No.99-396

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER TERM, 1999

__________________________________________

In Re: JAMES CONSTANT,

Debtor,

______________________________________________

JAMES CONSTANT

Petitioner,

V.

DAVID L. RAY, Trustee;

ADVANCED MICRO-DEVICES, INC.

et. als,

Respondents.

_________________________________________________

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

James Constant


Pro-per Petitioner

i

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

Does a federal court have an obligation to actually litigate and finally determine its jurisdiction to void, assign, and sell patents under California state laws when the issue of such jurisdiction is raised by a party?

Can the inferior courts constitutionally decide a case against debtor without actually litigating and finally deciding issues presented to them by debtor for the first time?

ii

LIST OF PARTIES

Kristin M. Cano, One Corporate Plaza, Suite 110, Newport Beach, California 92660

Jonathan R. Ellowitz, 4400 MacArthur Blvd, Suite 300, Newport Beach, California 92660

Robert Morrill, Skjerven, Morrill, Macpherson, Franklin and Friel, 25 Metro Drive, Suite 700 San Jose, California 95110, Attorney for Anthony de Alcuaz, Skjerven, Morrill, Macpherson, Franklin and Friel, and AdvancedMicro-Devices, Inc.

Salzburg, Ray & Bergman, 10960 Wilshire Boulevard, 10th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90024-3702 Attorney for David L. Ray, Trustee and Salzburg, Ray & Bergman

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

OPINIONS BELOW .................................................1
JURISDICTION ........................................................1
STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED ..............1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE ..................................1
REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT ...............4
I. The Jurisdictional Issue ............................................4
II. Statement of Issues at Bar ......................................6
III. Debtor's Proposed Findings of Facts .....................8
SUMMARY ............................................................12
CONCLUSION ......................................................13

iv

INDEX TO APPENDIX

A. Order of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit entered 18 June, 1999

B. Order of the District Court entered 5 May, 1999

C. Statutes And Rules Involved:

BR 2016(a)

BR 7012(h)(3)

35 USC 261

FULL BOOK AVAILABLE AT https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/333375