47 USC § 503 (Making False Statements): Prohibits to knowingly and willfully make any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement, or to make/use any false writing or document knowing it contains false statements, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the U.S. Government (which includes the FCC).
18 USC § 1001 (Making False Statements): Prohibits to knowingly and willfully make any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement, or to make/use any false writing or document knowing it contains false statements, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the U.S. Government (which includes the FCC).
18 USC § 1343 (Fraud by wire, radio, or television): Prohibits executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud—or obtaining money or property under false pretenses—using interstate electronic communications, automated billing networks, or digital transmissions.
1.235 (Violation of Statutory Stay): Knowingly inducing or procuring a court department or clerk to alter calendars or execute substantive actions while a statutory disqualification stay is active.
197.040 / 197.040 (Asking or Receiving Bribe by Public Officer): A judicial officer or court employee who asks for, agrees to receive, or accepts any gratuity, compensation, or personal favor to perform or omit any official act or bypass mandatory duties commits a Category C felony.
197.110 (Misconduct of Public Officer): Soliciting, aiding, or abetting a public officer to defer or omit an official duty (such as deferring a mandatory default ruling under EDCR 2.20).
199.120 (Perjury and Subornation of Perjury): Giving, offering, or promising a bribe or illicit consideration to a judge or court official to influence a ruling or administrative setting.
199.210 (Offering False Evidence / Altering Records): It is a felony for anyone (including private lawyers) to knowingly offer false or backdated evidence, or to cause court records and electronic docket entries to be altered, backdated, or falsified.
199.280 (Obstructing a Public Officer): Deceiving, misleading, or willfully delaying/hindering a public officer or investigator in the performance of their official duties.
199.480 (Conspiracy): Criminalizes two or more persons conspiring to commit a felony (such as bribery or record tampering) or conspiring to obstruct justice.
205.320 (Extortion): Attorneys can be charged directly under this statute for conspiring with co-counsel, court clerks, or judicial officers to obstruct justice, subvert procedural defaults, or violate due process rights.
207.171 (False, deceptive or misleading advertising and other sales practices): Makes it unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to publish, disseminate, or display false, deceptive, or misleading advertising—through any medium (print, broadcast, digital, or direct communication)—with the intent to induce a consumer into a commercial transaction or agreement.
207.174 (Civil Penalties for Misleading Advertising): Authorizes the Nevada Attorney General or local district attorneys to bring civil actions against any person or corporation that uses false or misleading advertising, imposing civil financial penalties of up to $2,500 per violation.
207.190 (Coercion): It is unlawful for a person, with the intent to compel another to do or abstain from doing an act which the other person has a right to do or abstain from doing.
598.0915 (Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Definition): Explicitly defines unlawful commercial conduct in business transactions—including knowingly making false representations about product/service characteristics, misrepresenting pricing or price reductions, fraudulently altering contracts or billing statements, or knowingly making any false representation during a transaction.
598.0923 (Nevada Unconscionable and Illegal Trade Practices Definition): Expands the definition of a deceptive trade practice to include knowingly operating without required state/local business licenses, failing to disclose material facts in a transaction, violating state/federal sales laws, using coercion/intimidation, or engaging in an unconscionable practice—such as taking grossly unfair advantage of a consumer's lack of knowledge or causing a gross disparity between the value received and the price paid.
1.1 (Compliance with the Law): Failure to respect and comply with the law, including state and federal statutes prohibiting perjury and false declarations.
1.2 (Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary): Engaging in dishonest conduct, docket falsification, and false sworn statements that severely erode public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary.
1.3 (Avoiding Abuse of the Prestige of Judicial Office): Prohibits a judge from using or attempting to use the prestige of judicial office to advance personal, economic, or improper interests.
2.2 (Impartiality and Fairness): Failure to uphold and apply the law fairly and impartially, demonstrating overt favoritism toward corporate counsel while suppressing pro se emergency filings.
2.3 (Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment): Exhibiting systemic bias and procedural prejudice against an individual litigant in favor of represented corporate entities.
2.4(B) & (C) (External Influences): Prohibits a judge from permitting financial, political, or personal interests to influence judicial conduct or judgment, or conveying the impression that anyone is in a position to influence the judge.
2.5(A) (Competence and Diligence): Requires a judge to perform all judicial and administrative duties diligently, including disposing of court business promptly and without unnecessary delay.
2.6(A) (Ensuring the Right to Be Heard): Directs that a judge shall accord every person with a legal interest in a proceeding the full right to be heard according to law.
2.7 (Responsibility to Decide): Mandates that a judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the judge, except when disqualification is required by law. Refusing to rule or hold a hearing on a properly filed emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) is a direct violation of this Rule.
2.9 (Responsibility to Decide): Mandates that a judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers, concerning a pending or impending matter.
2.11(A) (Mandatory Disqualification): Refusing to self-recuse when the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, and submitting false statements to evade disqualification under NRS 1.235.
2.12 (Supervisory Duties): A judge shall require court staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge’s direction and control to act in a manner consistent with the judge’s obligations under this Code (e.g., permitting department clerks to manipulate electronic dockets at 8:51 PM)
2.15 (Responding to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct): A judge having knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness... shall inform the appropriate authority.
2.16 (Cooperation with Disciplinary Authorities): Making false statements of material fact in official proceedings addressing judicial misconduct and recusal.
3.1 (Extrajudicial Activities in General): A judge shall not participate in activities that will interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties, lead to frequent disqualification, or appear to a reasonable person to undermine independence or impartiality.
3.13 (Acceptance and Reporting of Gifts, Loans, Bequests, Benefits, or Other Things of Value): Restricting financial relationships or benefits that create conflicts of interest.
4. Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC)
1.3 (Diligence): Failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in responding to pending motions, causing intentional procedural defaults under EDCR 2.20.
3.3 (Candor Toward the Tribunal): Making false statements of fact or law to the court, or failing to correct false impressions created by after-hours eFiling queue submissions.
3.4(a) (Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel): Unlawfully obstructing another party’s access to evidence or service of documents by actively blocking Complainant’s official email server addresses.
3.4(c) (Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel): UKnowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal (including EDCR 2.20 response deadlines and NRCP 16.1 discovery requirements).
3.5 (Impartiality and Decorum of the Tribunal): Seeking to influence a judge, clerk, or court official by means prohibited by law, including unauthorized ex parte administrative requests to set hearings during an active statutory stay.
4.1 (Truthfulness in Statements to Others): Making false statements of material fact to Complainant and third parties during litigation.
4.4 (Respect for Rights of Third Persons): Using means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden an unrepresented (Pro Se) litigant.
8.4(a) (Misconduct): Violating or attempting to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct.
8.4(c) (Misconduct): Engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
8.4(d) (Misconduct): Engaging in conduct that is highly prejudicial to the administration of justice.
5. State Bar of Texas — Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct (TDRPC)
3.04 (Fairness in Adjudicatory Proceedings): Unlawfully obstructing access to evidence, altering or concealing documents, or habitually violating rules of procedure.
4.01 (Truthfulness in Statements to Others): Making false statements of material fact to third parties, law enforcement, or administrative bodies during representation.
4.04 (Respect for Rights of Third Persons): Using means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, burden, or violate the constitutional rights of a third person.
8.04(a)(3) & (a)(12) (Misconduct): Engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, or engaging in conduct that obstructs or perverts the administration of justice.
RELATED SITES
The following independent websites were created and maintained as public-interest consumer advocacy platforms. These specific domains constitute the primary subject matter of this complaint, serving as direct evidence of unauthorized account lockouts, contract concealment, targeted service disruption designed to suppress public consumer verification, perjury, and extortion.
