OT2015Journal

128 MONDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2015
petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District
of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
No. 14–10138. Glen Thomas Dotson, Petitioner v. United States. Petition
for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for
the Eighth Circuit denied. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration
or decision of this petition.
No. 14–10162. Samuel Saldana, Petitioner v. Clark E. Ducart, Warden.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit denied. Justice Breyer took no part in the
consideration or decision of this petition.
No. 14–10184. Allah Burman, Petitioner v. R. A. Perdue, Warden,
et al. Petition for writ of certiorari before judgment to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
No. 14–10185. Armando Abreu Aceves, Petitioner v. California. Motion
of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and
petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
No. 14–10209. Arthur D’Amario, III, Petitioner v. Manhattan Housing
Specialists, Inc., et al. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit dismissed. See
Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court’s process,
the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal
matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a)
is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin
v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per
curiam).
No. 14–10309. Francisco Saldana, Petitioner v. United States. Motion
of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and
petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Eleventh Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has
repeatedly abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to
accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner
unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition
submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia
Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam). Justice
Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and
this petition.
No. 14–10324. Johnny Brett Gregory, Petitioner v. Deborah Denham,
Warden. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pau­