I will prove JUDGE MELINDA HARMON is maliciously incompetent

OPINION & ORDER
Pending before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Gary INMENDHAMs (INMENDHAM) motion for recusal. (Doc. 36.) Also before the Court is pro se Defendant XXXXX XXXXXX (XXXXXX) motion to dismiss (Doc. 6), as well as Plaintiff INMENDHAMs response (Doc. 9) and XXXXXX reply (Doc. 10).
Although XXXXXX motion included information outside Plaintiff INMENDHAMs complaint, arguably making it a motion for summary judgment, the Court will rely solely on the facts contained in the complaint and therefore construe XXXXXX pleading as a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Upon review and consideration of these motions, the
responses and replies thereto, the relevant legal authority, and for the reasons explained below, the Court finds that Defendant XXXXXX motion to dismiss (Doc. 6) should be granted, and that Plaintiff INMENDHAMs motion for recusal (Doc. 36) should be denied.
I. Background and Relevant Facts
This is a copyright case with a multifarious procedural history. On December 17, 2008, the parties in this case failed to appear for a scheduling conference before Magistrate Judge Stephen Smith. Pro se Plaintiff INMENDHAM had earlier requested special accommodation to appear by teleconference due to an alleged anxiety disorder. (Doc. 7.) On December 18, 2008, the day after the scheduled conference, U.S. District Judge David Hittner dismissed the case for failure to prosecute, without ruling on INMENDHAMs request for special accommodation. (Docs. 11 and 13.) INMENDHAM appealed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the dismissal and remanded the case to the district court because there was no clear record of delay or contumacious conduct by the plaintiff and therefore his request that the conference be held by telephone or electronic means was not unreasonable given the distance from his home in New Jersey and his assertions, albeit unsupported by evidence, that he suffers a disability that prevents him from traveling. (Doc. 25 at 2, USCA No. 09-20057, September 15, 2009.)
On remand, Judge Hittner scheduled a Rule 16 conference by telephone for October 8, 2009. (Doc. 18.) Although both parties appeared by telephone, the minute entry reflects that the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference [was] not held, and the conference was reset. (Doc. 20.) On the same day Judge Hittner recused himself from the case. (Doc. 21.) On or about October 9, 2009 Plaintiff INMENDHAM posted a video on the internet site YouTube that included recorded excerpts from the teleconference with Judge Hittner along with INMENDHAMs commentary. See, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICTrVUvYqDo. Related videos posted on the internet can be found at http://www.youtube.com/donotgod and
http://www.youtube.com/inmendham. Plaintiffs recording and posting on the internet the October 8, 2009 conference with Judge Hittner constitute a direct violation of Local Rule 83.7,
which states that, [e]xcept by leave of the presiding judge, no photo- or electro-mechanical means of recordation or transmission of court proceedings is permitted in the courthouse. Local Rule 83.7 of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, http://www.txs.uscourts.gov/district/rulesproc.
After Judge Hittners recusal, the case was reassigned to this Court. (Doc. 22.) On October 13, 2009, Magistrate Judge Frances H. Stacy reset the Rule 16 scheduling conference for March 3, 2010; all parties were specifically ordered to appear in person at the conference. (Doc. 30.) On February 25, 2010, Plaintiff INMENDHAM filed a Motion for Accommodation and Notice of Special Circumstances requesting that he be allowed to appear by telephone. (Doc. 33.) In the Minutes of the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference held March 3, 2010, the case manager to

youtube has a text limit so I will provide link to complete text

http://www.inmendham.com/dog/mh1.html

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• MELINDA
• HARMON
• UNITED
• STATES
• DISTRICT
• JUDGE
• makes
• willfully
• false
• accusations
• to
• commit
• unmconstitutional
• atrocities
• against
• the
• truth
• and
• Justice
• says
• donotgod
• inmendham

[TheMaleWithNoName]

What happens now though? Can you appeal the case dismissal?

[InJustice4Most]

@TheMaleWithNoName , As with hittner, First I will file a motion for reconsideration giving the judge a chance to prevent the embarrassment of being reversed on appeal... if I have to appeal I will ask for sanctions against the judge consistent with the outrage of forcing a second appeal on such a lame and silly legal argument. .. and I believe I will ask the appeals court to decide the case in final as apparently the federal judges in Texas are incapable of providing basic justice.

[Crosisborg]

Sorry Skippy but name calling is not civily or crminally illegal. Calling someone a litigious mother fucker is not slander... especially when they have filed as many suits as you. Now if a pattern of failed lawsuits are a sign of frivolousness...

Maybe you should stop and think that if all your attempts to sue fail then maybe there is a slight chance your wrong in your ideas. Its rather insane to think the entire justice system knows you and have a conspiracy to violate your rights.

[WarblesOnALot]

@InJustice4Most  G'day. If y've got something to say, post it on Yt. It's the only Website my phone goes to. I'm an Uncomputered Old Luddite. I thought I told y' that.

Ciao !

[WarblesOnALot]

@InJustice4Most Ah, hahahahahahahahaha ! Last time I represented myself in Court, it only took 9 years. But, I did win. In the End. For the first 7 years, I told nothing but the Truth, & the Liar won... Year 8 & 9, the Webs of Bullshit tightened around the Liar. In the final event, I won 4 Cases in 4 Jurisdictions in 4 weeks. I doubt if you have the patience... But, Good Luck, Grasshopper !

[vigilantesTV]

This is why we need to remove the government monopoly over justice. If judges don't understand/don't care about the law then who do we turn to? There needs to be a citizen's court/prison system put into place just for the government when they break the law.

I'd love to be the warden! Anyone who thinks this man is crazy has never gone through this crap before. It's this story and many others why I am on a mission to make the local judges lives hell since they put me through it too. :-)

[ecidemon1]

Oh the irony is killing me :D

[blackacidlizzard]

@johncerasi

It's like "willfully ignorant," you pedantic douchebag.

[ransom247]

You should send a jar of Vaseline to that judge. The system likes to fuck us up the ass.

[johncerasi]

"maliciously incompetent" makes no sense, you pseudo intellectual fuck.

[itpduder]

The judges reasoning is as preposterous as the Dred Scott decision?

lolololol

[mrsalmon1984]

Boo hoo you whiny melodramatic moron. You flame people ALL THE TIME but when someone uses fair use to make you look like the fool you are, you get all emo and post, "I'm going to post video's on how I got my feelings hurt." Shut up and grow a pair. Tasting your own medicine is quite bitter.