SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

 

ROGER W. KNIGHT,                                    )

                                                                        )           No.

                                    petitioner,                     )

            v.                                                         )           9th Cir. No.  03-35116

                                                                        )

FRED STEPHENS, Director of Department     )           DECLARATION OF ROGER W.

of Licensing, DENNIS BRADDOCK,              )           KNIGHT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

Secretary of Department of Social and              )           FOR LEAVE TO FILE LATE PETITION

Health Services, and GARY LOCKE,              )           FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Governor of Washington,                                  )

                                    respondents.                 )

____________________________________)

 

            I, ROGER W. KNIGHT, declare that:

            On April 8, 2004, Daphne C. Clarke handed me a letter from the United States Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit at 95 Seventh Street, P.O. Box 193939, San Francisco, California 94119-3939.  Beneath the return address of the Court on the envelope is the warning: “OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300”  It is marked “LEGAL MAIL” and bears the postal marks for San Francisco, California with the date December 1, 2003.

            In the window of the envelope, I could see the address to whom it was mailed:

            Roger W. Knight

            510 South Jackson Street

            Suite B101

            Seattle, Washington 98104

 

A yellow sticker had been added to the right of the window bearing the following text:

ACTI501   981042025  1303  14  12/08/03

NOTIFY SENDER OF NEW ADDRESS

: ACTIONLAW.NET

P.O. BOX 3254

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98114-3254

 

            Ms. Clarke and another woman who was present, Deborah E. Nagle, were working for John R. Scannell, an attorney.  We were in Mr. Scannell’s office.

            Because of the problems we have had with delivery of mail to our office, I sent the Ninth Circuit Clerk’s office a Notice of change of address informing them that my new mailing address is

            Roger W. Knight

            c/o Action Employment Law

            P.O. Box 3444

            Seattle, Washington 98104

 

            Subsequently, when they mailed first two pages of the Memorandum decision in this case on August 27, 2003 to this address, I received it on August 29, 2003.  However, it was not the complete decision, which was entered on June 23, 2003.

            This two month delay in mailing the decision deprived me of an opportunity to file a Petition for Rehearing, which is due within 14 days of entry of judgment, FRAP 40(a).  Therefore, I filed a Motion and Declaration for Recall of Mandate and for Extension of Time to File Petition for Rehearing, sending it on or about September 2, 2003.

            The December 1, 2003 Order found in the envelope on April 8, 2004 is the order denying this motion to recall the mandate and request for extension of time to file a petition for review.  Because April 8, 2004 is more than 90 days subsequent to the Order terminating this case in the Ninth Circuit, I have been denied the opportunity to timely file a Petition for Certiorari to this Court by circumstances beyond my control.

            Attached as Exhibit A are printouts of images scanned in with a Hewlett-Packard Scanjet 6200C with a driver updated for compatibility with Microsoft Windows XP and Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional 30 Day Tryout of: the envelope, the coversheet with the mailing address that was folded to show it in the envelope’s window, and the Order entered in Ninth Circuit No. 03-36116 on December 1, 2003.

            Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Appellant’s Motion for Recall of Mandate, for Extension of Time to File Petition for Rehearing, and Declaration by Roger W. Knight and its attached Exhibits.

            I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.

Dated this 12th day of April, 2004 in Seattle, Washington,

 

                                                            ____________________________________

                                                                        Roger W. Knight, petitioner pro se

If the back button does not take you there, click Home to go to the Index page of this Antipeonage Act Website, click Enemies for the main Enemies page, click Letters for the Letters page, and click Allies for the Allies page.  Click C02-879L to get to the main page for this case.  Or you can use the Antipeonage Act Site Map.