request for Judicial Notice of 120 year rule being filed with the US District Court for the District of Columbia. (in the public docket the SSN will be redacted)

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, STE 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-7603 

E-Mail: [email protected], [email protected]

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE  DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

 

Dr. ORLY TAITZ, ESQ, PRO SE                     §

                             Plaintiff,                        §

                                                                   §       

                   v.                                             §    EMERGENCY    

                                                                   §    MOTION FOR 

Michael Astrue, Commissioner of the         §    RECONSIDERATION

     Social Security Administration,          §     11-cv-00402

                                                                   §

                                                                        §

                                                                     §  Honorable Royce Lamberth    

                             Respondent                            § Chief Justice presiding

Request FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE FILED IN Conjunction with AN EERGENCY MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

 

Plaintiff Pro Se Dr. Orly Taitz (hereinafter “Taitz”) hereby requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following document attached as Exhibit 1.   SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

                                           Chief FOIA Officer Report for 2011

This request is made pursuant to Rule 201 (a), (b)1, (b)2, (c)2 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

RULE 201. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF ADJUDICATIVE FACTS

(a) Scope. This rule governs judicial notice of an adjudicative fact only, not a legislative fact.

(b) Kinds of Facts That May Be Judicially Noticed. The court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it:

(1) is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or

(2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

(c) Taking Notice. The court:

(1) may take judicial notice on its own; or

(2) must take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information.

(d) Timing. The court may take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding.

(e) Opportunity to Be Heard. On timely request, a party is entitled to be heard on the propriety of taking judicial notice and the nature of the fact to be noticed. If the court takes judicial notice before notifying a party, the party, on request, is still entitled to be heard.

Social security administration Chief FOIA Officer report is

(1) is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or

(2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

Aforementioned report is posted on the official web site of the Social Security administration   www.ssa.gov

and under 201 C (2) must take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information.

the report in question is relevant to the proceeding as Petitioner Taitz is seeking  reconsideration of the decision by the SSA to deny her release of the SS-5 for the Social Security number 042-68-4425 due to privacy considerations.  In her motion for reconsideration Taitz provides newly discovered evidence showing that the Social Security number in question was assigned to Harrison J. Bounel, an immigrant from Russia, born in 1890. Fed. R. Evid. Rule 201. Under Fed. R. Evid. Rule 201(f) judicial notice may be taken at any stage of the proceeding. Government of Canal Zone v Burjan, 596 F.2d 690, 694 (5th Circ. 1979).

SSA Chief Foia Officer report in question in Section I, (1) (c) states

• We have revisited longstanding decisions regarding the withholding of certain frequently requested data, to determine if our recommended guidance is still applicable and reflects the presumption of openness.   For instance, we issued new guidance for disclosing extremely aged individuals’ original Social Security Applications (SS-5) when our records do not indicate a date of death.  We developed a new policy that establishes a “120 year rule” and assumes that an individual is alive unless their birth date exceeds 120 years or we have proof of the individual’s death.  This new policy enabled us to release more information and potentially reduced requests on appeal.
• Since Harrison J. Bounel was born in 1890, he would be 123 years old and according to aforementioned 120 year rule SSA was obligated to release his SS0-5 under FOIA 5US 552.
• CONCLUSION  
  • This court should take the Judicial notice of the SSA Chief FOIA Officer report

Respectfully submitted

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

President of the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation

05.18.2013

cc Inspector General of the Social Security Administration

cc senator Chuck Grassley ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee

cc Congressman Bob Goodlatte Chair of the House Judiciary Committee

cc Daryl Issa, Chair of the House Oversight Committee

cc Inspector general of IRS

Source: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=421866