Dr Z Digitally signed by

Joseph H Zernik
DN: cn=Joseph H
Joseph Zernik, PhD Zernik, o, ou,
email=jz12345@e
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750; arthlink.net, c=US
Location: La
Fax: 801 998-0917; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net Verne, California
Date: 2010.01.19
Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs 12:40:11 -08'00'

10-01-19 Office of Terry Nafisi, Clerk of the US Court, Central District of California is still researching…

On Tue, January 19, 2010 Dawn Bullock wrote:

X-MSK: CML=1.001000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,305,1262581200";
d="scan'208";a="239602967"
Subject: Re: Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) Requests
for responses on requests dated January 4, 2010 in re dockets integrity.
X-KeepSent: D6678434:CF9A792A-882576B0:00631049;
type=4; name=$KeepSent
To: joseph zernik <jz12345@earthlink.net>
Cc: terry_nafisi@cacd.uscourts.gov
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.0.2 HF618 January 15, 2009
From: Dawn_Bullock@cacd.uscourts.gov
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:02:46 -0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on 09CACMAIL01a/M/09/USCOURTS(Release 8.0.2FP1 HF316|May
05, 2009) at 01/19/2010 10:02:47 AM
X-ELNK-AV: 0
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;

Mr. Zernik,

I am researching your request. I will send you a letter when I have the
answers.

Thanks.

Dawn Bullock
Records Supervisor

On Tue, January 19, 2010 Dawn Bullock wrote:

X-MSK: CML=2.001000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,305,1262581200";
d="scan'208";a="181472564"
To: joseph zernik <jz12345@earthlink.net>
Subject: Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) Requests
for responses on requests dated January 4, 2010 in re dockets integrity.
From: Dawn_Bullock@cacd.uscourts.gov
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:49:30 -0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on 09CACMAIL01a/M/09/USCOURTS(Release 8.0.2FP1 HF316|May
05, 2009) at 01/19/2010 09:49:31 AM
X-ELNK-AV: 0
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;

Return Receipt

Your Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff

document: (2:09-cv-01914) Requests for responses on requests dated
January 4, 2010 in re dockets integrity.
was Dawn_Bullock@cacd.uscourts.gov

Page 2/3 January 19, 2010

received
by:
at: 01/19/2010 09:49:30 AM

On Sat,
Sat, January 16,
16, 2010 Joseph Zernik wrote:

From: joseph zernik <jz12345@earthlink.net>

To: terry_nafisi@cacd.uscourts.gov
Cc: Dawn_Bullock@cacd.uscourts.gov
Date: 01/19/2010 09:49 AM
Subject: Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) Requests for responses on requests dated
January 4, 2010 in re dockets integrity.

January 16, 2010

Terry Nafisi
Clerk of the US Court
Central District of California

RE: Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff

(2:09-cv-01914) Requests for responses on requests dated January 4, 2010
in re dockets integrity.

Dear Clerk Nafisi:

Please accept this notice as a reminder of requests for information from

your office, made in person to Records Supervisor Dawn Bullock on December
29, 2009, and also in writing, in letters dates January 4, 2010.[1] [2]

In a December 29, 2009 visit to the US District Court, LA, requests were
made to access court records, to inspect and to copy. Most requests were
denied, but access was allowed to several NEFs (Notices of Electronic
Filings) in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) . Such NEFs cemented
concerns regarding honesty, validity, and effect of the PACER docket under
such caption.

The US District Court would not certify its dockets. Moreover, no

statements appear in the dockets in the name of the Clerk or any Clerk
Deputy, as such. Therefore requests were made, and requests are made
herein, for statements by the US District Court, LA - Terry Nafisi, whether
the dockets in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff
(2:09-cv-01914) were honest, valid, and effectual dockets, in compliance
with US law. Please accept this request also as Custodian of Records of
the US District Court, LA, pursuant to California Law, as a request for
custodian of records declaration regarding the PACER dockets of Zernik v
Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914).

As a follow up to the December 29, 2009, visit to the United States

District Court, Los Angeles, where access to almost all records requested
was denied, request was made for written explanations of the legal
foundation for such denials, and related questions regarding the legal
foundation for the rules of operation of PACER & CM/ECF at the US District
Court.

Ms Bullock indicated that some of my questions would require research.

However, it should be possible to provide without any further delay at
least responses to two of the simpler questions:

a) Are the PACER docket in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v


Page 3/3 January 19, 2010

Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) honest, valid, and effectual dockets, in compliance

with US law?

b) Was Donna Thomas, Courtroom Assistant of Magistrate Carla Woehrle, who

conducted various transactions in the dockets of Zernik v Connor et al
(2:08-cv-01550) and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) a Deputy Clerk at that
time, who was authorized to engage in such transactions, pursuant to your
authority as Clerk of the US Court, Central District of California?

I look forward to your expedient responses on at least these two questions.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs
Patriotic pics of Beyonce' Knowles, Sharon Stone, and Charlize Theron,
Coming soon- deep house music!

Linked Records:
[1]
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24772496/10-01-04-Requesting-US-District-Court-LA-Clerk-Terry-Nafisi-s-
statements-re-docket-of-Zernik-v-Connor-et-al-is-it-honest-valid-and-effectual-in

[2]
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24776792/10-01-04-Request-Clarifications-by-US-District-Court-LA-Clerk-
Terry-Nafisi-in-re-PACER-CM-ECF-and-denial-of-access-to-records-s