article details a pattern of judicial fraud, denial of due process, and unconstitutional party substitution—all under color of law. A Verified Emergency Petition for Writ of Mandamus has now been filed with the Ninth Circuit to vacate the void order and demand full dismissal. This is a critical case of federal overreach, judicial misconduct, and systemic abuse.
A federal judge’s July 2025 order is now under fire for unlawfully striking a removal, misapplying criminal statutes, ignoring unrebutted affidavits, and participating in a fraudulent party substitution. The case, originally removed under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1), involves severe allegations of constitutional violations, jurisdictional fraud, and due process abuse. Despite clear legal precedent barring time limits on § 1443 removals, the court falsely claimed the removal was untimely and smeared the petitioner with defamatory labels. This article exposes the judicial misconduct, factual distortions, and illegality underlying the void order now being challenged.
Federal courts are now under scrutiny after a verified Writ of Mandamus vanished from the Ninth Circuit docket without explanation—raising grave concerns of judicial tampering, fraud, and systemic misconduct. Judge Sunshine Sykes defied clear jurisdictional divestiture by issuing rulings on a matter under appellate review, violating 28 U.S.C. § 144 and § 1651. This article exposes a disturbing pattern of ultra vires acts, denial of due process, and potential RICO violations implicating both district and appellate judges.Ask ChatGPT
A properly executed Security Agreement assigning all assets, rights, and interests to a private trust—paired with a UCC-1 financing statement and UCC-3 amendment claiming the Deed of Trust and Note—lawfully establishes the trust as the secured party and real party in interest. This perfected interest, under UCC §§ 9-203, 9-509, 3-301, and supported by controlling case law (e.g., Carpenter v. Longan, Ibanez, Veal), strips any servicer or third-party of standing to foreclose unless they possess the original Note, prove an unbroken chain of title, and rebut the trust’s perfected claim. Without that, all foreclosure attempts become void ab initio, commercial dishonor, and legal trespass on private trust property.
In an unthinkable display of judicial defiance, the United States District Court for the Central District of California—specifically Judge Kenly Kiya Kato—has openly violated federal disqualification statutes and constitutional protections, triggering a full-scale procedural breakdown. The Plaintiffs, Kevin Realworldfare and Corey Walker, filed a timely and sufficient affidavit of bias under 28 U.S.C. § 144—invoking a mandatory disqualification. Yet, Judge Kato continues to issue orders and direct proceedings as if the law simply does not apply to her.This is not a mere procedural oversight. This is a calculated refusal to follow the law, a violation of the U.S. Constitution, and an unmistakable act of judicial misconduct.
This article exposes verified judicial misconduct by U.S. District Judge Kenly Kiya Kato in the federal civil rights case Kevin Realworldfare et al. v. Tamara Wagner et al. Despite a verified motion for disqualification filed under 28 U.S.C. § 144, Judge Kato continued to rule without jurisdiction—rendering all subsequent actions void ab initio. Plaintiffs allege Kato deliberately misrepresented the law, falsely claiming an affidavit was required despite Ninth Circuit precedent confirming that a verified motion suffices. Meanwhile, state commissioner Tamara Wagner—whose jurisdiction ceased on April 28, 2025, upon federal removal—continued to obstruct access to remedy, deny motions, and execute dispossession orders without lawful authority. Rather than uphold federal supremacy and equity, Kato has doubled down on the fraud, sustaining ultra vires state actions under color of law. Plaintiffs demand her immediate disqualification, vacatur of all rulings, and reassignment to restore judicial integrity.
A federal lawsuit filed by Kevin: Realworldfare accuses Sailfish Point Realty, attorney Douglas J. Kress, and Judge Michael J. McNicholas of engaging in a $45 million real estate fraud scheme involving unrebutted tender, judicial collusion, and deprivation of rights under color of law. The complaint asserts that verified affidavits and commercial instruments lawfully transferred title to a luxury Florida property, yet were ignored in favor of a void dismissal without jurisdiction. Realworldfare claims the defendants conspired to sabotage the transaction and unlawfully dispossess him, violating UCC provisions, Florida statutes, and federal civil rights laws. The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, quiet title, and treble damages under civil RICO.
A family in Riverside County, California, was unlawfully dispossessed from their home despite having a valid quiet title claim and federal removal in place. Commissioner Tamara Wagner issued writs without jurisdiction, blatantly violating 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), and ignored federal supremacy. Federal Judge Kenly Kiya Kato failed to enforce the removal, refused to halt the state court’s void actions, and mischaracterized the plaintiffs as "pro se" to evade intervention. Multiple Supreme Court precedents make clear that judges acting without jurisdiction are not immune, yet no accountability has occurred. Meanwhile, public figures like President Trump, Pam Bondi, and Kash Patel remain silent as judicial officers aid in unconstitutional property theft under color of law.
A federal RICO lawsuit filed in the Central District of California exposes a coordinated conspiracy involving attorneys Barry Lee O’Connor and John Bailey, MARINAJ PROPERTIES, and the Doumit family. The Verified Complaint details simulated legal process, fraudulent conveyance, and theft of trust property through a void Trustee’s Deed. Despite unrebutted affidavits and perfected title filings, Judge Rachel A. Marquez has enabled the fraud by refusing to sanction the guilty and instead targeting Americans asserting their rights. The case alleges violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962, 241, 1341, and California Civil Code §§ 1709, 3346. This is judicial conspiracy at its peak—where bar members are protected, and real parties in interest are punished. The outcome will test whether equity and law still matter in California’s courts.
When a court acts without lawful jurisdiction—whether through improper removal, lack of subject matter or personal authority, or constitutional violations—its orders are void ab initio and carry no legal force. This article explains how judges who continue to issue rulings after losing jurisdiction are not merely mistaken—they are acting under color of law and are subject to direct civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Backed by black-letter case law and statutory authority, this piece dismantles the myth of absolute judicial immunity and affirms a fundamental truth in law: jurisdiction is everything. When it’s gone, so is the court’s power to act.
In a federal civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs Kevin: Realworldfare and Corey: Walker expose Riverside Court Commissioner Tamara L. Wagner’s unlawful railroading under color of law and total absence of jurisdiction. Despite a pending Quiet Title Action and perfected federal removal, Wagner issued void orders to dispossess the Walker Estate—yet the Estate remains lawfully and firmly in possession. Now under Article III jurisdiction, Judge Kenly Kiya Kato presides over the live case, which alleges constitutional violations, commercial fraud, and abuse of process. This is a high-stakes confrontation between equity and overreach—where immunity fails and facts prevail.
Federal summonses have been issued and served in Kevin Walker Estate v. Chad Bianco, a $1 trillion RICO lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Sheriff Bianco, deputies, and other officials face 18 devastating charges, including fraud, kidnapping, and racketeering. The verified complaint is backed by unrebutted affidavits, UCC filings, and self-executing contracts, which stand as judgment in commerce and law. Proof of service has been filed, and the 21-day response clock is already running. Failure to respond results in default judgment, lien enforcement, and final commercial adjudication.