Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit

COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY

I, respectfully, submit my Complaint of Judicial Misconduct for your consideration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 351-

364 regarding JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES (DISTRICT OF NEVADA). I allege conduct "prejudicial to the effective and

expeditious administration of the business of the courts."

Six (6) cases in question involve a Nevada homeowner association ("HOA") fraud scheme involving:

 Embezzlement (verified by District Attorney letter) See Exhibit 1,

 Extortion by unlicensed debt collector (verified by State of Nevada letter) See Exhibit 2,
 Death threats (verified by Reno Police Department) See Exhibit 3,
 Fraudulently-obtained restraining orders on at least (3) "whistleblower" homeowner victims in
collusion between HOA Board President (embezzled HOA funds) and HOA attorney, GAYLE A. KERN
See Exhibit 4.

These unlawful actions resulted in my loss of liberty, illegal foreclosure of my home, and extortion of my

retirement. I have filed a motion to proceed anonymously with District of Nevada due to ongoing threats to my personal

safety and liberty.

I allege JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES' misconduct has repeatedly deprived my right to implied honest services, due

process and property rights. JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES' alleged misconduct, includes, but is not limited to:

 Ex Parte communication See Exhibit 5, 1

 Extrajudicial Prejudice / “Favoritism” Resulting in Unsanctioned Perjury/Perpetrations of Fraud See Exhibit 6 2

 Abuses of Discretion/Due Process Deprivations:

o No "Random" Assignment of (8) cases – ALL my cases are ALWAYS assigned to JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES, 3
o Wrongful dismissal of (5) five triable-issue cases without citing any valid legal authority, 4
o Denial of any oral argument hearings in (5) five cases in question, severely depriving my due process, 5
o Denial of any oral argument hearings which might establish if JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES has “conflicts of
interest” (business or personal relationships with defendants or their attorneys), 6

1
3:08-cv-00176-RCJ –RAM, (D. Nev. 2007)
2
Johnson v. Truckee River Highlands HOA, LLC, (D. Nev. 2009), Docs. 15-2, 29. See Request for Judicial Notice (See Exhibit 6)
3
3:09-cv-527-RCJ-RAM; 3:09cv00530-RCJ-RAM; 3:11cv00296, 3:11cv00087; 2:2010cv02264; 3:09cv00016; 3:08cv00253;
3:08cv00176
4
3:11cv00087; 2:2010cv02264; 3:09cv00016; 3:08cv00253; 3:08cv00176; Judge Jones dismissed my case, Moulton v. Eugene Burger
Management, Gayle A. Kern, (D. Nev. 2008), Doc. 126, without apparent good cause stating: “no genuine issue of material fact…to
Plaintiff’s Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claim” when, in fact, there was substantial criminal evidence and on-point authority
proving otherwise.
5, 6
3:11cv00087; 2:2010cv02264; 3:09cv00016; 3:08cv00253; 3:08cv00176

Page 1 of 5
 o Failure to provide me with written notice of November 7, 2011 hearing (I never authorized the Court in this
case to send notification via email), thereby, depriving my due process. 7
o Intentional non-compliance with Fed R. Civ. P. Rule 58 for failure to file final judgment after well over the
required 150 day period has passed, thereby denying my right to appeal. I have contacted the Clerk’s Office
numerous times, to no avail. 8
o Failure to order IFP (depriving service of defendants prior to statute of limitations), 9

 Deprivation of Implied Right to Honest Services Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. § 1341

o As a result of the Court’s misconduct, I have been repeatedly deprived of honest services, resulting in the
illegal foreclosure of my home and extortion of retirement due to an HOA fraud scheme. I have, also,
incurred significant costs for federal court filing fees, all due to the continued perpetrations of fraud on and
by JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES’ Court. While I am a victim to Right to Honest Services, so is the Judiciary, so are
the U.S. Taxpayers victims to this fraud. So long as my due process is deprived, I will continue to litigate
however long it takes to achieve equitable relief and Justice.

I was advised by the Department of Justice to file a complaint with Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit. See

Exhibit 7. Currently, the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation are investigating and prosecuting

massive homeowners’ association fraud schemes in Nevada perpetrated by attorneys, judges, property management

companies, etc. See Exhibit 8.

A. “MATERIAL WITNESS”, JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES MUST BE DISQUALIFIED PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 455

GAYLE A. KERN, GAYLE A. KERN, LTD are a plaintiffs in case (Kern v. Moulton 3:11cv-00296); GAYLE A. KERN and

GAYLE A. KERN, LTD. were defendants in my (5) five cases. 10 Attorney, GAYLE A. KERN seems to have a history of perjury

and false statements in federal court.

FEBRUARY 11, 2008 - GAYLE A. KERN, ESQ. made the following false statement in federal court:

Sheryl Moulton owns a condominium in the Lakeside Plaza Condominium Association. This real property
is in Washoe County, Nevada. Although she claims that she does not reside in this condominium, she
does assert that she is receiving worker's compensation from the State of Nevada.". See Moulton v.
Eugene Burger Management Corporation, (N.D. Cal. 2007) Doc. 62: 4- 5.

GAYLE A. KERN’S apparent motive was to infer I had somehow perpetrated a fraud by collecting

worker’s compensation while living in another state. GAYLE A. KERN’S statement was false as I have never

received worker's compensation in my entire lifetime, nor have I have made such a claim. GAYLE A. KERN, ESQ.,

of course, could never substantiate her false statements and claims made in federal court with any proof.

7
3:11cv00296
8
3:11cv00087
9
Moulton v. Gayle A. Kern, (D. Nev. 2:10-cv-02264-PMP-GWF), Docs. 2, 36.
10
3:11cv00087; 2:2010cv02264; 3:09cv00016; 3:08cv00253; 3:08cv00176
Page 2 of 5
 NOVEMBER 17, 2009 - GAYLE A. KERN, ESQ. perpetrated fraud on JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES’ courtroom by

committing perjury in federal court. This occurred in a separate case filed by another alleged HOA victim, Mr. Neil

Johnson. See Johnson v. Truckee River Highlands HOA, LLC, (D. Nev. 2009), Docs. 15-2, 29. See Exhibit 6.

GAYLE A. KERN’S signed affidavit claims “I was not personally served with the summons and complaint.”

GAYLE A. KERN’S perjurious affidavit is a complete contradiction from the U.S. Marshal’s Service affidavit, and given the

continuous pattern of predicate acts of false statements, misrepresentations and omissions by attorney, GAYLE A. KERN,

GAYLE A. KERN, ESQ., at a minimum, has perpetrated fraud on federal court and committed perjury.

JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES', to my knowledge, never sanctioned or reprimanded GAYLE A. KERN for this said

perjury and perpetration of fraud on his courtroom, and it seems to suggest JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES’ extrajudicial

“favoritism” to GAYLE A. KERN, ESQ. See Johnson v. Truckee River Highlands HOA, LLC, (D. Nev. 2009), Docs. 15-2, 29.

See Exhibit 6.

Since JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES seemingly allowed perjury and perpetration of fraud in his courtroom by GAYLE

A. KERN, it is highly likely, I will call JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES as a material witness to KERN’S perjury, therefore, pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 455, JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES must disqualify and recuse himself from the case, Kern v. Moulton, (D. Nev.

2011). 11

B. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
12
SEPTEMBER 16, 2010 - Eugene Burger Management and Lakeside Plaza defendants filed a motion to dismiss.

JANUARY 14, 2011 - I attempted settlement negotiations with opposing counsel, KEVIN BROWN, ESQ., (attorney

for Eugene Burger Management and Lakeside Plaza defendants). 13

“Conveniently”, this very same day, as my attempted good-faith settlement negotiations with KEVIN BROWN,

ESQ., JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES dismissed KEVIN BROWN'S clients from my case. 14 "Conveniently," this all just

“happened” the same day, 121 days later after defendants' September 16, 2010 Motion to Dismiss was filed.

11
3:11cv00296
12
Moulton v. Eugene Burger Management (D. Nev. 2007, 3:08-cv-00176-RCJ-RAM), Doc. 131.
13
Defendants Eugene Burger Management Corporation, Eugene J. Burger, Kevin Berg, Lakeside Plaza Condominium Association, Ulla
Christensen Michael Grady, Daniel Joseph, Frank Perau, Rich Svihla.
14
Moulton v. Eugene Burger Management (D. Nev. 2008, 3:08-cv-00176-RCJ-RAM), Doc. 137.
Page 3 of 5
 Ex parte communication is highly suspected. I believe email or telephone records might prove ex parte

communications between JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES (or his clerk) and KEVIN BROWN, ESQ. or LAW FIRM (THAGARD,

REISS AND BROWN, LLP).

FEBRUARY 14, 2011 - JUDGE LARRY R. HICKS recused himself from my other HOA fraud case within (1) one

month of the alleged ex parte communication between opposing counsel, KEVIN BROWN, ESQ. and JUDGE ROBERT C.

JONES. Three days later, FEBRUARY 17, 2011, JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES was “conveniently” reassigned to yet another

one of my HOA fraud cases, thereby, denying my due process. 15

C. EXTRAJUDICIAL PREJUDICE

1. NO "RANDOM" ASSIGNMENT - ALL (8) EIGHT CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES 16

There are total of (8) federal cases I have filed - all assigned to JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES. 17 For all intents and

purposes, (2) two cases were unrelated to the matter at hand, while the remaining (6) six cases in question involve a

homeowner association fraud scheme, with GAYLE A. KERN, GAYLE A. KERN, LTD. as parties to those cases. The (6) six

cases in question were all assigned to the same judge, JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES.

Statistically speaking, the "random" assignment of all (8) cases to JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES is nearly impossible.

I suspect JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES has requested to preside over all of my cases, which has severely deprived my due

process. Any "reasonable" person would also make the assumption these cases are NOT “randomly” assigned, therefore,

depriving due process.

2. (4) FOUR AFFIDAVITS OF BIAS REGARDING JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES

Please refer to my Affidavit of Bias from my Motion to Disqualify, filed herewith. 18 See Exhibit 9. Please refer to

enclosed Affidavits of Bias regarding JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES from another alleged HOA victim, Neil M. Johnson and

witnesses, Zachary Larkin and Moo Yim. (GAYLE A. KERN is also a party to Mr. Johnson’s case). See Johnson v. Truckee

River Highlands HOA, LLC, (D. Nev. 2009), Doc. 198; See Exhibits 10, 11, 12.

15
3:11-cv-00087-RCJ-RAM (D. Nev. 2011), Docs. 8, 9
16, 16
3:09-cv-527-RCJ-RAM; 3:09cv00530-RCJ-RAM; 3:11cv00296, 3:11cv00087; 2:2010cv02264; 3:09cv00016; 3:08cv00253;
3:08cv00176
18
3:11cv00296 (D. Nev. 2011), Doc. 47.
Page 4 of 5
 GAYLE A. KERN, GAYLE A. KERN, LTD. court filing statements seem to suggest extrajudicial “familiarity” with my

prior HOA fraud cases:

The judges and the magistrate judges in Reno are familiar with the facts of this case, having decided three of
Moulton’s cases, and having a pending action by her in the Reno division… See Moulton v. Kern, (D. Nev. 2010
2:10-cv-02264-PMP-GWF), Doc. 23 ¶8.

The judges and the magistrate judges in Reno are familiar with the facts of this case, having decided all five (5)
of Defendant’s cases.” See Kern v. Moulton (D. Nev. 2011 3:11cv00296-RCJ-PAL), Doc. 22 ¶8.

D. DEPRIVATION OF IMPLIED RIGHT TO HONEST SERVICES PURSUANT TO 18 U. S. C. § 1341 19

I have lost my liberty, home and retirement due to an HOA fraud scheme. To top it off, as a financially-indigent,

pro se litigant, I have incurred the significant cost of federal court filing fees due to these repeated deprivations of my

due process and implied right to honest services.

I contend that the wrongful dismissals of four (4) prior HOA fraud cases involving GAYLE A. KERN, ESQ., along

with GAYLE A. KERN’S unsanctioned perjury and JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES’ repeated abuses of process and deprivations

of due process clearly prove extrajudicial prejudice and “favoritism”, thereby, proving fair judgment is, indeed,

impossible. Any “reasonable” person would make the same assumption that fair judgment is impossible.

While I have the utmost regard and respect for JUDGE ROBERT C. JONES, clearly, the issues of constitutional due

process deprivations must be addressed.

Based on the foregoing misconduct, I respectfully, request this Council investigate and address these egregious

miscarriages of justice. Thank you.

Jane Doe
a.k.a. Sheryl Moulton

19
McNally v. United States, 483 US 350 (S. Ct. 1987) “The term "defraud" is not unique to § 1341. Another federal statute, 18 U. S. C.
§ 371, uses the identical term in prohibiting conspiracies to "defraud the United States," and the construction we have given to that
statute should be virtually dispositive here. In Haas v. Henkel, 216 U. S. 462 (1910), the Court, dealing with the predecessor to § 371,
rejected the argument that there could be no conspiracy to defraud in the absence of contemplated monetary or property loss. "The
statute is broad enough in its terms to include any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful
function of any department of Government." Id., at 479. Again, in Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U. S. 182 (1924), the Court
described the scope of the statute as prohibiting not only conspiracies to "cheat the Government out of property or money, but it
also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means
that are dishonest." Id., at 188.[6] It is thus clear that a 369*369 conspiracy to defraud the United States does not require any
evidence that the Government has suffered any property or pecuniary loss. See also United States v. Barnow, 239 U. S. 74, 79
(1915).”
Page 5 of 5