UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff's Third Motion for Sanctions
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
William Thomas, et. al. | C.A. No. 94-2742
Plaintiffs pro se, | Judge Charles R. Richey
The United States, et. al. |
PLAINTIFFS' THIRD MOTION FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
On January 23, 1995 the U.S Attorney filed Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider Denial of Plaintiffs Application for a TRO.
In the interests of an opportunity to spur us all toward factual accuracy, greater understanding, and a more perfect judicial system, the progress of the human race, though more thoughtful writing, plaintiffs see it as their solemn duty to move again for Rule 11 Sanctions.
Upon the reasons more fully related in the accompanying Memorandum plaintiffs explain the reasons for this motion.
A Proposed Order is attached.
Respectfully submitted this 9th day of February 1995,
Concepcion Picciotto, Plaintiff
Post Office Box 4931
Washington, D.C. 20008
Ellen Thomas, Plaintiff
2817 11th Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby state that, on February __, 1995, I delivered a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Third Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions upon the office of Assistant United States Attorney Sally Rider at 555 4th Street NW, Washington, D.C.