OFFICE OF TIlE SECRETARY

CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET

Date Printed: Oct 01, 2007 16:31

PAPER NUMBER:

ACTION OFFICE:

AUTHIOR:

AFFILIATION:

ADDRESSEE:

LTR-07-0670

EDO

Po Kee Wong

MD

Dale Klein

LOGGING DATE: 10/01/2007

AEDODEDMRSDEDRDEDIAAO

SUBJECT: Cordial invitation to relevant U.S. Government officials: news media and worldwide experts inrelevant fileds flor ope review and evaluation of U.S. Supreme Courts: 06-1705 and 209....

ACTION:

DISTRIBUTION:

LETTER DATE:

ACKNOWLEDGED

SPECIAL IHANDLING:

Appropriate

Chairman, Conrs..encls to: EDO / O

09/28/2007

No

Made publicly available in ADAMS via F.DO/DPC

NOTES:'

FILE LOCATION: ADAMS

DATE DUE: DATE SIGNED:

CHAIRMA`N- Cordial invitation of relevant U.S. Governm ent Officials; News Media and Worldwide Experts in relevant field •bg-1

From: "Po Kee Wong" <pokwong@verizon.net>To: <suprectbriefs@usdoj.gov>, <chairman@nrc.gov>, <MFL@nrc.gov>, <BWSgnrc.gov>,<abement@nsf.gov>, <jon.dudas@uspto.gov>, <Chun-I.Chiang@pentagon.af.mil>,<Chuong.Ngo@uspto.gov>, <yourcomments@foxnews.com>, <fns@foxnews.com>, "'Mitchelson, Mary"'<Mary.Mitchelson@ed.gov>, <meesee.phua@longandfoster.com>, "'Morris, Alexander"'<Alexander. Morris@hq.doe.gov>, <mcontomp@boston.kl2.ma.us>,<meesee.phua@longandfoster.com>, <mintenlee@yahoo.com>, <mlee@nsf.gov>, "'Caspari, Mary L"'<mcaspari@utdallas.edu>, <Mayor@dc.gov>, <Michelle.Rhee@dc.gov>, <chin8673@yahoo.com>,<fengd@utdallas.edu>, <Fenty@NBC4.com>, <em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw>,<em50920@email.ncku.edu.tw>, <ChihHongChen@aol .com>, <chin8673@yahoo.com>,<chensiung@aol.com>, <papapizza@comcast.net>, <esia9@buaa.edu.cn>, <fesi@fesi.org.uk>,<richard.shih@lmco.com>, <richard@mathforum.org>, <aliilik@gmail.com>, <domrosa@snet.net>,<anisohedral@yahoo.com>, <chouk@mail.nlm.nih.gov>, <Michael.Sohlman@nobel.se>,<rtclhu@yalhoo.com>, "'Rahul"' <rahulshandilya@yahoo.com>, "'Robinson, Kellie N. (HQ-NBOOO)'"<kre,'bins1@nasa.gov>, "'Rotella, Robert F. (HQ-MAO0O)'" <Robert.F.Rotella@nasa.gov>,<rstutman@btu.org>, <ronald.lai@mms.gov>, <rsaa@kva.se>, "'NCKU DC.' <nckudc@yahoo.com>,.. nateyen@post.harvard.edu>, <szuh@yahoo.com>, <shousun@yahoo.com>,<shiuhwen@hotmail.com>, "'simon Tam. <simonfctam@yahoo.com.hk>, <sjcl@nrc.gov>,<sam2@nrc.gov>, <SJCCommClerk@sjc.state.ma.us>, <SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us>Date: Fri, Sep 28, 2007 12:13 PMSubject: Cordial invitation of relevant U.S. Government Officials; News Media and WorldwideExperts in relevant fields for open review and evaluation of U.S. Supreme Courts Cases:06-1705 and 07-209 from the 17 attachments.

Dear Solicitor General Clement ET AL:

This is to inform all of you that the relevant documents in the 17attachments of this E-mail have been submitted in hard copies to the U.S.Federal Supreme Court about Case No. 06-1705 and Case No. 07-209. It is myopinion that the Court Judges as well as your department officials should bewell informed the opinions from the expert referee in the relevant filed ofexpertise. There are no reasons for the Case 06-1705 (Patent Application08/980,657) should be lingered for more than 13 years at all. Please openthe attachment tmce 2008 template.doc-7.doc (1 59KB) and read the messages 6,7,8 and click on " show all messages" and read number 14 Thanks forProfessor Rosa's Reply to "TI an order of operatioIns by Susan Moore"by Po Kee Wong ( Post: Jan 9, 2004 3:46PM). There were many opendiscussions showing why the Judges have been making the wrong judgment onthis case 06-1705.

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 25,2007 1:16 PMTo: 'Rahul'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: An example of E-mails being sent for more than 20 times

L9J )MA - odalivtatior66f re6_ev4nt US.9 G-o'v-e-rr-m'e-n-t "O-ff-i-c~ial- -e- _Med~i~aan'_d -Worldwi de, -E-xp-e,,r-t~s'iý-nTrel-eva-ntffielde

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 25,2007 12:02 PMTo: 'Rahul'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: FW: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Rahul:

Here is an example of the E-mail having been sent for more than 20 timeswhich I having deleting since when it was first sent.

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Thursday, September 20,2007 11:43 AMTo: 'Rotella, Robert F. (HQ-MAOOO)'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: RE: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Dear Mr. Rotella:

Thank you very much for your message on behalf of NASA on the subject issuesof (1) NASA-1-218 Case and (2) request for sending a copy of my FOIA PIInformation Report to U.S. Supreme Court as a result of failing responsesfrom NASA officials for a long period of time about the subject issue number(1) and for two months about the subject issue of (2) until the responsefrom Ms. Kathy Bayer.

All the subject matters of (1) and (2) can be fully cleared and explainedfrom the attached 16 documents.

Please believe me that I did not repeatedly send you or any one of multipleidentical messages. I was so annoyed by whoever did that to me repeatedlyagain and again for more than 10 times on my messages of very largeattachments like this one, I warned them openly in the internet that I willtake them to the FCC and to the U.S. Judicial courts of levels for theirintentional and illegally blocking and interfering my legal communicationwith the U.S. governmental organizations. Those repeated messages are sent

C .C . nvit.tion o re S Media and Worldwide Experts relevant fieldsbge3

by someone who claims that we must buy their product of "InternetCommunication Security "I have been deleting those repeated messages frommy computer more than 10 time everyday. The current message being sent toyou is only once by me. If you received this message of very largeattachments more than one time, please call me at 301-585-3453

And both of us can track down whoever do this to us and formally take themto the Judicial Court for their violation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071.

Please answer this E-mail by giving me your telephone number such that wecan talk directly clarify about the subject matters further.

Wong, Po Kee

?S ?? 1

2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344 USA

Tel; 301-585-3453

E-mail; pokwong@verizon.net

Pro Se Petitioner for Supreme Court Cases: 07-209 and 06-1705 that can beobtained from the following two websites immediately:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docketlO7-209.htm

And

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/06-1705.htm

From: Rotella, Robert F. (HQ-MAOOO) [mailto:Robert.F.Rotella@nasa.gov] Sent:Wednesday, September 19, 2007 8:07 AMTo: pokwong@verizon.net

'[C'HAIRMAN - Co~i ni~iho(~en u::6v&rnm-nvofficials'; News Media- a'nd Worldwvide~ Experts in rel'evanlt fieldg

Subject: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Dear Mr. Wong,

I have been assigned to review the request you made of the NASA Office ofthe General Counsel in a series of E-mail messages addressed to Ms. KathyBayer of this office.

Initially, I must respectfully request that you refrain from sendingmnultiple identical E-mail messages to us. This practice only results indelaying consideration of your request because every one of your messagesneeds to be read and evaluated. We have realized that all of theapproximately twelve messages you sent to Ms. Bayer yesterday contained theidentical text and attachments. Sending multiple messages in this mannerwill not afford consideration of your request any higher priority. Anyfurther correspondence addressed to the Office of the General should beconducted with me and not with Ms. Bayer, until further notice.

Second, we are not clear about the nature of what you are requesting fromthis office. Are you making a FOIA request for the first time? Or, are youinquiring about the status of a FOIA request that you have already made? Ingeneral, requests under FOIA are directed to, and considered by, the NASAFOIA Office, rather than the Office of the General Counsel. Accordingly, youshould pursue any FOIA-related inquiries directly with that office.

Finally, the assistance we are able to provide you is limited to that whichis specifically authorized by law and regulation. We are unable to file anydocuments with the United States Supreme Court (or anywhere else) on yourbehalf. To the extent that you make a proper FOIA request, we will providethose documents -- which are available and properly releasable to you underthe law -- that you are seeking, and you may then make whatever use of themthat you deem appropriate.

Again, I ask you to confine your messages to those which clarify the natureof the information you are seeking from NASA and to avoid sending usmultiple messages which contain the same information.

Sincerely,

Robert F. RotellaSenior Patent AttorneyOffice of the General Counsel

CHAIMAN - C-ord-ia-l in-v-it"ati"o-n -o-f -reeIv-a~nt U.S. G-overn-me'nt Offwi-ca I-s'; N-e ws M-eýdi-a 'a"-n-d-W-o-r-ldwi~de -E-xpert's-i~n ,r~e-leva-n~t fieldý bge

NASA HeadquartersWashington, DC 20546-0001

CC: "Po Kee Wong"' <pokwong@verizon.net>', <adam.wong@fcps.edu>

CHAIRMAN - TlEXT.-htr agm0 a'g"e 1," I

Dear Solicitor General Clement ET AL:

This is to inform all of you that the relevant documents in the 17 attachments of this E-mail have beensubmitted in hard copies to the U.S. Federal Supreme Court about Case No. 06-1705 and Case No. 07-209. It is my opinion that the Court Judges as well as your department officials should be well informedthe opinions from the expert referee in the relevant filed of expertise. There are no reasons for the Case06-1705 (Patent Application 08/980,657) should be lingered for more than 13 years at all. Please openthe attachment tmce 2008 template.doc-7.doc (159KB) and read the messages 6,7,8 and click on "showall messages" and read number 14 Thanks for Professor Rosa's Reply to "TI an order of operations bySusan Moore" by Po Kee Wong ( Post: Jan 9, 2004 3:46PM). There were many open discussionsshowing why the Judges have been making the wrong judgment on this case 06-1705.

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 1:16 PMTo: 'Rahul'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: An example of E-mails being sent for more than 20 times

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007.12:02 PMTo: 'Rahul'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: FW: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Rahul:

Here is an example of the E-mail having been sent for more than 20 times which I having deleting sincewhen it was first sent.

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:43 AMTo: 'Rotella, Robert F. (HQ-MAOOO)'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: RE: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

I C A A MAN -- T ....... E-X-T-fidt'n "I CHAIRMAN - TEXT.htm

Page 2

Dear Mr. Rotella:

Thank you very much for your message on behalf of NASA on the subject issues of(1) NASA-1-218 Caseand (2) request for sending a copy of my FOIA PI Information Report to U.S. Supreme Court as a result offailing responses from NASA officials for a long period of time about the subject issue number (1) and fortwo months about the subject issue of (2) until the response from Ms. Kathy Bayer.

All the subject matters of (1) and (2) can be fully cleared and explained from the attached 16 documents.

Please believe me that I did not repeatedly send you or any one of multiple identical messages. I was soannoyed by whoever did that to me repeatedly again and again for more than 10 times on my messagesof very large attachments like this one, I warned them openly in the internet that I will takethem to theFCC and to the U.S. Judicial courts of levels for their intentional and illegally blocking and interf6ring mylegal communication with the U.S. governmental organizations. Those repeated messages are sent bysomeone who claims that we must buy their product of "Internet Communication Security "I have beendeleting those repeated messages from my computer more than 10 time everyday. The current messagebeing sent to you is only once by me. If you received this message of very large attachments more thanone time, please call me at 301-585-3453

And both of us can track down whoever do this to us and formally take them to the Judicial Court for theirviolation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071.

Please answer this E-mail by giving me your telephone number such that we can talk directly clarify aboutthe subject matters further.

Wong, Po Kee

S

2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344 USA

Tel; 301-585-3453

E-mail; pokwonqa.verizon.net

Pro Se Petitioner for Supreme Court Cases: 07-209 and 06-1705 that can be obtained from the followingtwo websites immediately:

C"-H'AI'R'M''A-- 'N""_--'TEXT'h't' m ý Pag e 3CHAIRMAN -TEXT.htm

Page 31

http://www.supJremecourtus.gov/docket/07-209.htm

And

http://www.surpremecourtus.cqov/docket/06-1 705.htm

From: Rotella, Robert F. (HQ-MA000) [mailto: Robert. F. Rotella@nasa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, September19, 2007 8:07 AMTo: pokwong@verizon.netSubject: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Dear Mr. Wong,

I have been assigned to review the request you made of the NASA Office of-theGeneral Counsel in a series of E-mail messages addressed to Ms. Kathy Bayerlof thisoffice.

Initially, I must respectfully request that you refrain from sending multiple identical E-mail messages to us. This practice only results in delaying consideration of yourrequest because every one of your messages needs to be read and evaluated. Wehave realized that all of the approximately twelve messages you sent to Ms. Bayeryesterday contained the identical text and attachments. Sending multiple messages inthis manner will not afford consideration of your request any higher priority. Any furthercorrespondence addressed to the Office of the General should be conducted with meand not with Ms. Bayer, until further notice.

I CHAAMAN-ý--TtXT-Rm' age 4 ili . ... . . . .... ..... . ....... ..... ... .. ...... . .... .. ........ .. .. .. . .. . . . .. . ............ ... . . ....... . .... . . . ..... P a ge.......... ... . . . .. . .. 4.. .

Second, we are not clear about the nature of what you are requesting from thisoffice. Are you making a FOIA request for the first time? Or, are you inquiring about thestatus of a FOIA request that you have already made? In general, requests under FOIAare directed to, and considered by, the NASA FOIA Office, rather than the Office of theGeneral Counsel. Accordingly, you should pursue any FOIA-related inquiries directlywith that office.

Finally, the assistance we are able to provide you is limited to that which is specificallyauthorized by law and regulation. We are unable to file any documents with the UnitedStates Supreme Court (or anywhere else) on your behalf. To the extent that you makea proper FOIA request, we will provide those documents -- which are available andproperly releasable to you under the law -- that you are seeking, and you maythen make whatever use of them that you deem appropriate.

Again, I ask you to confine your messages to those which clarify the nature of theinformation you are seeking from NASA and to avoid sending us multiple messageswhich contain the same information.

Sincerely,

Robert F. RotellaSenior Patent AttorneyOffice of the General CounselNASA HeadquartersWashington, DC 20546-0001

CHAIRMAN..................... ......... Page 1

APPENDIXTF

Proposal Cover Sheet

Announcement of Opportunity 98-OES-02Proposal No. _ _ (Leave Blank for NASA Use)

Tide:APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLES FOR TRIANA

Principal Investigator:: Dr. Po Kee Wong

Department:

.Institution: SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY

SLreet!PO Box: 50 Bradley Street

City: Somerville State: Mass. Zip: 02145-2924

'Country: U.S.A E-rmail:

Telephone: 617-628-8157 Fax: 617-628-8157

Co-Investigators:Name Institution Telephone

.Dr.Sheldon Greenfield, Tuft University Tel:617-636-8665 Fax:617636-7988

Dr.Celia L. Moore, U Mass.-Boston Tel:617-287-5777 Fax:617- 287-6511.

Mr. Tony Morrison, Boston Public Schools, 617-635-9907 Fax:617-635-7781

Budget:1st Year$ 4 4 3

,000. 2nd Year:$4 59

,8 3

4 3rd Year'$ 4 78,687. Total: $1, 38 1,5 52 1

Certification of Compliance with AUolicable Executive Orders and U.S. Code

By submitting the proposal identified in this Cover Sheet/Proposal Summary in response to thisResearch Announcement, the Authorizing Official of the proposing institution (or the individualproposer if there is no proposing institution) as identified below:• certifiesithat the statements made in this proposal are true and complete to the best of his/her

knoi'yledge;* agrees to accept the obligations to comply with NASA award terms and conditions if an

award is made as a result of this proposal: andconfirms compliance with all provisions, rules, and stipulations set forth in the twoCertifications contained in this NRA (namely, (i) Certification of Compliance with the NASARegulations Pursuant to Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs, and (ii)

CHAIR AN -NASA 99OE-cl 8-68-oc Pg

APPENDIX D

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

NASA Research Announcement 99-OES-08

Proposal No. (Leave Blank for NASA Use)APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLES TO

Title: SUPPORT ESTO PRORGAMS: AIST,ATI,IIP AND HPCC/ESS.

Principal Investigator: Dr. Po Kee Wong

Department: R & D and Consulting Services

Institution: SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY ( U.S. Federal Supply Code:5R583)

Stret/O Bx: 50 B~radley Street

Somerville Mass. 02145-2930City: State: Zip:

Country: U.S.A. E-mail: pokwong@aassed.net,

Telephone: 617-628-8157 Fax: 617-628-8157

Co-Investigators:

Name _nstitution & email address Telephone & Address

George Komar gcorge.komar@gsfc.nasa.gov 301-286-0007

James R. Fischer ESS Project Manager esscan@cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov

Steven A.:Smith steven.a.smith@gsfc.nasa.gov 301-286-7336

Budget:IstYear:$500,000. 2ndYear: $519S,500- 3rd Year: $

5 3 9,

7 6 1. Total: $1,559,261.

Proposal Topic Category - Check one from the five areas below (Ref. Para. III (b)):

S. On.board Data Processing and Intelligent Sensor Control-On-board Satellite Data Organization, Analsysis and Storage-Transmission and Network Configuration-Intelligent Platform Control

__.Architectures and Standards

3/11

~CHA-IM A N"A-'S-A-!I2-1 -8- 1.-d--c- Page1

National Aeronautics andSpace Admin istration

HeadquartersWashington, DC 20546-0001

Rep to AMtt of: GP(00-37082) August 29, 2000

Mr. Po Kee WongCEOSystems Research Company50 Bradley StreetSomerville, MA 02145

Re: Administrative Claim ofPo Kee Wong for Infringement of U.S.Patent Numbers 5,084,232 and 5,848,377, NASA Case No. 1-218

Dear Mr. Wong:

Your letter addressed to Mr. Edward A. Frankre dated July 26, 2000 regarding your appeal tosupport your proposal number NRA-96-HEDS-03 entitled "Applications of Trajectoly SolidAngle and the Wong's Angles to Solve Fundamental Problems in Microgravity" has beenforwarded to me for a response.. Subsequent to that letter during a phone call with Mr. Alan J.Kennedy of my office, you requested that NASA consider your appeal and that the appeal be

converted to an administrative claim for patent infringement for the two subject to patents.We have received official copies of your'U.S. patents from the United States Patent andTrademark Offce and now consider this matter to be an administrative claim for patentinfringement. In order to proceed further with this investigation, we will need you to provideus with the following information.

(1) The identification of all claims of the patent alleged to be infringed.

(2) ,The identification of all procurements known to the claimant or patent ownerwhich involve the alleged infringing item or process, including the identity ofthe vendor or contractor and the Government procuring activity.

(3) A detailed identification of the accused article or process, particiularly where thearticle or process relates to a component or subcomponent ofthe item procured,an element by element comparison of the representative claims with the accusedarticle or process. If available, this identification should include documentationand drawings to illustrate the accused article or process in suitable detail to enableverification of the infringement comparison.

I§RX1RN4MAN - NS-282dc Page 1 !

2

(4) The names and addresses of all past and present licenses under the patent, and

copies of all license agreements and releases involving the patent.

(5) A brief description of all litigation in which the patent has been or is now

involved, and the present status thereof.

(6) A list of all persons to whom notices of infringement have been sent, including

all departments and agencies of the Government, and a statement of the ultimatedisposition of each.

(7) A description of Government employment or military service, if any, by the

inventor and/or patent owner.

(8) A list of all Government contracts under which the inventor, patent owner, or

anyone in privity with him performed work relating to the patented subject matter.

(9) Evidence of title to the patent alleged to be infringed or other right to make theclaim.

(10) A copy of the Patent Office file of the patent, if available, to claimant.

(11) Pertinent prior art known to claimant, not contained in the Patent Office file,particularly publications and foreign art.

In addition to the foregoing, if claimant can provide a statement that the investigation

may be limited to the specifically identified accused articles or processes, or to a

specific procurement, it may materially expedite determination of the claim.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Kennedy at (202) 358-2065.

Sincerely,

Associate General Counsel(Intellectual Property)

CHAIRMAN - NASA-1218-3.d0c Page 1 i...... .... ....

Pagg.... ... ... ...

r

SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY (SRC)50 Bradley Street, Somerville, Massachusetts 02145-2930,USA

Tel. and Fax: 617-628-8157Dr. Po Kee Wong. CEO

E-mail: pokwongetmassed.net

To:Attention of OP (01-37044)

Mr. John G. Mannix, Associate General Counsel (Intellectual Property)National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationHeadquarters. Washington, DC 20546-0001Tel.: 202-358-2065 (Mr. Kennedy)

Re: Administrative Claim of Po Kee Wong for Infringement of U.S. Patent Numbers 5,084,232 and5,848,377, NASA Case No. 1-218

Dear Mr. Mannix:

Thtank you for your letters of August 7, 2001 and of August 29, 2000 with reference to the subject matter.Your help to provide the ample time period to respond your August 29. 2000 letter point by point isappreciated.The following documents divided in four parts as evidences for the claims arc submitted to you forexamination:

PART I.TECHINCAL PAPERS RELEVANT TO BOTH US PATENTS HAVING BEEN REVIEWED,PRESENTED AND PUBLISHED AT INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES: 68pages.

1. 1." BASIC NEEDS OF HUMAN BEINGS AS THE PURPOSES AND FOUNDATIONS FOR THEEXISTENCE OF GOVERNING INSTITUTIONS AND THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE ANDTECHNOLOGY ".A paper presented at 2001 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress &Exposition on Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 930AM at Technical Session # E&TM- 1I at Hilton NewYork/Sheraton New York, New York City, NY.USA.8 pages.

1.2. "APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE (TSA) AND THE WONG'S ANGLES(WA) TO SOLVE PROBLEMS OF THAAD FOR BMDO AND FOR FUTURE MISSIONS OF NASA"US Copyright Registration Number TX5-375-549, April 19, 2001, presented at the Proceedings of theFifteenth SSllPrinceton Conference on Space Manufacturing, May 7-9, 2001.14 pages.

1.3. " APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE CTSA) AND THE WONG'S ANGLES(WA) TO SOLVE PROBLEMS OF THAAD FOR BMDO AND FOR FURTURE MISSIONS OF NASA"Excerpts of document No. 1.2 published in" SPACE MANUFACTURING 13 SETTLINGCIRCUMSOLAR SPACE" Proceeding of the Fifteenth SSI/Princeton Conference on Space ManufacturingMay 7-9,2001. Page 98 to page 101. 4pages.

1.4. " APPLICATIONS OF TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE (TSA) AND WONG'S ANGLE (WA) TOSOLVE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS IN PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY " IAF-00-. 1. 10 paper

CHAIRMAN - NASAA-11. . . .... Page.

presented and published at 5 1'. International Astronautical Congress, 2-6 Oct 2000/Rio do Janeiro, Brazil.5pages.

1.5. " APPLICATIONS OF TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE (TSA) AND WONG'S ANGLES (WA) FOR

LAUNCHING OF SPACE VEHICLES " IAF-00-S.6.03 paper presented and published at the 51'.International Astronautical Congress, 2-6 Oct 2000/Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 4 pages

1.6." NUMERICAL DATA FOR SATELLITE ALTITUDE CONTROL BY MEANS OF WONG'SANGLES " AIAA-96-1047-CP paper presented and published at the 16h. International Communications

Satellite Systems Conference, February 25-29,1996 Washington DC. page 517 to page 523, 7pages.

1.7. " ON THE FORMULATION AND SOLUTION OF A CLASS OF MAGNETO-VISCOELASTO.DYNAMICS (MVD) GOVERNING EQUATIONS OF MOTION " presented and published at the 1995

ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences-The 15", Biennial Conference on Mechanical Vibration

and Noise, September 17-20, 1995 Boston, Massachusetts. DE-Vol. 84-2 Volume 3- Part B page 1451 to

1456.7pages.

1.8. " ON THE IRROTATIONAL-FLOW VELOCITY POTENTIAL FUNCTION AND A NEWSTREAM FUNCTION OF FLUID MECHANICS " paper No. 80-C2/Aero-3 presented and published at

the ASME Century 2 Aerospace Conference, San Francisco, California, August 13-15, 1980. 10pages.

1.9. "ON THE UNIFIED GENERAL SOLUTIONS OF LINEAR WAVE MOTIONS OF

THERMOELASTODYNAMICS AND HYDRODYNAMICS WITH PRACTICAL EXAMPLES paperNo. 67-APM-32 preaented and published at the ASME Applied Mechanics Conference, Pasadena,

California, June 26-28, 1967. 9pages.

PART II.3 (SRC) SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY'S TECHNICAL PROPOSALS HAVING BEENSUBMITTED TO NASA FOR SUPPORT: 113pages.

1I. 1. SRC-NASA proposal NoNRA-96-HEDS-03-076 entitled" APPLICATIONS OF THETRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLES TO SOLVE FUNDAMENTALPROBLEMS IN PHYSICS "submitted on March 21, 1997. 26pages.

II. 2. SRC-NASA proposal No. TPIANA-0003-0006 entitled " APPLIACTIONS OF THE

TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLE FOR TRIANA " submitted on July 22,1998. 36 pages

11. 3. SRC-NASA proposal No.AIST-0042-0006 entitled " APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORYSOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLE TO SUPPORT ESTO PROGRAMS:AIST;ATI;IIP AND

HPCC/ESS." Submitted on January 22, 2000 51pages

PART 1II,DOCUMENTS OF OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN NASA AND SYSTEMS RESEARCH

COMPANY (SRC) APPEALING TO NASA ADMINISTRATOR FOR CONSIDERATION OFFURTHER REVIEW AND EVALUATION AND CONSIDERATION OF SUPPORTS OF ALL THREE

3 SRC-NASA PROPOSALS LISTED IN PART II: 24pages.

PART IV.DOCUMENTS OF OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS BEWTEEN ALL OTHER US GOVERNMENTALAGENCIES WHICH INCLUDE: THE WHITE HOUSE; IRS; AFLSA/JACP; ARMY; NAVY;MEMBERS OF THE. US CONGRESS; NSF;DOE AND GAO WITH SYSTEMS RESEARCHCOMPANY (SRC)THAT HAD REQUESTED FOR A JOINT INVESTIGATION ABOUT THE

POSSIBLITY OF PREVIOUS SRC'S TECHNICAL PROPOSOALS HAVING BEEN HIJACKED,

FCHAIRMAN - NaSA-12_1 8-5dcPg1

DIVERTED, OR SWINDLED BY OTHER COMPANIES ILLEGALLY AND THAT CAUSE THE IRSTO HAVE ORDERED SRC TO PAY FOR CORPORATE TAXES IN 1995: 49pages.

Based on all the above submitted documents of PART 1; mI; M and IV total of 254 pages, the informationthat you requested in your August 29, 2000 letter can be provided point by point with reference to thesubmitted documents:

(1Tihe identification of all claims of the patent alleged to be infringed.

The identification can be substantiated from the contents of the 9 published papers that provide all analysesinvolved in software development and hardware product designs and invented items mentioned in alldocuments of PART I and PART U that are obvious results under die impacts of all claims in both basicPatents Numbers 5,084,232 and 5,848,377.

(2)The identification of all procurements known to the claimant or patent owner which involve the allegedinfringing item or process, including tie identity of the vendor or contractor and the government procuringactivity.

The identification of all procurements can be verified from the 3 SRC-NASA proposals in PART fI. Thevendors or contractors having been proposed to be involved in the 3 SRC-NASA proposals can beidentified from the contents of these 3 proposals, The major companies and educational institutions thathad communicated with SRC about the utilization ofthe two patents include but not limit to: RaytheonCompany; Lockheed Martin Corp.; The Boeing Co.; Microsoft; IBM: TI; Hewlett Packard; Fairchild;Draper's Laboratory; MUT; Harvard; Caltech; Stanford; Brookhaven National Laboratory; Boston PublicSchools ... etc. The U.S. Federal government procurements that under the impacts of these 2 basic patentswere issued from NASA; DOE; Air Force; Navy; Army: DOT; NSF.

(3) A detailed identification of the accused article or process, particularly where the article or processrelates to a component or subcomponent of tie item procured, an element by element comparison of therepresentative claims with the accused article or process. If available, this identification should includedocumentation of drawings to illustrate the accused article or process in suitable detail to enableverification of the infringement comparison.

The U.S. patent 5,848,377clairas have been used by MSFC for tracking the International Space Satellite(ISS) using the Latitude, Longitude and Altitude method of" Wong's Angles to Determine Trajectories ofObjects " and put them in the Website under the titie of" Where is the International Space Station?" Forexan•ple, the data from MSFC was obtained by SRC on January 24, 2001 at UTC time of 03:42, 04:42,and 04:42 as so indicated in the submitted document PART 1.2. in the section of "SUNvMvIARY OFRESULTS TO OBTAIN THE TRAIECTORY EQUATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SPACESTATION FROM NASA-MSFC OBSERVED DATA"

The U.S. patent 5,084,232 claims can be applied to perform experiments in die ISS under low gravitycondition. Its application can be traced from page 123 of NASA document No. D-13845 (1966) Figure 2 Asketch of a cold-atomic fountain clock. The details can be read from the submitted document 11.1 SRC-NASA proposal No.NRA-96-HEDS-03-076 from page I to page 6.

The submitted documents 1.; 1.2; 1.3; 1.4; 1.5 and 1.6 provide the details of the applications of the claimsfrom the two U.S. Basic Patents Naumber 5,084,232 and 5,848,377.

(4) The names and addresses of all past and present licenses under the patent, and copies of alt licenseagreements and releases involving the patent.Thus far, there are no license agreements with any companies worldwide except that the marketingagreement was signed with the Inventors Express Services (IES), Inc. 57 Exchange Street, Suite 205,

Portland, ME 04101 Tel: 1-800-411-0496. A copy of the IES letter having been sent to the manufacturers

to negotiate for ticensing on behalf of SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY (SRC) is attached.

(5) A brief description of all litigation in which the patent has been or is now involved, and the present

status thereof.Thus far, no litigation is involved.

(6) A list of all persons to whom notices of infringement have been sent, including all department and

*agencies of the Government, and a statement of the ultimate disposition of each.Thus far, no notices of infringement have been sent because of the uncertainty to identify wvlich companiesand organizations that may have infringed the two patents. However, the evidences of some companies

could have done it based on all the documents PART IV being submitted to you.

(7) A description of Government employment or military service, if any, by the inventor and /or patent

owner.The inventor of the two basic patents was ired by Boston Public School (BPS) to work as a teacher fromSeptember 1979 and retired on June 30, 2001. However, the invention of these two basic patents were notinvolved in any government employment or military service as they were clearly described in the section ofintroduction of the patent specifications. Thus far, both the claim basic patents and all the SRC proposalswritten from these two basic patents have not been funded by the public, local, state and the federalgovernmtent of all levels as of to-date. They arc stilt considered proprietaty and that the inventor should be

considered as the unique owner of these patents according to the U.S. Law.

(8) A list of all Government Contracts wider %ilich the inventor, patent osoner, or anyone in privily withhim performed work relating to tie subject matter.None whatsoever as of to-date as indicated in the above statement No. (7).

(9) Evidence of title to the patent alleged to be infringed or other right to make the claim.All the evidences are being submitted with the PART[, It, Ill, and IV documents of total 254 pagem.

(10) A copy of the Patenl Office file of the patent, if available, to claimant.The file is well documented and filed in tie U.S. Patent Office. It contains a huge volume of papers. Theycan be requested for a copy from the U.S. Patent Office if you insist that the current 254 pages of submitted

evidences are not sufficient. IHowever, the patent specifications of5,084,232 and 5,848,377 are also

submitted here inside the document 11.3 SRC-NASA proposal Number AIST-0042-0006.

(11) Pertinent prior ant known to claimant, not contained in the Patent Office File, particularly publicationsand foreign art. The inventor has subntitted site most updated publications of his own for lhisexamination and claims. The nesser art could be contributed by other inventors to improve the current

2 claim basic patents but'not known to tie inventor.Yours test,.

Po Kee WongCEO, SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY (SRC)U.S. Federal Supply Code: 5R583

50 Bradley Street, Somerville, Massachusetts, 02145-2930Tel and Fax: 617-628-8157

E-mail: nokwonegmassed nel

CHAIRMAN-NASA-N RA-96-HES-"0-.dOC Page 1PaQe 1 ~

'V 41 M

FORM I

'ATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATIONOFFICE OF LIFE & riICROGRAVITY SCIENCES & APPLICATIONS

tIt!CROGRAVITY SCIENCES AND APPLICATIONS DIVISION NUIMIBER NIRA -96-HEDS-03

SOLICITED PROPOSAL APPLICATION REVIEW GROUP

PLEASE FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY DATE RECEIVED

1. COMPLETE TITLE OF PROJECT

APPLICATIONS OF TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE (TSA) AND WONG'S ANGLES TO SOLVEFUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS PROBLE41IS IN MICROGRAV1TY

2. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORIPROGRAM DIRECTOR tnzs. o~aa. ae a, :oin,,s -, rr,

PO KEE WONG,Ph.D. & P.HE. ,CEO, SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY (U.S. CAGE CODE: 5R583)

3. COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESStnhlras &all coo, oLoLaion 50 Bradley St reetOft.e ot Orgatan 0yiDorndd• hwyo2.enter C-oaray, orotiawnein Somer ville, M'ass. 02145-2924Orn1aroP.O. a.o U. S.-A.Croy. State. zP Code

4. TELEPHONE NUMBER : 617-628-B157 5. CONGRESS!ONAL DISTRICTlarv nodo. nones,, Oolenoh)nFAXNUMBER : 617-628-8157E-MAIL ADDRESS S. SOCIAL SECURITY 9. 52-56-6'05

7. IS THIS PROPOSAL -.NJ NEW -j RENEWAL -- REVISED8. HAS THIS PROPOSAL (OR SIMILAR REQUEST) BEEN SUBMITTED TO NASA OR ANY OTHER AGENCY?

"D No D Yes IF YES, SPECIFY AGENCY AND YEAR SUBMITTED:

9. CO-INVESTIGATORS (Fist. seand~rn,.oa~aet !0, CO-INVESTIGATOR'S ORGANIZATION

Staff Members: Adam Wong, B.S. SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY (SRC)Anita Wong, NBA. (U.S. CAGE CODE:5R583)

•. 11. DATES OF ENTIRE PROPOSED 12, COSTS REQUESTED FOR FIRST 13. COSTS REQUESTED FOR ENTIREPROJECT PERIOD 12-MONTH BUDGET PERIOD PROPOSED PROJECT PERIOD

From: November 1997 12a. Direct Costs 12t. Total Ccs:s Da Direct Costs 13b, Total Costs

Througfh: June 1998 s89,750. 9g8,725. B 386,832. 5 425,516.

14. APPLICANT ORGANIZATION (OaanitonnaaNle)SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY (SRC) U.S. Federal Supply Code:5R583

15. TYPE OF ORGANIZATION

Non Profit I For Profit (Denhohl U.i For Prolil ($S-• l :1 0 o Public, Specify: -- Federal Lj State - Local

16. ORGANIZATION OFFICIAL TO BE NOTIFIED IF AN AWARD 17. OFFICIAL SIGNING FOR APPLICANTORGANIZATIONSIS MADE (N.-e ov.e. ddr-s h.-e~anenm,; N~.:ra ee•~ • ,

Dr. Po Kee Wong , Program Director Dr. Po Kee 'Wong, Owner50 Br'adley Street SYSTE,',S RESEARCH COMIPAN'Y (SRC)

Somerville, Mass. 02145-2924 617-628-8157

617-628-8157

18. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROGRAM DIRECTOR ASSURANCE: SIGNATURE OF PERSON NAMED IN 205158 0Iee IO arneor reIp•,orihio O SOnhe ieWi-i onou•- t tlie oro.oani 00 oronee ii r on e" a acnoo,,'asherteli ,eOprono aso irrtreanon s ,1 a 9ann nnnai olD , U.S. Coes e 10, S-a•h o 'f11.

Dr. Po Kee Wong, Program Director 0N)2 - t.larch 17,97,1

19. CERTIFICATION AND ACCEPTANCE: I-,f -ai noiei.n,na hen n SIGNATURE OF PERSON NAMED IN 17ar, lne t and 0COM iile to the best of my I nn o k dge, and On ¢00•01the oibhgarl In C001 ro l y t i (n 01 "Pet sinnare nor nap1oblohNASA oeres and osoaiono4 dafýrants 0.0e00 as in e~niu of 00$s aPOMos.i on L . ATFraise oe•olial SO riminal o wens Y STEM Code. T , Sns 100RE 1. COM A

Dr. Po Kee Woog, Owner, SYSTEM'S RESEARCH COM,tAh (0 'noo '-/ Z ,-- oareS 79' a rc] 79'

I CHAI RM AN - Admiral Steidle.doc Page 1 II

Po Kee Wong, Ph.D. &P.ME, CEOSYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY (SRC)

2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344 USATel: 301-585-3453; E-mail: pokwongnarcn.com

August 4, 2004To:Rear Admiral Craig E. Steidle (Ret.)Associate Administrator for Exploration SystemsNASA Headquarters, 300 E Street SW, Washington D.C.

Subject: Submission of the Notice Of Intent (NOI) for participation in:(1) Solicitation Number TB-04-02 entitled "HUMAN &ROBOTIC

TECHNOLOGY"(2) A-EXPLORATION SYSTEMS ENTERPRISE REQUEST FOR

INFORMATION

Dear Admiral Steidle:

Based on the previous 3 SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY'S proposals No.TRIANA-0003-0006; NRA-96-HEDS-03; NRA-99-OES-08 that had been submittedto Dr. Ghassem R. Asrar, Associate Administrator for Earth Science, within last fewyears, many proposed tasks need the most advanced knowledge in Physics,Mathematics and Engineering Technologies for their implementationsimilar to thecurrent solicitations.

I would like to collaborate with the qualified industrialcompanies and educational institutions by licensing to them my proprietarily

owned U.S. Basic Patents. These basic patents can be obtained from typing thepatent'numbers 5,084,232; 5,848,377 and 6,430,516 into the search query of thewebsite:http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/srchnurn.htm

Based on the claims of patent 5,848,377(Wong's Angles) , NASA must build athird identical observatory to the one that had been built by NASA at Tempe,Arizona in order to obtain the precise tracking; control and targeting of all objects.

Your help and acceptance of this NOI and its subsequent proposalscollaborated with other qualified contractors to assure the success of your projectswill be appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Po Kee WongC.C.Michael Sosebee, Tel: 202-358-1026 ;Fax:202-358-3342 ;E:msosebee@hq.nasa.govMark R Stiles, Tel: 202-358-1521;Fax:202-358-3342;E:mstiles@hq.nasa.gov

CHAIRMAN -Admiral Steidle.doc Page.2

<2K,

JCHAIRMAN - NASA Proposal H&RT BAA No.TB-04-02.doc Page 1

Online instructions have been updated to assist offeror's and clarify instructions. NOI's already submitted willnot be impacted as need not be resubmitted.

H&RT BAA Input Form

1. Project Title: APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLES &SRC'S PATENTS TO SOLVE PROBLEMS IN HUMAN &ROBOTIC TECHNOLOGY

2. Lead Individuals and Key Personnel (First oerson list must be Proiect Lead)Title Name Field of Telephone Email Organization

ExpertiseLead Dr. Po Mathemati 301-585- Pokwong@r SYSTEMS

Kee cal 3453 cn.com RESEARCHWong Physics & COMPANY

Engineerin (SRC) U.S.g & owner Federal Supplyof several Code:5R583U.S. basic forpatents to Mechanizationbe Of Contractlicensed Administrationout Services(MOC

AS)Co-Lead To be

determined by

NASAOther: To be

determined by

NASA,

Other Relevant NASA Personnel NASA OrganizationAll to be determined by NASA to All to be determined by NASA to collaboratecollaborate with SYSTEMS with SRCRESEARCH COMPANY(SRC)

____________________________________________________________________________________ I

Provide work background summaries of key personnel relative to the type of project that is being proposed.For Advanced Space Technology Program projects, where appropriate include titles of 1-2 papers that eachkey member has published or presented at a conference. . Note: The title and references to the papersdoes not count towards the 75 words per member limit.

Max 75 words per memberProject Lead: NASA granted contractors and Dr. Po Kee Wong as a consultant for theproject in utilization of his basic patents to solve many relevant problems for the entireproject from TRL1 to TRL9 by signing licensing and loyalty agreementsCo-Lead: Same as aboveOther: Same as above

3. Lead Organization: NASA Granted Industrial Contractors and Educational Institutions

JfCRAR MM _-_N'___A__8'A__P__ -r- op_'o_'_s"i_1H& T-9AA 14 6. T'-B'-- -0 4 1 -0 2- _. do- -_6 --ýl~A~MAN~- NASA Proposal ~ No.TB-04-02.do& Page 2 I

4. Names of any additional participating NASA and other collaborating institutions, if applicable.

NASA Center Academia Private Industry Non-ProfitOrganization/Other

1. Goddard U of Maryland LMSC ASME International2. MSFC Stanford UniV. Raytheon ASTM3. Caltech Boeing MAA4. MIT GM & GE AMA

6. Brief Summary - which will serve as proposal abstractEnter your summary using the following general breakouts.

1. Description of the proposed technology project including specific Goals & Objectives. Emphasis torelevance and potential support to H&RT Goals & Objectives

2. Description of the technology development/maturation approach. Include specific technical challengesthat you expect to encounter, and the beginning and ending Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of theproject. Ilighlight partnership approach.

3. Impact of the proposed technology to future exploration systems, including specific benefits toexploration and overall long-term use (e.g. future systems like CrewExploration Vehicles, lunar rovers,lu.nar-planetary bases, etc)

Max 750 wordsBased on the previous SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY'S proposals:

No. NRA-96-HEDS-03-076 entitled "APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORYSOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLES TO SOLVE FUNDAMENTALPROBLEMS IN PHYSICS "submitted and dated on March 21, 1997;No. TRIANA-0003-0006 entitled "APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLIDANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLES FOR TRIANA." Submitted and dated on July22, 1998 andNo. AIST-042-0006 entitled "APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLIDANGLE AND THE WONG'S ANGLES TO SUPPORT ESTO PRORGAMS:AIST;ATI;IIP and HPCC/ESS." Submitted and dated on January 22, 2000That had been submitted to Dr. Ghassem R. Asrar, Associate Administrator forEarth Science, many proposed tasks need the most recent advanced knowledge inPhysics, Mathematics and Engineering Technologies for their implementationsimilar to the current Solicitation TB-04-02.

Dr. Po Kee Wong would like to collaborate with NASA selected contractors ofindustrial companies and educational institutions by licensing to all thesecontractors his proprietarily owned U.S. Basic Patents. These basic patents canbe obtained from typing the patent numbers 5,084,232; 5,838,377 and 6,430,516into the search query of the website:http://l 64.195, 100.11 /netahtml/srchnum.htm

Based the claims of patent 5,848,377 (Wong's Angles), NASA must build athird observatory identical to the one that had been built by NASA at Tempe,Arizona, USA (Another one was built by NSF in Chile). This will assure to obtainthe precise tracking, control and targeting of all structures and objects in the space.

End of sample form.

.... ......... ..... ........ -lCRHAIRMAN - NASA Proposal H&RT BA NO.TB-04-02.doc .. Page31

The following information will also be required when uploading a NOI to the website.

1. Company Name: SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY(SRC), CAGE Code:5R5832. Company Division3. Address: 2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344 USA4. Project Title: APPLICATIONS OF THE TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE AND THE WONG'S

ANGLES & SRC'S PATENTS TO SOLVE PROBLEMS IN HUMAN & ROBOTIC TECHNOLOGY5. Project Lead : Dr. Po Kee Wong6. Project Lead Email : pokwong@verizon.net7. Project Lead Phone:301-585-34538. H&RT Program (i.e., ASTP or TMP). The following table is a breakdown of the choices on the

submission webpage. On the Submission webpage enter PROJECT TYPE Table data as follows.You will only be allowed to choose "One Type", "One Primary" and "One Secondary.'"

a. Click the project type. Project NOIs/Proposals will be assigned to an element program.forreview.

b. Click the primary element boxes where required for Type 3 or 6 projectsc. Identify Primary element program technical theme via dropdown listd. Enter beginning and ending technology readiness levels (1-9)e. For ASTP Type 1-3 projects, click the "Secondary" TMP element program that represents a

likely technology maturation pathway.f. For TMP Type 4-6 projects, click the "Secondary" ASTP or TMP element program that appliesg. List the project deliverables and identify the frequency.

i. For Technology Maturation Program projects: e.g project plans, list of data reviewpackages for PDR/CDR, list of types of project status'schedules, earned value statusreports, monthly/quarterly reports reviews, etc;

ii. For Advanced Space Technology Program projects: eg. Project plans, projectschedule type, Technology Product Development Milestones and associated progressreports (including earned value), milestones relating to technology data input for Designactivities, etc).

This section is completed on the NOI Submission website. This table is provided to show all the possibilities inthe various categories. These categories appear in the form of Drop down lists on the website. Each submitter isto "CLICK" the appropriate (one type only) project category in the following table. "Check "RED" selectionsfor Primary and Secondary Element Program applications.

PROJECT TYPE

Advanced Space Technology Program (ASTP) Technology Maturation Program (TMP)S-1Ty-I a) Tye-2 a) Tpe-3 a) Tyne-4 a) Te-5 a) Type-6Phase I +11 Phase I + il Phase I + II Phase I + 1I Phase I + !1 Phase I + I1

CHIMN - NASA Proposal H&RT BAA No.TB-04-02.doc Page 4. 1

12 months + 36 12 months + 12 12 months + 36 12 months + 12 12 Months + 36 12 Months+ 36months with a months with months Months Months Months,total value of a total value with a with a with a total with a total

$4M-$8M of $2M-$4M total total Value of value ofvalue of value between $10M-$40Mbetween between $10M-

$5M- $2M- $20M$15M $4M

Primary Primary b) Primary Primary Primary b) Primary (CheckASCT Tools and ASCT Concepts (Check One) In-STEP In-STEP One)

Databases and Studies Developm TechnologAMSC uent of y Flight HESSCCEI Key Experimen ASPSSISM Infrastru t Definition ASOTPPCS cture & & LPSO

Carriers Implementation

c) Primary Theme: c) Primary Theme: c) Primary c) Primary c) Primary c) Primary Theme:Theme: Theme: Theme:

d) Beginning TRL: d) Beginning TRL: d) Beginning d) Beginning d) Beginning d) Beginning TRL:TRL: TRL: TRL:

d) Ending TRL: d) Ending TRI.: d) Ending TRL: d) Ending TRL: d) Ending TRL: d) Ending TRL:e) Secondary e) Secondary e) Secondary 1) Secondary f) Secondary 1) Secondary(Check One) (Check One) (Check One) (Check (Check (Check One)

One) One)

AMSC AMSC HESS ASCT ASCT ASCTCCEI CCEI ASSP AMSC AMSC AMSCSISM SISM ASOT CCEI CCEI CCEIPPCS PPCS LPSO SISM SISM SISMHESS HESS Ia-STEP PPCS PPCS PPCSASPS ASPS HESS HESS in-STEPASOT ASOT ASPS ASPSLPSO LPSO ASOT ASOT

In-STEP In-STEP LPSO LPSO

For each phase of each project, list the deliverables and identify the frequencykg) Phase 1 Deliverables Phase I Timetable

I1 Month or Quarter2 Month or Quarter

3 Month or Quarter

4 Month or Quarter5 ..,Month or Quarter

__) Phase II Deliverables Phase II TimetableI Month or Quarter2 Month or Quarter3 Month or Quarter4 Month or Quarter5 Month or Quarter

CHAIRMAN. . . . . . . .. . . ..idoc ... P.gei

2007

In The

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PO KEE WONG, Pro Se - PETITIONER

VS

BOSTON RETIRMENT BOARDMA SC No. SJC 09858

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari toSupreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts in re: Case No.SJ-2006-OO41and CaseNo. 02-3854-F at Suffolk Superior Court According to U.S.

Federal Supreme Court Rule 13. 1. and Rule 13.3

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

On August 17, 2007Submitted by

PO KEE WONG, Pro Se-PETITIONER2413 Spencer Road, Silver, Maryland 20910-2344

Tel: 301-585-3453; e-MAIL:POKWONGiVERIZON.NET

ýCHAIRMAN -- 2007--finai[.doic Pg e

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

I. In a case of city-employee retirement, theCity Retirement Board Counsel may have been construed inviolation, of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071 of intentional/orunintentional concealment of admissible judicialevidences. Should the City of Boston Retirement BoardCounsel be allowed to practice the act of obstruction ofjudicial justice?

U. Should all U.S. government officials, including butnot limiting to judges, be given the unlimited power tocover up and rule against a case that may be construed inviolation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071?

111. According to U.S.C. 1251, should the U.S. SupremeCourt allow anyone in the U.S. Government and/ or anyoneelse in the world to rule against a case that may beconstrued in violation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071?

r

ii

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS

The only parties to the proceedings are those listed in thecaption of the case.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PageQUESTION PRESENTED ........................ i.PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS ........................ iiTABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................... iiA PPEN D IC E S ................................................... iiiTABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................... ivOPINIONS BELOW .......................................... 1JU RISD ICTIO N ................................................... 2RELEVANT PROVISIONS INVOVLED .................... 2STATEMENT OF THE CASE .............................. 3REASONS GRANTING THE PETITION ............... 3TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT ..................... 6C O N CLU SIO N ................................................... 7APEND ICES .......................................... 1 a to 20aORDERS FROM STATE COURTS .................. la to3aAPPEAL TO CASE SJ-2006-0041 ................... 4a to 1 laAPPEAL TO CASE 02-3854-F ...................... 12a to 15aSUMMARY OF SYSTEMS RESEARCH CO .... 16a to 20a

ICHAIRMAN -2007-f in'al .do'c'Pg Pa-g- e4fj

APPENDICES Page

SUPREME COURT ORDER No. SJC-09858 ............ la

SINGLE JUSTICE ORDER No. SJ-2006-0041 ............ 2a

SINGLE JUSTICE JUDGMENT No. SJ-2006-0041 ...... 3a

DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHAERING ............ 4a

JUDGMENT AFTER RESCRIPT ..................... 5a

NOTICE OF DOCKET ENTRY ......................... 6a

PLEADING FOR RE-CONSIDERATION ............ 7a

PLEADING ON JANUARY 21, 2005 JUDGMENT .... 12a

SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY ...... 16a to 20a

ý CHAIRMAN - 2007-final.doc- Page 5 jjCHAIRMAN - 2007-final.doc Page 5j

iv

TABLE OF AUTHORITIESPage

Cases

Supreme Judicial Court No. SJC-09858 ..................... 1

Mass, Single Justice Case No. SJ-2006-0041 ............... 1

Suffolk Superior Court Case No. 02-3854-F ................. 1

Statutes

18 U .S.C . Section 2071 ........ i...................................... i ; 2;4

125 1 U .S .C ..................................................... i

Rules

Federal Supreme Court Rulel3.3 and Rule 13.3 Cover

Other Authorities:

General Laws of Massachusetts, Chapter 32.Retirement Systems and Pension

* Section 4-(1)-(d)" Section 4-(10-(f)* Section 4-(1)-(f0/o1/2%)" Section 3-(4)" Section 3-(4A)" Section 4-(l)-(p)

all from ....................................... page 6 to 7

1;ý,'CHAIRMAN - 200'14-6- a-if."d-b-c- peCHAIRMAN - 2OQ7-fin~I.d6c PaQe 61

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

According to the U.S. Supreme Court Rule 13. Review onCertiorari and the Rule 14. Content of Petition for aWrit of Certiorari,. Pro Se PETITIONER Po Kee Wongrespectfully prays that a Review on Certiorari can beissued to review the judgment from the Massachusetts statecourts below:

OPINIONS BELOW

The opinions of the Massachusetts State Courts aresummarized'below:

The ORDER from the Supreme Judicial Court for theCommonwealth of Massachusetts, No. SJC-09858 wasissued on February 13, 2007.

The ORDER from the Supreme Judicial Court for SuffolkCounty case No. SJ-2006-0041was issued on October 10,2006.

The JUDGMENT from the Supreme Judicial Court forSuffolk County case No, SJ-2006-0041 was issued on June28, 2006

The opinions of the Case No. SJ-2006-0041 from theMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and the Case No.02-3854-F from the Massachusetts Sulffolk Superior Courtof Appeals that appear atAppendices page64a to page 15a.

dbb- P6-111111111-ýi . .. . ..H A . . . . . . . . . ... .... .. ...M.. . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . ... .. .. .. .. .. . ....... . .. . . ... ....... ... ... . ... . .. . .. ....... . . .. .. . ... . . . . . . . . ... .. .. . . .. .... .. .. . ... a....................... ... ......

2

JURISDICTION

The opinions from all the Massachusetts States Courts havebeen continuously appealed and timely filed step by stepbased on the their judgments may be in violation of theU.S.C. 18 Section 2071 .The final ORDER for the CaseSJC-09858 was issued on April 2, 2007 by theMassachusetts State Supreme Court. The ORDER wasimmediately appealed in time by Pro Se Petitioner Po KeeWong to U.S. Federal Supreme Court started from April21, 2007 and had been received and replied by the Clerk'sOffice of the U.S. Federal Supreme Court on April 26,2007 letter signed by Erik Fossum.

RELEVANT PROVISIONS INVOLVED

The most important element of this retirement case wasstarted from the beginning with the false statementspresented by the Counsel of Boston Retirement Boardto the division of administrative law appeals, as a resultof those false statements having been made andtherefore leading from thereafter, the wrong judgmentsfrom Massachusetts Courts of various levels. Thesubsequent proof can be evident from the clerks ofvarious levels that the original documents had beensubmitted in time and very well docketed in the relevantoffices and courts where the documents had been andshould be submitted to. Based on the provision of U.S.C18 Section 2071 (a) and (b) that are quoted in theREASONS GRANTING THE PETITION shown below,the case should be well considered and granted by theU.S. Supreme Court.

CHAIRMAN - 2007-final.doc Page 8

3

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Responding to the promotion for earlier retirementprogram in the city of Boston in 2001, teachers ofBoston Public Schools are encouraged and allowed tobuy their retirement according to the State RetirementLaw.When the Pro Se Petitioner Po Kee Wong hadsubmitted all the required documents in time to theRetirement Board, the counsel of the Retirement Boardchose not to believe the authenticity of all documentshaving been submitted to her and started to make falsestatements to the Division of Administrative LawAppeals (DALA) about the submitted documents. As aresult, the case is continuously appealed up to allMassachusetts State Courts and now to the U.S. FederalSupreme Court.

REASONS GRANTING THE PETITION

The U.S. Supreme Court should grant this petition for aWrit of Certiorari based on the U.S. Supreme Court Rules13.1 and 13.3 to support the following reasons I.; II. III inanswer to the three questions presented:

I. U.S.C. 18 Section 2071 provides:Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes,obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intentto do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding,map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed ordeposited with... any public office, or with any...'publicofficer of the United States, shall be fined under this title orimprisoned not more than three years, or both.

CHAIRMAN - 200 7-final .doc Page 9.il

4

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record,proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing,willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates,obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be finedunder this title or imprisoned not more than three years; andshall forfeit his Office and be disqualified from holding anyoffice under the United States.

According to all the actual documents of evidences that hadbeen submitted to the courts of various levels in theCommonwealth of Massachusetts, the Board Counsel ofBoston Retirement Board may have been construed inviolation of the above listed U.S.C. 18 Section 2071.

Therefore, the U.S. Supreme Court should grant thisPETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI to stopall U.S. government officials of all levels from practicingthe violation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071.

II. The U.S. Supreme Court should grant thisPETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI of thiscase by:

Subpoena of the written record for Judge Walker'sNOTICE TO APPEAR FOR FINAL PRE-TRIALCONFERENCE together with the audio record tapedin the Court Room on 01/20/2005.

Please listen carefully to the dialogues among JudgeMuse;

Edward H. McKenna, Boston Retirement BoardLawyer and Po Kee Wong, the Pro Se petitioner.

CHAIRM A N- -2- 0 0 7--'f-i n'-al ýd c Paie 10,

5

After Po Kee Wong's answering to Judge Grabau'squestion to buy back 9 years and 5 months in a previoushearing in the court room as allowed by theMassachusetts General Law for retirement, Po KeeWong had finished and submitted the DOCUMENTSONLY BY HIM IN TIME in response to and fromJudge Walker's NOTICE on 01/20/2005. However,Judge Muse decided to issue the JUDGMENT of thispublic trial without jury of this Civil Case 02-3854-F inthe Court Room of Suffolk Superior Court alone on thesame day of 01/20/2005. The contents of our dialogueson 01/20/2005 were so "shocking" to Po Kee Wonginside the court room for almost 20 seconds to havemade him speechless and that the contents of thedialogues should be sufficiently used to overturn theJUDGMENT issued by Judge Muse alone.

IR. The U.S. Supreme Court should grant THISPETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARIACCORDING TO U.S.C. 1251 NOT TO ALLOWANYONE IN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AND/ORANYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD TO RULEAGAINST A CASE THAT MAY BE CONSTRUED INVIOLATION OF U.S.C.18 SECTION 2071.

IV. According to the General Laws of Massachusetts,Charter 32. Retirement Systems and Pension*Section 4-(1)-(d), Po Kee Wong should be allowed to buy

back his services at Stone and Webster EngineeringCorporation' from 1974 -1975 and for his services atSystems Research Company from 1976 to 2001 in the Stateof Massachusetts.

0'a' g-e- 'i 1,I...... . . ...... .. .P.g. . ........ .... I

6

It is important for the court to issue an order to audit theaccount in the City of Boston that may be involved in PoKee Wong's proposals having been submitted throughBoston Public Schools as a collaboration partner to thevarious U.S. Federal Governmental Agencies from theperiod of September, 1979 to June, 2001.*Section 4-(l)-(f) and Section 4-(l)-(f'Yol/2%p) for hisservices at University of Utah from 1959-1961; atCalifornia Institute of Technology from 1961-1965; atStanford University from 1968-1970 and at Santa ClaraUniversity from January 4, 1971 to March 19, 1971.*Section 3-(4);Section 3-(4A) and Section 4-(l)-(p) allcombined to allow for purchasing back up to 10 years ofServices outside of Boston Public Schools.

TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT

Based on the history of employment of Pro SePetitioner Po Kee Wong in the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts, he is entitled to seek the relief to buyback his retirement in two separate parts: Namely Part(1). and / or Part (2).

Part(1) is based on his previous employments withvarious educational institutions within USA. This hasbeen claimed and should be allowed to buy back 9 yearsand 5 months but not more than 10 years according tothe published Massachusetts State General Law.

Part (2) is optional and it is involved in his operation ofhis own small business, SYSTEMS RESEARCHCOMPANY that was founded by him in 1976 in the

[ CHAIR N --_ 2-00-7-4 i 'n' aill'Ad'o c- 11 P a 9 e- I 42J 1I CHAIRMAN - 2007-final.doc Paqe 12j

Town of Brookline before he joined the Boston PublicSchools in 1979.Some of his company proposals may have been used bythe Boston Public Schools to have obtained U.S. Federal'Government Contracts.

7

The Pro Se petitioner Po Kee Wong seeks the relieffrom the U.S. Federal Supreme Court to issue an orderof:(1). To allow Po Kee Wong to buy back his retirementfor 9 year and 5 months from the City of BostonRetirement Board.(2). To audit the City ofBoston Account to determinewhether SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY'Sproposals had been used by theBoston public Schoolsto have obtained the U.S. Federal GovernmentContracts.

CONCLUSION

Based on all the questions and reasons I.; II. ; III; IVtogether with all evidences in the submissions, thispetition for a writ of certiorari to review a judgment bythe state courts of Massachusetts according to U.S.Supreme Court Rule No. 13.1 and No.13.3 under theexceptional circumstances warrant the exercise of theU.S. Federal Supreme Court's discretionary powers togrant the relief for:

(1) Allowing Po Kee Wong to buy back 9 years and 5months time according to the Massachusetts RetirementLaw Section 3-(4); Section 3-(4A) and Section 4-(l)-(p).

(2) Auditing the account of the City of Bostonspecifically involved with the Po Kee Wong's proposalshaving been submitted to the various U.S. Federalgovernmental agencies for supports with collaborations

7NýiCHAIRMAN - 2007-final .doc - e 13

of Boston public Schools as a proposal partner.

8

Respectfully submitted by,

Po Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitioner2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344Tel: 301-585-3453E-mail: pokwonjgverizon.net

If-CHARMAW- -2-0-61---final.doc- -Pý46ý f4lP CHAIRMAN - 2007-flnal.do6 Paqe 14

la

APPENDICES

ORDER

Supreme Judicial Court

February 13, 2007

Po Kee Wong vs. Boston Retirement Board. February13, 2007. Supreme Judicial Court, Appeal from order ofsingle justice.

Po Kee Wong appeals from both a judgment of a singlejustice of this court denying his petition for reliefpursuant to G.L. c. 211, s. 3, and the single justice'sorder denying his motion for reconsideration. Weaffirm.Wong, a former Boston public school teacher, was

denied certain employment credits by the BostonRetirement Board (board).Wong unsuccessfullychallenged the board's decision before the division ofadministrative law appeals, the ContributoryRetirement Appeal Board, and the Superior Court. He

.then sought to pursue an appeal in the Appeals Courtbut failed to timely docket the appeal. He moved forleave to docket the appeal late, but a single justice of theAppeals Court denied the motion. He then sought relief

in the county' court pursuant to G.L. c.211, s3,apparently request either that the Appeals Court berequired to grant him leave to docket his appeal late, orthat the single justice entertain his appeal on themerits. The single justice denied his petition as well ashis motion for reconsideration.

2a

Wong then filed a notice of appeal "according to Rule

2:21." See S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as amended, 434 Mass.1301 (2001). Although he is not challenging aninterlocutory ruling of the trial court, and thus rule 2:21technically does not apply. Wong cannot demonstratethat he lacked an adequate alternative to relief under G.L. c.211, s 3. He could have appealed to a panel of theAppeals Court from the decision of the single justice ofthat court denying his motion for leave to docket hisappeal late. Se Maza v. Commonwealth, 423 Mass. 1006(1966).

Judgment affirmed.Order denying motion forReconsideration affirmed.

The case was submitted on the papers filed,

accompany by a memorandum of law.Po Kee Wong, Pro Se.

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT FOR SUUOLKCOUNTY

No. SJ-2006-0041Suffolk Superior Court

No. 02-3854-F

If CRAI RMAN -AV-finawoc Page 16i}I~~~~~~~~qý! IR MN-20-inldcPg 6

PO KEE WONGVs.

BOSTON RETIREMENT BOARD, ET AL

ORDER

3a

This matter came before the Court, Sosman, J.,presiding, on a request for reconsideration, and uponconsideration thereof, it is ORDERED that the requestbe, and the same hereby is, denied.

By the Court (Sosman, J), MBS

Signature signed by

Maura S. Doyle, Clerk

ENTERED: October 10, 2006

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT FOR SUFFOLKCOUNTY

No. SJ-2006-0041Suffolk Superior Court

No. 02-3854-F

PO KEE WONGVs.

BOSTON RETIREMENT BOARD, ET AL

JUDGMENT

JýCH&FMWAff -10-0--C6 -.666" Page 17I CHAIRMAN: 2007-finaLdoc Page 17 I

This matter came before the Court, Sosman, J.,.presiding, on a petition pursuant to G.L. c. 211, s.3, andupon consideration thereof, it is ORDERED that thepetition be, and the same hereby is, denied withouthearing.

By the Court, ( Sosman, J.) MBSSignature signed byMaura S. Doyle, Clerk

Entered: June 28, 2006

4a

Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts

John Adams CourthouseOne Pemberton Square, Suite 1400, Boston,

Massachusetts 02108-1724Telephone 617-557-1020, Fax 617-557-1145

Po Kee Wong2413 Spencer RoadSilver Spring, MD 20910

RE: No. SJC-09858

PO KEE WONGVS.

BOSTON RETIREMENT BOARD

NOTICE OF DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHAERING

The Petition for Rehearing filed in the abovecaptioned case has been considered by the court and isdenied.

Suan Mellen, Clerk

11C-H-A I -RM AN, -2-00, 7--flih-a-1-d-oc- -Paq6 1-811I CHAIRMAN - 2007-finaldoc PaQe 18 I

Dated: March 29, 2007

To: Po Kee WongEdward H. McKenna, Esquire

5a

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTSSupreme Judicial Court

For Suffolk CountyJohn Adams Courthouse

One Pemberton Square, Suite 1300Boston, Massachusetts 02108-1707

Case Information 617-557-1100, Fax 617-557-1117

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT FOR SUFFOLKCOUNTY

No. SJ-2006-0041

Suffolk Superior CourtNo. 02-3854-F

PO KEE WONG

VS.

BOSTON RETIREMENT BOARD, ET AL

JUDGMENT AFTER RESCRIPT

~CHAIRMAN - 207-final~doc _ _______Pae 9

This matter came before the Court, and in accordancewith the Rescript Opinion that was entered in the Full Courton February 13, 2007, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGEDthat the following entry of Judgment be, and the samehereby is, made:

"Judgment and Order denying motion forreconsideration affirmed."

By the Court, (Greaney, J.)Signature signed byMaura S. Doyle, Clerk

ENTERED: April 2, 2007

6a

April 2, 2007

NOTICE OF DOCKET ENTRY

You are hereby notified that on April 2, 2007, thefollowing was entered on the docket~of the abovereferenced case:

JUDGMENT after Rescript from the SJC for theCommonwealth, "Judgment and Order denying motion forreconsideration affirmed." ( Greaney, J)

Signature signed byMaura S. Doyle, Clerk

To: Po Kee WongEdward H. McKenna, Esquire

Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts

John Adams CourthouseOne Pemberton Square, Suite 1400, Boston,

1!'C"-H Page 20 ý,'I CNAIR~MAN - 2007-finaldoc Page 201

Massachusetts 02108-1724Telephone 617-557-1020, Fax 617-557-1145

Po Kee Wong2413 Spencer RoadSilver Spring, MD 20910

RE: No. SJC-09858 "

PO KEE WONGVS.

BOSTON RETIREMENT BOARD

NOTICE OF DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING

7a

The Petition for rehearing filed in the abovecaptioned case has been considered by the court and isdenied.

Suan Mellen, Clerk

Dated: March 29, 2007

To: Po Kee Wong,Edward H. McKenna, Esquire

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT

CASE NO. SJ-2006-0041PO KEE WONG

VS.BOSTON RETIREMENT BOARD, ET AL

Suffolk Superior Court

F CHAIRMAN - 2007-final!doc P..2IPage 211

Case No. 02-3854-F

PLEADING FOR RE-CONSIDERATION FROM THEJune 28,2006 JUDGMENT issued by

HONORABLE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURTJUSTICESosman, J.

ACCORDING TO THE GENERAL LAWS OFMASSACHUSETTS PART III, TITLE I. CHAPTER

211 SECTION 3

8a

SUBMITTED AND MAIL ON JULY 1, 2006 BY PoKee Wong, Pro Se Plaintiff

2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344 USA'

Tel: 301-585-3453E-mail: pokwong2(-verizon.net

TO:Maura S. Doyle, ClerkEric Wetzel, Assistant Clerk (Tel:617-557-1186)Supreme Judicial Court for Sufforlk CountyJohn Adams Courthouse, Suite 1300Boston, Massachusetts 02108-1707

C.C.Edward McKenna, EsqJuliana deHaan Rice

Dear Honorable Supreme Justice Sosman:

CHAIRMAN - 2007-fi'n aldocP 22;d

This is pleading to you to reconsider your initialjudgment of the case based on the following documentswith facts that had been submitted and accepted fordocketing by all three levels of courts since the inceptionof my appeal.

The evidences in all the submitted documents hadshown that the DEFENDANT, Boston RetirementBoard, have violated all the important elements statedin the Massachusetts Law Chapter 211 Section 3. Theviolations can be listed and shown in the followings withreference to the specific documents re-submitted here asattachments:

9a

(1) Intentional and/or unintentional to conceal theadmissible 20 pages of documents of evidences. These20 pages of documents can be seen and read fromCICIL DOCKET #SUCV2002-03854-F in the"PLEADING ON JANUARY 21, 2005 JUDMENT BYHONORABLE JUDGE CHRISTOPHER J. MUSEWITH PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED DOCUMENTSTHAT HAD BEEN OMITTED FROM THE 94PAGES ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD BYATTORNEY GENERAL THOMAS F. REILY."

(2) The DEFENDANT, Boston Retirement Board, hadrefused many times both from my repeated requests byphoning and by E-mailing for several weeks toparticipate and to prepare documents together withPLAINTIFF, Po Kee Wong, in response to JudgeJospeh M. Walker's request to prepare documents forNOTICE TO APPEAR FOR FINAL PRE-TRIALCONFERENCE set on January 20, 2005 at 2:00 PM.

J'CýHAi MAN - 07-final.doc Paae .........23 dI CHAIRMAN - 2007-final.doc Paoe 23

As a result of this violation by the DEFENDANT,Boston Retirement Board provided nothing to JudgeMuse during the trial on January 20, 2005 in CourtRoom 2 - 1 2 th Floor at 90 Devonshire Street, Boston,Massachusetts. In the above document (2), A BRIEFSTATEMENTBY THE PETITIONER PO KEEWONG WHO EXPECTS THE FOLLOWINGEVIDENCES TO SHOW:

1,. According to the General Laws of Massachusetts,Chapter 32., Retirement Systems and Pension Section 4-(1)-(d) Po Kee Wong should be allowed to buy back hisservices at Stone and Webster Engineering Corporationfrom 1976 to 2001 in the State of Massachusetts.

10a

2. Section 4-(1)-() and Section 4-(1)-(f0/ol/2%p) for hisservices at University of Utah from 1959-1961; atCalifornia Institute of Technology from 1961-1965; atStanford University from 1968-1970 and at Santa ClaraUniversity from January 4, 1971 to March 19, 1971.

3. Section 3-(4) ; Section 3-(4a) and Section 4-(1)-(p) allcombined to allow for purchasing back up to 10 years ofServices outside of Boston Public Schools. Thepetitioner Po Kee Wong should be allowed to buy backhis creditable services.

4. Boston Retirement Board failed to reply theSUMMONS sent by Court that should have beenanswered within 20 days instead of 6 months.Therefore, judgment by default should have been takenagainst Boston Retirement Board for the relief demandin the COMPLAINT.

1;'_NA_1RMAN-- _20V-_fin_'_a'1'.docCHAIRMAN -2007-finaldoc Paoe 24 I

5. Petitioner Po Kee Wong's answer to Judge Grabau'sfinal questions for buying 9 years and 5 months hasnever been answered by the Boston Retirement Boardsince the hearing from 12/01/2003.

6. Boston Retirement Board repeatedly ignored theNOTICE TO APPEAR FOR FINAL -TRIALCONFERENCE sent from the court and failed tosubmit the required documents on January 20, 2005 at2:00 PM.

(3) The Plaintiff Po Kee Wong obeys the General Lawsof Massachusetts Part II, Title I, Chapter 211 Section 39(one page) which is attached here together with:

Ila

1. A copy of the ANNEXED PAPER returned onFebruary 7, 2006 from Superior Court Department ofthe Trial Court signed by L.B. and entered fordocketing as Case No. 02-3854 as the proof that thePlaintiff respects and obeys the Law. lpage.

2. A copy of the June 22, 2005 letter from the AppealsCourt Clerk's Office as the NOTICE OF DOCKETENTRY as case 2005-J-0238. lpage.

3. A copy of the June 28, 2006 letter and NOTICE OFDOCKET ENTRY from Maura S. Doyle, Clerk,Supreme Judicial Court. 3pages.

Based on the above documents (1), (2) and (3) beingsubmitted to you for your re-consideration of yourjudgment to provide relief to the plaintiff according tothe law will be gratefully appreciated by all other

1,ýCRATRMAN --20'0-f6-aF.d-&6" pane,K CFIATRMAN - 2007-finaldoc PaQe 251

educators under similar situations.

Respectfully submitted bySignature signed by

Po Kee Wong, Pro Se Plaintiff, for Case SJ-2006-0041Tel: 301-585-3453pokwong(aiverizon.net

With copies served to:'Edward McKenna, EsquireJuliana deHann Rice, Assistant Attorney General

Enclosures:Attachment No.(1) 33 pages.Attachment No.(2) 15 pages.Attachment No.(3) 6 pages.

12a

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTSSUPPFOLK SUPERIOR COURT

CIVIL DOCKET # SUCV2002-03854-F

PO KEE WONG

V.

BOSTON RETIRMENT BOARD ET AL

PLEADING ON JANUARY 21, 2005 JUDGMENT BYHONORABLE JUDGE CHRISTOPHER J. MUSE

WITHPREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS THAT

.......Page 2,6,1[I CHAIRMAN -~2O~07-frnaI.do( Page 26 I

HAD BEEN OMITTED FROM THE 94 PAGESADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

BYATTORNEY GENERAL THOMAS F. REILLY

SUBMITTED BYPO KEE WONG, Pro Se Plain tiff

2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344USA

Telephone: 301-585-3453E-mail: pokwongdverizon.net

This appeal is the same document No.(1) listed in theAppeal to Supreme Justice Sosman as shown above. Itcontains 33 pages of documents. The most importantone that should be read is my E-mail on Monday, February14, 2005 11:59 AM sent to the court as shown in thefollowings:

13a

From: pokwong(&rcn.comTo: conley m(ijud.state.ma.us;walsh t(&iud.state.ma.usCc:Juliana.Rice(dago.ma.us;emckenna615(@comcast.net;pokwong(&rcn.comSent: Monday, February 14, 2005 11:59AMSubject: (1) Acknowledgement of receipt 4 pages of CourtJudgment Document signed by Mr. Conley and Judge Muse; (2) Submission of pleading documents to the Court ENBanc for Case 02-3854-F

Dear Mr. Conley and Mr. Walsh:

Please help to confirm with the following factsaccording to all the submitted documents having been sent

I ý CýFA _1RMAN___-N 0-7 --fi 6ýir.ao-c- Pýqe ?T 'II CHAIRMAN 2OO~7-finaI.doc Page 27]

to the court for the Case 02-3854-F and present them to thepanel of Judges: Judge Muse; Judge Walker and JudgeGrabau who have been involved in judging the case:

(1) My answer to Judge Grabau's question on12/01/2003 with submitted documents had been doneand served to all concerned parties.(2) My answer to Judge Walker's NOTICE TOAPPEAR FOR FINAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCEon 01/20/2005 with submissions of requiredDOCUMENTS in time at the Court and THEMEMORANDUM in the required format Acceptable bythe Court had already been done and served to allconcerned parties.(3) My pleading to Judge Muse for the Deft BostonRetirement Board's motion and JUDGMENT BY THECOURT for a reversal JUDGMENT is now beingsubmitted to the Panel of Judges for re-considerationand to all concerned parties.

14a

Please help to point out to the attention of JudgeMuse to examine my original submitted 20 pages ofdocuments that had been filed with the Court andcompare the detail features of the correspondingdocuments that also appeared in the ATTORNEYGENERAL'S 94 page ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDpage by page in the followings:

94 page 20 page ORIGINALADMINISTRATIVE SUBMITTEDRECORD DOCUMENTSPage No. 89 page 1Not included page 2(Very important Proofof Nesson's violation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071)

JCfiAIIRMAN ?00- fia~o ____ ____ Pa ge 2 8

Not included page 3(2nd page of the letter toAnthony E. Penski, Esquire, Chairman (CRAB)

Not included Page 4 Carol E. Nesson's letterDated:Jan.30, 2002

Not included Page 5 Carol E. Nesson'sMotion to dismiss the case

Not included Page 6 Carol E. Nesson'sCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Not included page 7(A page of State Law)

Not included page 8( A page of StateLaw)Not included page 9 (document fromUtah)

Page 05 page 10 more detailPage 13(2yr. teaching) page 11(5 yr. teaching)

Documents from Caltech

15a

Not included page 12 (Santa Clara Univ.)Not included page 13 (Caltech document)Not included page 14 (Caltech document)

Page 38 page 15Page 39 page 16Page 03 page 17(Curran's original letter) (Marked Cuffan letter by Wong)Not included 18(A page of State Law)Not included 19( A page of State Law)Not included 20 ( A page of State Law)

1["CHA1RMAN_- -2007-final.d6c- Ai&61-ylil~ ORA[RMAr{- 2007-final.doc PaQe 2911

The JUDGMENT by judge Muse is based on theconclusions of Judithann Burke ( DALA) and of CarolE. Nesson (BRB) that can be and should be corrected bythis pleading based on 4(f) and 4(f%/ol/2%p) followed by3(4A). The fact can be seen from page 1 to page 14 andfrom 15 to 20 of the 20 pages original submitteddocuments as shown in the above table

Please enter this signed E-mail of communication with theCourt as a formal admissible document. It is bound intothis pleading document for Judge Muse to re-consider thereversal of this case based on the correct M.G.L.

I look forward to hearing from the FINAL decision of thiscase from the PANEL of Judges again and/or going to filethe REHEARING En Banc all the way up if necessary.

Respectfully submitted to the CourtSignature signedPo Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitioner for Case #02-3854-F2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, MD 20910-2344Tel:301-585-3453 E-mail;pokwong@rcn.com

16a

SUMMARY OF SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY

Po Kee Wong, the Pro Se Petitioner of this PETITIONFOR A WRIT OF CERTIORAI, has planned, directedand implemented all operations of SYSTEMSRESEARCH COMPANY from 1976 to present. He hascontributed in the invention of 6 granted and pendingUS BASIC PATENTS with international impacts inphysics, mathematics, engineering and hightechnologies for educational, industrial and defense

1,ZHArRMAN_- ^ riý_66, ý6 i IIlHIMA 07-iado aj 301

applications. He has recruited, selected, supervised anddeveloped professional and support staff involved indiverse endeavors. He has presented and publishedhigh qualitative technical papers in AIAA, ASME,MAA, IFA professional meetings and conferences atregional, national and international level since 1965. Hehas established stature in the profession as members ofASME, AIAA, AMS, MAA, New York Academy ofSciences, ; having been cited in 12 published "Who'sWho" biographies. He obtained the first FederalGovernment Contract for SYSTEMS RESEARCHCOMPANY FROM DOT-TSC UNDER ORDER No.TS-15054 in 1978 responding to the solicitation of aprogram in collisions of structures and a test case ofSYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY'S

unsolicited proposal TSC-UP-77-27. He produced themajor SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY'S proposalentitled "Initiation of the Definition of Trajectory SolidAngle and its Influence on Classical, Quantum andStatistical Mechanics" January 17, 1979.United StatesDepartment of Energy Proposal No. P7900450.His first patent entitled "TRAJECTORY SOLIDANGLES' IMPACTS TO PHYSICS AND HIGHTECHLOGIES" was issued on January 28, 1992.

17a

After obtaining his first proprietarily owned patentNo.5,084,232 (TRACTORY SOLID ANGLES) issuedfrom USPTO in January 1992, many proposals have beenwritten since then while he was also under the employmentof Boston Public School as a teacher since 1979.Therefore, under this condition, Po Kee Wong hadsubmitted many of his proprietarily owned proposals tomany U.S. Federal Agencies for supports with proposedpartnerships with the Boston Public Schools as well as with

I ýr C H A-1 F ý M) kN ------ -2-0-0- 7 -f i n' 611'.'d -oc - lji_• -o. . .. •

I CHAIRMAN - 2007-final.do6 PaQe 311

many other industries in the entire United States ofAmerica.

A few of those proposals communicated with therelevant Federal organizations and their contractingofficers are submitted here to the U.S. Supreme Courtas a starting point for tracking and auditing theaccount of Boston Public Schools that may also havebeen involved in using SYSTEMS RESEARCHCOMPANY'S proprietarily owned patents in theproposed joint -partnership proposals.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIRFORCEHEADQUARTERS ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS

DIVISION (AFSC)HANSCOM AIR FORCE BASE, MASSACHUSETTS

01731-5000

25 February 1992

Reply to: PKRC/Colin Gray/(617)-377-4019

Subject: Program Research & Developmentannouncement (PRDA) PL/GPA 92-02Title: Advanced Physics Global Spectral Model

18a

To:Systems Research CompanyATTN: Dr. Po Kee Wong50 Bradley StreetSomerville, MA 02145

1. You are hereby notified that your proposal, submitted in

CHAIRMAN - 2007-final.doc -Va-g-e-S211I H IR A .. . ......... ................. . . .... . .. .. . .. . . . .... . .... ... .. ... . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . .. . .2.. . . . . . . . . . . .. .... .

response to the subject PRDA, has not been selected forfunding.

2. Since your proposal was not selected, no furtherconsideration can be given to your proposal at this time.We appreciate your interest in solving the problemsaddressed in the PRDA; however, your proposed solution isnot presently suitable for our needs.

3. Any questions regarding this action should beaddressed to:

ESD/PKRC (Colin Gray)Bldg. 1520, 3rd FloorHanscom AFB, MA01731-5320

Signed with signature ofKAREN M. STONE, Contracting OfficerR&D and Advanced Projects ContractsDeputy Chief of Staff for Contracting

21 April 1994MEMORANDUM TO;SYSTEMS ERSEARCH COMPANY (SRC)50 Bradley street, Somerville, MA 02145-2924ATTN: Po Kee Wong

19a

FROM:ESC/PKRC (Karen M. Stone/(617) 377-59i4)104 Braksdale StreetHanscom AFB, MA 01731

SUBJECT:

CPHA1RMAN- W2007-final.doc. .Page.. .33.

Request Information about PRDA PL/GPA 92-02-ACTION MEMORANDUM-

REFERENCE:SRC letter dated 19APR94, same subject.

1. Peryour request paragragraph (1) the followinginformation is provided regarding the successfulOfferor under subject PRDA:Contract Number: F 19628-92-C-0092Contractor: Atmospheric & Environmental Research Inc.ADDRESS:840 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA 02139

Telephone: 617-547-6207

2. The above stated contract is still active at this time, thecognizant Contracting Officer is Ms.Iris Durden, 617-377-2907. If you want to receive any documents in response tothe above contract you must submit a request through ourFreedom of INFORMATION Office. Your request muststate you are requesting information under the Freedom ofInformation Act. Therefore you must state exactly whatdocuments (s) you want copies of regarding Contractnumber F19628-92-C-0092. The address of of our FOIAoffice is as follows:

647 SPTG/UMDF9 Eglin StreetHanscom AFB, MA 01731-2109ATTN: FOIA Office Telephone: 617-377-4320

20a

Signed with signatureKAREN M. STONEContracting OfficerR&D Contracting DivisionDirectorate of Contracting

C HI R ....7..ili Page 34------- --- ....... ..................--------

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

According to the Supreme Court Rule 29.4.(a) and 29.5.(a),I hereby certify that on August 17, 2007, Po Kee Wong,the Pro Se petitioner, caused the following copies of the

LCHAIRMAN "Vý-__007-final.doc__ Page_35 J1

booklets of PETITION FOR A WRIT OFCERTIORARI for the Massachusetts Court Cases No.SJC-09858; No.SJ-2006-0041 and No. 02-3854-F to thefollowing parties by U.S. Postal Service:

40 copies to:William K. Suter, Clerk, Supreme Court Office of the Clerk1 First Street, N.E. Washington DC 20543Tel: 202-479-3011 and 202-479-3392 (Erik Fossum)Fax:202-479-3230

1 copyto:Deval Patrick, Governor of MassachusettsMassachusetts State House, Room 360Boston, Massachusetts 02133Tel: 617-725-4005 Fax: 617-727-9725

1 copy to:Martha Coakley, Attorney General of MassachusettsOffice of Attorney GeneralOne Ashburton Place, 20t' Floor, Boston, Massachusetts02108-1698Tel: 617-727-2200 Ext: 2062ATTN: Attorney Assistant General Juliana deHaan RiceE-mail: Juliana.Rice(aago.state.ma.us

I copy to:Susan Mellen, Clerk, Supreme Judicial Court for theCommonwealth of MassachusettsJohn Adams Courthouse, One Pemberton Square, Suite1400, Boston, Massachusetts 02108-1724TeL 617-557-1020 Fax: 617-557-1145E-mail: SJCCommClerk(Dsic.state.ma.us

1 copy to:Maura S. Doyle, ClerkSupreme Judicial Court for Suffolk CountyJohn Adams Courthouse, One Pemberton Square, Suite1300Boston, Massachusetts 02108-1707Tel: 617-557-1100 Fax: 617-557-1117

3 copy to:Edward McKenna, Esq. BBO#631027636 East Fifth StreetSouth Boston, Massachusetts 02127Tel: 617-640-9911E-mail: emckenna615Rcomcast.net

-"-207 - -F- 76ýIFC-H-AIRVAN 0611166 ir4l 0 ' 'a" -a" e-- --1- ' 1[H RM N-2O[11 LJ .doc...... .. Ddf. Paqel,,.J

2006-1324

In The

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PO KEE WONG, Pro Se- PETITIONER

VS

USPTO/BPAI Solicitor-RESPON DENT

PETITION FOR AN EXTRAORDINARY WRITTO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL

CIRCUIT INRE PO KEE WONG FOR CASE 03-1322(SERIAL NO.08/980,657)

ACCORDING TO RULE 20.3.(a) FOR A PETITIONSEEKING A WRIT OF PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS

PETITION FOR AN EXTRAORDINARY WRIT

Submitted byPO KEE WONG, Pro Se-PETITIONER

2413 Spencer Road, Silver, Maryland 20910-2344.Tel: 301-585-3453; e-MAIL:

POKWONG(&VERIZON. NET

F(ýHMMMW ---2-0-Wf 1.d -06 --ri-n- a-'-1-'-.-p-d- ... f P aqe2iI CHAIRMAN -2006[11.doc Final .Ddf PaQe 21

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

I. In a patent application case when the examinermakes an initial error of judgment, should the judges ofsubsequent courts, who rule the case confirmatively withoneand the other, be allowed to abuse the Supreme CourtRule 10 - (a) in order to cover up the initial mistakes and toavoid for an exercise of the U.S. Federal Supreme Court'ssupervisory power?

II. Should all U.S. government officials be given thepower to rule against a case that may be construed inviolation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071?

III. According to U.S.C. 1251, should the U.S. SupremeCourt allow anyone in the U.S. Government and/ or anyoneelse in the world to rule against the absolute truth ofmathematics?

-2-0660 J.doc "F"i n-a-l "-."p'-"d-f'-"CHAIRMAN - 2OO~6f11.d6~ Fin~ .Ddf Paqe3I

ii

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS

The only parties to the proceedings are those listed in thecaption of the case.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

*PageQUESTION PRESENTED ..................... .............. i.PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS ............... iiTABLE OF CONTENTS ........................ iiOPINIONS BELOW ........................... 1...... ........... IJURISDICTION ............................................. 1RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED ......................... 1REASONS GRANTING THE PETITION ................. 2TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT ...................... 4C O N C L U SIO N .................. ................................. 4APENDICES ..................... . . ........... la to 14aCERTIFICATEF SERVICE ................................. 15a

.... .. .....11,ý;HAIRMAN - 200611].doc Final pdf Paqe 4 11

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PETITION FOR AN EXTRAORDINARY WRIT

According to the U.S. Supreme Court Rule No. 20. Pro SePETITIONER Po Kee Wong respectfully prays that anextraordinary writ issue to review the judgment below:

OPINIONS BELOW

The opinion of the United States Court of Appeals appearsat Appendices page la to page 2a.

JURISDICTION

The ORDER by the CAFC about case 2006-1324 (SerialNo. 08/980,657) was issued on June 27, 2006. TheORDER was immediately appealed in time by Pro SePetitioner Po Kee Wong.to U.S. Supreme Court started fromJuly 21, 2006 and continued with repeated appeals to ChiefJustice John G. Roberts through U.S. Supreme Court RulesNo.22 with imputes from the Executive Branch of the U.S.governmental organizations and now continued the appealby U.S. Supreme Court Rule No. 20

RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED

(1) Library of Congress Registration number TX 6-162-487dated July 22, 2004:U.S SUPREME COURT CASENUMBER 03-1277 ON PETITION FOR REHAERINGFOR A WRIT OFCERTIORARI TO U.S. COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT- IN RE POKEE WONG FOR CASE 03-1322(SERIAL NUMBER08/980,657) that was also filed at the Clerk's Office.

VCHKIA -MA-N-- 2-0-'-O-'6-["l-]."-d-o--c-'--F-i"'n"-a-I ......... p'-d-f -I CHA1RMAN - 2006(11.doc Final .~df Pane 5~r

2

(2) Library of Congress Registration number TX 6-162-488dated July 22, 2004: U.S SUPREME. COURT CASENUMBER 03-1227 ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OFCERTIORARI TO U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FORTHE FEDERAL CIRCUIT - RE PO KEE WONGFOR CASE 03-1322 (SER IAL NUMBER 08/980,657)that was also filed at the Clerk's Office.

REASONS FOR GRANTING ANEXTRAORDINARY WRIT

The U.S. Supreme Court should grant this petition for anExtraordinary Writ based on the following reasons inanswering the Questions Presented as enumerated in thefollowings as reasons I.; II. and III ACCORDING TOTHE Supreme Court Rules 14.1.(a);20 and 22 respectivelyand with the reasons having been submitted to the court andpublished in Library of Congress Documents (1) and (2)enumerated again in the followings

I. THIS COURT' SHOULD GRANT THISEXTRAORDINARY WRIT BECAUSE THE USPTOEXAMINER HAD MADE AN INITIAL ERROR OFJUDGMENT OF THIS CASE. WHILE EACH ONE OFTHE SUBSEQUENT COURTS SHOULD HAVERULED INDEPEDENTLY AND STAYED AWAYFROM THE INITIALLY MADE MISTAKES.HOWEVER, SINCE THEY HAD CHOSEN TO AGREEWITH ONE AND THE OTHER AND THEREFORE, THESUPREME COURT SHOULD STEP IN TO EXAMINEAND TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE LOWERCOURTS HAVE ABUSED THE SUPREME COURTRULE 10-(a) IN ORDER TO COVER UP THE INITIALMISTAKES SUCH THAT THEY CAN AVOID FOR ANEXERCISE OF THE U.S. FEDERAL SUPREMECOURT'S SUPERVISORY POWER.

lFC-RKfkM-AN- 260-6rll.do6--Fi6a-T-.6df- Radie 6AWRiRAN-20611do Fina -- d Paqe '

3

II. THIS COURT SHOULD GRANT THISEXTRAORDINARY WRIT BECAUSE THE CASE HASBEEN EXHUSTED WITH ALL THE COURT'SPREVIOUS APPELLATE JURISDICTIONS ASEVIDENCED BY THE REASONS LISTED IN THEPETITION FOR REHEARING IN Case No. 03-1227 ANDTHE QUESTIONS PRESEN TED FOR A WRIT OFCERTIORARI FOR CASE No. 03-1322. THEREFORE,ACCORDING TO SUPREME COURT RULE 20 ANDACCORDING TO U.S.C. 18 SECTIONS 2071, THISCOURT SHOULD EXAMINE THIS CASE TODETERMINE WHETHER ANY U.S. GOVERNMENTOFFICIALS WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLED IN THISCASE MAY BE CONSTRUED THE VIOLATION.

III. THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH OF MATHEMATICSHAS BEEN CONFIRMED AND OBSERVED AS AGENERAL LAW OF NATU RE BY ALL PEOPLEWORLDWIDE IN THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO ANDEVEN UP TO NOW. WH ILE ALL OTHER BRANCHES'OF SCIENCES AND ENGINEERINGS MAY BECHANGED WITH TIME IN HISTORY EXCEPT THATOF THE ABSOULTE THRUTH OF MATHEMATICS.IF THE JUDICIAL LAWS CHOOSE' TO VIOLATE THISGENERAL LAW OF NATUR E, THEN ALL THERULINGS BY JUDGES IN TH ECOURTS OF JUDICIALLAWS WILL COMPLETELY FALL APARTSWITHOUT ANY 'ORDERS IN ALL THE COURTSWORLDWIDE AT ALL.

IT IS MY PERSONAL OPINION THAT NO ONE ONEARTH SHOULD BE GIVEN THE POWER TO RULEAGAINST THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH OFMATH EMATICS.

jfd4A_11kMKW_' f1j.-d o__ c___ F -in"J'a'-d ............. __ Pa~ge 11

I CHAIRMAN- 2006[1 ].doc Fina! . pdf Page 7 I

4

ACCORDING TO U.S.C 1251, THE U.S. SUPREMESHOULD GRANT THIS EXTRAORDINARY WRITNOT TO ALLOW ANYONE IN THE U.SGOVERNMENT AND/OR ANYONE ELSE IN THEWORLD TO RULE AGAINST THE ABSOLUTETRUTH OF MATHEMATICS.

TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT

THE U.S. SUPREME COURT SHOULD GRANTTHIS EXTRAORDINARY WRIT ACCORDING TOTHEABOVE REASONS I;IIAND IIITOISSUE ANORDER TOTHE SOLICITOR GENERAL OFTHEJUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO INSTRUCT USPTO TOCOMPLETE THE ISSUAN CE AND ALLOWANCEOF THE PATENT APPLICATION NUMBER08/980,657.

CONCLUSION

Based on the above'reasons I; 11; lII; and the type ofrelief being sought, the U.S. Federal Supreme Courtshould grant this PETITION FOR ANEXTRAORDINARY WRITACCORDING TOTHESupreme court Rule 20.3.(a) to grant and complete theissuance and allowance of the U.S. Patent ApplicationN umber 08/980,657.

Respectfully submitted by,

Po Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitioner2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 209102344USATel: 301-585-3453 E-mail: pokwong(qverizon. net

CHAJRMAN - 2O6[1].doc Final .pdf ___ _______e8

Ia

APPENDICES

* NOTE: Pursuant to Feed Cir. R. 47.6, this order is notcitable as precedent: It is a public order.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2006-1324(Serial No. 08/980,657)

IN RE PO KEE WONG

ON MOTION

Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, LINN andJudges. PER CURIAM.

DYK, Circuit

ORDER

ý The Director of the United States Patent andTrademark Office moves to waive the requirements of Fed.Cir.R. 27(f) and to dismiss Po Kee Wong's appeal for lackof jurisdiction. Wong responds.

Wong applied for a patent on a "Uniquely-CorrectedSystems and Method to Compute High Power Functions."The Board of Patent and Trademark Appeals affirmed therejection of the sole claim of the patent. This courtaffirmed the rejection. In re Wong, 2003 WL 22439880(Fed. Cir. 2003).

The Patent and Trademark Office issued a notice ofabandonment in 2004. In 2005, Wong filed a petition torevive the application. The Commissioner for patentsdenied the petition on July 19, 2005. Wong filed a noticeof appeal on February 14, 2006, seeking review by thiscourt of the Commissioner's denial of his petition.

C H KI 9 -MA N -- 2 0 -0 9 F66 --rh a-l -. -p- -d-f-CHAJRMAN - 2006[1].doc Final .pdf PaQe9~I

2a

The Director argues that we do not have jurisdictionover the appeal from the Commissioner's denial of thepetition. We agree. Morganroth v. 0uigg, 885 F. 2d843,846 ( Fed. Cir. 1989) ( "the Commissioner.'s denial of apetition to revive a patent application is subject to review inthe district court," pursuant to the Administrative, ProcedureAct, 5 U.S.C. $$ 701 et seq.). In his response to the motionto dismiss, Wong does not dispute the jurisdictionalchallenge but instead appears to argue the merits of his case.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion to waive the requirements of Fed. Cir. R.27(f) is granted

(2) The motion to dismiss is granted.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.

FOR THE COURT

JUN 27 2006 Signature

D ate Jan Horbaly, Clerk

cc: Po Kee WongJohn M. Whealan, Esq.

ISSUED AS A MANDATE JUN 27 2006

IC-HAIR-MAN _2006[l ].doc Final .pdfPae1 --pa---g-, 6-1 0-ýý

3aThe appeals, submitted to and. received by the Clerk'sOffice in U.S. Supreme Court to examine the ORDER indetails, are enumerated in time as shown in the followings:(1) April 17, 2007; (2) March 27, 2007; (3) November 08,2006.The contents of the appeals addressed to Honorable ChiefJustice John G. Roberts are summarized in the Appeal (1)April 17, 2007 with letters of imputes from the ExecutiveBranches of U.S. Government typed in the subsequentpages in this APPENDICES.

Contents of Appeal (1) April 17, 2007:

Dear Honorable Chief Justice Roberts:

According to the .book entitled RULES OF THESUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES,ADOPTED MARCH 14, 2005; EFFECTIVE MAY 2,2005, FROM PAGE 22 TO PAGE 23, Rule 20-1, I ampleading to you to grant me the writ in aid of the Court'sappellate jurisdiction, that exceptional circumstanceswarrant the exercise of the Court's discretionary powers,and that adequate relief cannot be obtained in any otherform or from any other court.

Attached with this letter of pleading include the followingdocuments for your consideration:

(1) 1 copy of the March 27, 2007 letter from William K.Suter, Clerk of the Court and signed by Erik Fossum.1 page.

(2) 1 copy of my most recent pleading documentsubmitted to you on March 21, 2007 and had beenreceived by the Office of the Clerk with a stampdated on March 27, 2007. 20 pages.

I [04A-R-MAWN 46-al -Ddf-IICFIAiRMAN - 2006[11.doc Final .Ddf ~ci~ii~l

4aRespectfully submitted by,Signature signedPo Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitione r for Supreme Court CaseNo. 2006-13242413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344USATel: 301-585-3453E-mail: pokwong@verizon. net

March 27, 2007 letter from Erik Fossum:

RE: Po Kee Wong v. USPTO/BPAI

Dear Mr. Wong:

In reply to your letter or submission, received March 27,2007, I regret to inform you that the Court is unable toassist you in the matter you present.

Under Article III of the Constitution, the jurisdiction ofthis Court extends only to the consideration of cases orcontroversies properly brought before it from lower courtsin accordance with federal law and filed pursuant to theRules of this Court. The Court, does not .give advice orassistance or answer legal questions on the basis ofcorrespondence.

Your papers are herewith returned.

Sincerely,William K. Suter, ClerkBy:Signature signedErik Fossum(202) 479-3392

I ýN-AIRM-AN --200611W66-rhn-al -pýdfbOHAIRMAN - 2006F11.doc Final .Ddf Pacie 121

5a

Contents of Appeal (2) March 27, 2007 letter:

Dear Honorable Chief Justice Roberts:

Pursuant to my March 20, 2007 telephonic conversations(1) with Mr. Michael Sherry at ( 571-272-8800 of

USPTO as indicated by the FEB 20, 2007 letterand

(2) with Mr. Erik Fossum (202)-479-3392 in SupremeClerk, William K. Suter's Office

The following documents, (A);(B) and (C) are submitted toyou for your consideration to take the appropriate action toend this 13 years old case:

.(A) contains:1. One page February 20, 2007 letter from Mindy B.

Fleisher, Chief of Staff from U.S. PTO.2. USPTO Primary Examiner of Art Unit: 2124 Mr.

Chuong D Ngo's signed letter quoted " Thiscommunication is to inform applicant that the noticeof abandonment mailed on Macrh 18, 2004 hasbeen removed from the file record "one page.

3. Five pages of my previous Supreme CourtDocuments of Appeals to you as dated received bythe Office of the Clerk with a seal dated onNovember 08, 2006. Total seven pages ofdocuments of(A).

(B) contains:1. One page December 20, 2006 letter from Mindy B.

Fleisher, Chief of Staff from Office of theCommissioner for patents.

j,'.CH-Ai-M-AN - 20-06[f]dbcFia.p -Pag0130

6a

2. Three pages of documents from Marguerite A.Murer, Special Assistant to the President andDirector of Presidential Correspondence of-theWhite House.

3. Three pages of documents from .Erik Fossum fromthe Supreme Court Clerk's Office.

(C) contains:Five pages of my technical communications with two

Chairmen of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission andtheir technical staff members about the correctness andthe ,corrections that should be done in relevance to thepatent application number 08/980, 657

Respectfully submitted by,Signature signedPo Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitioner for case No. : 2006-13242413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344USATel: 301-585-3453E mail: pokwongzaverizon. net

FEB 20 2007 letter from Mindy B. Fleisher of USPTO:

Dear Mr. Wong

Thank you for your recent correspondence to the UnderSecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property andDirector of the United States Patent and Trademark Office(USPTO), Mr. Jon Dudas& Your letter has been reffered tothis Office of the Commissioner for Patents for response.

CHIN ?J q -206[1].doc Final .pdf ea = ~4,

7a

Your communication again refers to your patent application,serial number 08/980,657 and specifically requests thatimmediate action taken to end the prosecution of this 13-year-old application.

As explained to you in previous office letters thisapplication was finally rejected by the examiner. Therejection was affirmed by the Board of Patent Appeals andInterferences (BPAI). A request for rehearing before theBPAI was denied. The application was appealed to theCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), whichaffirmed the decision of the BPAI. A request for rehearingbefore the CAFC was denied, and an appeal to the SupremeCourt was also denied. Thus, all avenues of appeal havebeen exhausted, and the application is abandoned.

Most recently, you filed a petition for revival of theapplication on June 2, 2005, to which the USPTOresponded on July 19, 2005. As clearly stated in ourresponse to your petition, the USPTO lacks jurisdiction inthis case to grant your petiti on. Jurisdiction of this casepassed from the USPTO upon you filing an appeal to theCAFC.I hope this information will be useful to you. Please feelfree to contact Michael Sherry at (571) 272-8800 if youhave any further questions specific to this letter.

Sincerely,Signature signed

Mindy B. FleisherChief of StaffOffice of the Commissioner for Patents

2__ 0___0'_6_'_[1_fdo__6__ __F__in-_a___1_'__.____-' - a geI .. . . . . . ... . . ...H. ... . ....... . .. .....M. ... .... .. . ..... . ... . ... . . . .. . . . .... . .. .. . . ....[.. . . .. ... ... . . . .. . ....o i I p fP g 1

8a

Contents of Appeal (3) November 08, 2006:

Dear Honorable Chief Justice Roberts:

I am pleading to you to examine the following twodocuments being sent to you according to the SupremeCourt Rule number 22 such that not to allow CAFC and theUSPTO/BPAI to abuse the U.S. Supreme Court Rulenumber 10 such that they can USE THEIR GIVENPOWER to rule against the ABSOLUTE TRUTH OFMATH EMATICS.

In particular, all their rulings may possibly be consideredwith intentional and/ or unintentional violation of U.S.C. 18Section 2071 according to all documents of evidenceshaving been submitted to the Supreme Court in the past fewyears. All those documents of evidences with imputes fromthe agencies of the Executive Branch of our U.S.government have also been openly published by the U.S.Library of Congress.

Your time and effort spent to issue your own judicialopinion on the submitted questions about this case will begratefully appreciated by all judicial scholars and by allqualified mathematicians and physicists and scientistsworldwide.The. following two documents are included in thissubmission to you:

(1) 2 pages of my September 23, 2006 12:36AM E-mail of communication with ThomasL. Stoll, Associate Solicitor of USPTO.

(2) 13 pages of my September 6, 2006 APPEALTO YOU which have been blocked andnever delivered to you.

2_006ffLd_6&_F4ýý_IDdf Pa -e 1611LL ARAN- 06[1.o Fina .Dd P, 1

9a

This submission will be sent to you by U.S. Postal Mailwith restriction signed by you personally to prove that youhave received this submission under Certified Mail. Receiptnumber 7006-0100-0006-8263-8067.

All the mathematicians and scientists in the world and I arelooking forward to hear and read from your opinion ofruling of this case.

Respectfully submitted by,Signature signedPo Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitioner of No. 2006-13242413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344USATel: 301-585-3453E-mail: pokwongpverizon. net

October 31, 2005 letter from Marguerite A. Murer:

Dear Po Kee Wong:

On behalf of President George W. Bush, thank you for yourletter.The White House is sending your inquiry to theDepartment of Commerce. This agency has the expertise toaddress your concerns. They will respond directly to youas promptly as possible. IThe president sends his best wishes.SincerelySignature signedMarguerite A. MurerSpecial Assistant to the President and Director ofPresidential Correspondence

-" -05 V6 [; fl -d 6 6- -F__i _n -a I~ -_. ---'- - - '#ageTil!~CHAIRMAN - 2006flfdocFiiaI.pdf Page 17

10a

November 15, 2005 letter from Marguerite A. Murer:

Dear Dr. Wong:

On behalf of President Bush, thank you for yourcorrespondence regarding the appointment of a newAssociate Justice to the Supreme Court. The presidentappreciates hearing your views,

Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., has served on the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit for the past 15 years.He now has more prior judicial experience than anySupreme Court nominee in more than 70 years. He hasparticipated in thousands of appeals and authored hundredsof opinions. In the performance of his duties, Jude Alitohas gained the respect of his colleagues and attorneys forhis brilliant legal mind, measured judicial temperament,and decency.

Jude Alito's long career in public service has given him anextraordinary breadth of experience on a wide range ofdifficult and complex legal issues, and President Bush waspleased to nominate Judge Alito to succeed justice SandraDay O'Connor. As a Justice Department official, Federalprosecutor, and judge, he has shown a mastery of the law, adeep commitment to justice and equality, and tremendousintegrity. Judge Alito understands that judges must strictlyinterpret the Constitution and not legislate from the bench.As the President said, his scholarly, fair-minded, andprincipled approach to the law will serve our Nation well inthe Supreme Court.

IL~iI~LMAN- 206[1.do FialpdfPae1 _P_a_9 _!e__1_'j

Ila

Judge Alito has devoted his professional life to advancingjustice and equality. Early in his career, he worked as anAssistant United States Attorney, handling criminal andcivil matters, and argued numerous cases in the UnitedStates Courts of Appeals. As Assistant to the SolicitorGeneral, Judge Alito argued 12 cases before the SupremeCourt, and in the Justice Department's Office of LegalCounsel, he provided constitutional advice for the Presidentand the Executive Branch. In 1987, he was appointed byPresident Ronald Reagan as the United States Attorney forthe District of New Jersey, one of our country's largestFederal districts. There, he gained a reputation for beingboth tough and fair while prosecuting white-collar andenvironmental crimes, violations of civil rights, drugtrafficking, and organized crime.

Judge Alito possesses excellent legal training andexemplary judicial qualifications. He is a Phi Beta Kappagraduate of Princeton University. ,He attended Yale LawSchool, where he served as editor of the Yale Law Journal.He clerked for Judge Leonard Garth on the Third CircuitCourt of Appeals.

In 1987, the senate confirmed Judge Alito as the UnitedStates Attorney for the District on New Jersey byunanimous consent. In 1990, the Senate confirmed JudgeAlito for the United States Court of Appeals, once more byunanimous consent. President Bush believes the Senatewill again be impressed by Judge Alito's distinguishedrecord and personal character, and he urges an up or downvote on this important nomination.

C H A IR~°6[ C~a P~P.. . . . . . .. .ge.. . .. . .. . . . . . .

12aFor more information on Judge Alito and the nomination.

.process, you may visit the White House website atwww.whitehouse.2 ov/infocus/iudicialnominees. Thankyou again for writing. Best wishes.

Sincerely,Signature signedMarguerite A. MurerSpecial Assistant to the President and Director ofPresidential Correspondence

May 27, 2005 letter from Gregory C. Cwalina of NRC:

Dear Dr. Wong:

This letter is in response to the email you sent to Dr. BrianSheon of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ( NRC) onApril 22, 2005. your email provided "...topics relevant toNEW NUCLEAR SFATEY STANDARD COMPUTERCODE DEVELOPMENT.. .in response to the request byDr. Sheron's March 22, 2005 letter."

Dr. Sheron's March 22, 2005 letter provided an assessmentof documents that you provided during the 2005 NRCRegulatory Information Conference. You were informedthat members of the NRC staff looked through thedocuments you provided and were unable to find anyinformation in them that supports your claim that computeranalysis codes for nuclear power plant safety calculationsare in error. Dr. Sheron's letter stated that NRC analysismethods, as your own calculations show, do not take intoaccount the mathematical fact that exponentiation forms anon-commutative algebra. /The March 22, 2005 letterconcluded that-NRC safety analysis calculations, at leastwith respect to exponentiatio n, are correct.

CHAIRMAN- 2061d0€ Finaill .......... Page 20

13a

Dr. Sheron's letter stated that the NRC will not pursue thismatter further unless you identify specific safety concernsassociated with the nuclear power reactors the NRCregulates. The information provided in your April 22, 2005,email does not provide specific safety concerns. Therefore,the NRC will not take any further action regarding youremail. Unless you provide specific information in thefuture, the NRC will not respond to any further request forreview of your documents.

Sincerely,

Signature signedGregory C. Cwalina, Senior Allegations CoordinatorPlant Support Branch, Division of Inspection ProgramManagement, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

March 22, 2005 letter from Dr. Brian W; Sheron of NRC:

Dear Dr. Wong:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2005, at the Nuclear RegulatoryCommission's (NRC) Regulatory Information Conference,you handed me several documents which you impliedshowed that computer codes used to analyze nuclear plantperformance were inaccurate. -

I and several members of my staff have looked through thedocuments you provided and have been unable to find anyinformation in them that supports your claim that computeranalysis codes for nuclear power plant safety calculationsare in error. In fact, my staff has reviewed themathematical formulas presented in your paper and foundthat that the exponentiation operator, which is at the heart

~CHAIRMAN - 2006[1].docjmFia1_pdf P6I7 7iIZ 7ý~~

14a

of your paper, forms a non-commutativ e algebra over afield. Whether the field is real or complex is irrelevant. Inorder for the proof of your paper to hold true, the operationmust commute (i.e., the ordering of the operation does notchange the result). Our analysis methods, as your owncalculations show, do take into account the mathematicalfact that exponentiation forms a non-commutativ e algebra.Therefore, you can be assured that our safety analysiscalculations, at least with respect to exponentiatio n, arecorrect.

I appreciate your interest in nuclear safety. However,unless you identify specific safety concerns associated withthe nuclear power reactors the NRC regulates, we do notintend to pursue this matter further. If you have a specificnuclear safety concern, please visit our website athttp://www.nrc.g ov/what-we-do/reeulatory/al legati ons/safety-conce rn.html, emailallegations(anrc. gov, or call NRC's Toll-Free SafetyHotline at (800) 695-7403

Sincerely,Signature signedBrian W. Sheron, Associate Director for Project Licensingand Technical Analysis, Office of Nuclear ReactorRegulation

1FC'RA1kKAX1q-2006[1].doc Final pdf Page 221I~CHAIRMAN - 2006[11.doc Final .Ddf Paqe 22i1

15a

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

According to the Supreme Court Rule 29.4.(a) and 29. 5.(a),I hereby certify that on June 21 , 2007 1, Po Kee Wong,the Pro Se petitioner, caused the following copies of thebooklets of PETITION FOR AN EXTRAODINARYWRIT OF CERTIORARI for the case 2006-1324 to thefollowing parties by U.S..Postal Service:

40 copies to:William K. Suter, Clerk, Supreme Court Office of the Clerk1 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20543Tel: 202-479-3011 and 202-479-3392 ( ErikFossum) Fax: 202-479-3230

2 copies to:Solicitor General, Department of Justice950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Room 5614Washington DC 20530-0001Tel: 202-514-2217 fax: 202-514-3648

1 copy to:,Jan Horbaly, Clerk/Circuit ExecutiveUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit717 Madison Place, N.W. Washington DC 20539Tel: 202-633-6550 Fax: 202-633-9623

1 copy to:John M. Whealan; Thomas L. Stoll; Joseph G. PiccoloOffice of the SolicitorP.O. Box:15667 Arlington, Virginia 22215Tel: 571-272-9035 Fax: 571-273-0373; 703-305-1324

I FC _H A I R M -A N __ F 5 o- K e _eW o 'n' a -0-7 -20'_ -9. -&-c- "ri-66 V11IF~HAJRMAN - Po Kee WonciOT~09doU Paae 1 ~lI

Po Kee Wong2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344

Tel: 301-585-3453E-mail: pokwong(&iverizon.net

September 18, 2007

To:William K. Suter, Clerk, Supreme Court, Office of the Clerk1 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20543Tel: 202-479-3011 and 202-479-3392 (Erik Fossum)

.Fax: 202-479-3230

No. 07-209Title: In Re Po Kee Wong, Petitioner

V. .

Boston Retirement BoardDocketed: August 17, 2007Lower Court: Supreme Judicial Court of MassachusettsCase Number: (SJC-09858)Decision Date; February 13, 2007Rehearing Denied: March 29, 2007

Subject: Filing and Service of documents from various FOIA Offices of U.S.

Government according to Supreme Court Rule 29.1.

Dear Mr. Suter:

Please help to enter the following attached documents requested from various FOIAOffices of U.S. government for Supreme Court Case 07-209:(1) 2 pages of documents from Michael A. West, Esq.'s September 13, 2007 letter.(2) 2 pages of my July 25, 2007 2:41 PM E-mail to FOIA Offices and News Media.(3) 1 page of PI information Summary from National Science Foundation FOIA Office.(4) 2 pages of PI information Summary from Vole Center of DOT.(5) 3 pages of my communication with FAA of DOT.(6) 3 pages of PI Information Summary from DOE.(7) 7 pages of PI Information summary from Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).(8) 13 pages of PI Information Summary from NASA-I 218 Case.(9) 14 pages of communications with IRS and DOD; NASA and Education Department

ChAIMN-P e oQ0-0. -Pa6e 2'1

*1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT

September 13, 2007

Mr. Po Kee Wong2413 Spencer RoadSilver Spring, MD 20910-2344

RE: FOIA Request No. 07-00966-F

Dear Mr. Wong:

This letter is in response to your e-mail dated August 2, 2007 requesting information pursuant tothe Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552. Your request was received in this officeon August 3, 2007. Your request has been assigned to the following office within the Departmentto search for responsive records: Institute of Education Sciences (IES). You asked for a list ofyour three proposals that had been submitted to the Education Department for support at the timeDr. Payzant resigned from the U.S. Education Department and became the Superintendent ofBoston Public Schools.

The staff in IES notified the FOIA Requester Service Center that they do not maintain anydocuments that are responsive to your request.

You have the right to appeal this decision by writing, within 30 days of your receipt of this letter.Your appeal should be received by the FOIA office on or before October 19, 2007. Your appealshould be accompanied by a copy of your initial letter of request and this denial letter, and shouldcontain any evidence or argument you wish the Department to consider in making anadministrative determination on your appeal.

Appeal Address

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Management400 Maryland Avenue, SW, LBJ-2W311ATTN: FOIA AppealsWashington, DC 20202-4500

If you have any questions, please contact the FOIA Requester Service Center'at (202) 245-6651 or

EDFOIAManager@cd.gov.

Sincerely,

FOIA Public Liaison, OM/R.IMS

400 MARYLAND AVE. SX,, WASHINGTON. DC 20202-4500wwwed.gov

Our mission Is to ensure equal access to education and to promote educational excellernce throughout the nation.

For joint investigations with relevance to NASA 1-218 Case and with requests a

complete P1 Summary Information Report from all those Offices are in progress.

~§HAMAN~. Fý ... .....-09do Page.3..?age 3J1

I

PART I. -- 15 pages. Entitled "IMPACTS FROM NEW SOLUTIONS OF OLDPROBLEMS IN MATHEMATICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SCIENCES."

PART II. - 20 pages. entitled" request review from members of CSTB of NationalAcademies"

Both documents are open technical discussions by qualified mathematician andcomputer scientists on the subject matter directly related to patent applicationnumber 08/980,657.

Respectfully submitted by

Po Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitioner for Case 06-1705 and Case 07-209

1',,_CHKrRMAN --Iti6-Kiifi-W&n''ci--"O-6-17-05.do-cICHAJRMAN - Po Kee Wono-06-1705.doc ~ie ill

Po Kee Wong2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344

Tel: 301-585-3453

E-mail: pokwong(verizon.net

September 18, 2007

To:William K. Suter, Clerk, Supreme Court, Office of the ClerkI First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20543Tel: 202-479-3011 and 202-479-3392 (Erik Fossum)Fax: 202-479-3230

No. 07- 209 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed Jun 22, 2007Title: In Re Po Kee Wong, Petitioner

V.

Boston Retirement BoardDocketed: August 17, 2007Lower Court: 'Supreme Judicial court of MassachusettsDecision Date; February 13, 2007Rehearing Denied: March 29, 2007

Subject: Filing and Service of documents according to Supreme Court Rule 29.1.

Dear Mr. Suter:

Please help to enter the following attached Documents relevant to Case 07-209 forDISTRIBUTION in the Court:(1) 2 pages of September 13, 2007 letter from Michael A. West, Esq. on behalf of Bostonretirement Board.(2)PART I. -- 15 pages. Entitled "IMPACTS FROM NEW SOLUTIONS OF OLDPROBLEMS IN MATHEMATICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SCIENCES."

PART II. - 20 pages. entitled " request review from members of CSTB of NationalAcademies"

Both documents are open technical discussions by qualified mathematician andcomputer scientists on the subject matter directly related to patent applicationnumber 08/980,657.

Respectfully submitted by

[!CHAIRMAN - Po Kee Wona-06-1 705.doc Pacle 21

Po Kee Wong, Pro Se Petitioner for Case 06-1705

CHAIRMAN - PIHistory Summarv.Ddf PaQe 1 fI

I .NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONPRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR / PROJECT DIRECTOR HISTORY REPORT

PI/PD NAME/ID :Wong, Po Kee CURRENT PROPOSAL NO :9760362INSTITUTION NAMEICODE :SYSTEMS RESEARCH BRANCH OR COMPONENT :SYSTEMSCOMPANY(U.S.FEDERAL SUPPLY CODE:5R583) RESEARCH COMPANYDEPARTMENT (IF KNOWN): PI GENDER :MPI DEGREE :PhD PI DEGREE YEAR :1970PI HANDICAP :N PI MINORITY CODE:

NSF STATUS PROP AWD ID/ NSF ORG REQ AWD TITLEDATE 98AABBR DATE NO AMD NO CODE AMOUNT DUR RCVD DUE

DECL 08/21/2001 0119649 11090000 $198,441 12 P1 03/15/2001

DECL 11/01/1997 9760362 07070000 $91,913 6 PI 06/11/1997

DECL 01/12/1995 9460052 07070000 $65,000 6 PI 05/27/1994.DECL 01/17/1995 9460051 07070000 $64,114 6 PI 05/27/1994

INAP 08/18/1992 9222239 04060001 $17,190 3 PI 07/16/1992

INAP 08/27/1992 9255153 11060100 $416,480 60 PI 02/18/1992

DECL 12/10/1990 9012303 07010004 $39,000 6 PI 02/12/1990DECL 04/25/1991 9012276 07010004 $336,500 7 PI 02/12/1990INAP 03/06/1990 9008004 04060001 $17,190 2 PI 01/10/1990

DECL 06/08/1990 9050007 11090000 $218,103 60 P1 10/02/1989

INAP 10/12/1988 8860922 07070000 $49,691 6 PI 06/24/1988INAP 10/12/1988 8860538 07070000 $49,691 6 P1 06/20/1988

INAP 10/12/1988 8860180 07070000 $48,321 6 P1 06/20/1988

DECL 03/30/1984 8319908 11090000 $1 24 PI 09/08/1983

DECL 09/30/1982 8260150 03040101 $30,000 6 P1 04/16/1982

DECL 09/30/1981 8113761 07040000 $30,000 6 PI 03/31/1981DECL 09/30/1981 8113752 07040000 $30,000 6 PI 03/31/1981

DECL 03/04/1981 8100696 07030200 $25,000 6 PI 10/06/1980DECL 11/04/1980 8100695 03010500 $25,000 6 P1 10/06/1980

DECL 09/05/1980 8009868 07030200 $25,000 6 P1 01/21/1980DECL 09/05/1980 8009134 07030200 $25,000 6 P1 01/11/1980

DECL 09/30/1979 7917145 07030000 $25,000 6 PI 03/29/1979

SUMMARY: 0 AWARDED 16 DECLINED 0 WITHDRAWN 6 INAPPR 0 PENDING 0 RECOMM

I-'nnted trom ejacket: U(I~UIUt rage i 01, Hnnted from eJacket: 07/20/07 rage I10T

I CHAfIRMAN - 6mce_2008tern piatei.doc-ti 7o.docPg -g-e- -

)

Proceedings of the TMCE 2008, April 21-25, 2008, Izmir, Turkey, Edited by I. Horvith and Z. Rusik© Organizing Committee of TMCE 2008, ISBN ----

IMPACTS FROM NEW SOLUTIONS OF OLD PROBLEMS IN MATHEMATICALAND EXPERIMENTAL SCIENCES

WONG,PO KEE (]-gf f)Systems Research Company

pokwong@veizon. net

WONG, ADAM (*R*)WONG, ANITA ( ;•)Systems Research Company.

ABSTRACTIMPACTS FROM NEW SOLUTIONS OF OLD

PROBLEMS IN MATHEMATICAL ANDEXPERIMENTAL SCIENCES

ABSTRACT

Submitted to

Seventh International Symposium on Tools andMethods of Competitive Engineering

TMCE 2008 Ankara Secretariat Dr. Bugra KokuMiddle East Technical University, Turkey E-mail:-

infob(tmce.org

(3) IMECE 200343536 paper, 5 pages.(4) IAC-02-J..P.02 paper, 7 pages(5) IMECE 200343586 paper, 3 pages.(6) ICONE 13 -50509 paper, 8 pages(7) Explanations of a popular geometry problem

to satisfy 2 million students in Turkey.(8) New solutions of a few old geometry and

algebra problems with using calculators.

The above papers (1) to (6) together with thisabstract had been submitted electronically: toZ.rusakatudeft.nl;info(@tmce.org;info(@tmce-symiosium.org:defaltaConfMaster.net

On the Theme of

Collaboration or Competition between East andWest

Invited to propose tutorials & to submit thefollowing technical papers:

ByPo Kee Wong, Ph.D.(i i A,

SYSTEMS RESEARCH COMPANY, USA

E-mail:pokwong@verizon.net

In response to the Call-for-Papers fromTMCE 2008, eight papers are being submitted to allparticipants of our colleagues worldwide for openreview and evaluation and to assess their impactsand values in mathematical and experimentalsciences with their applications in Tools andMethods of Competitive Engineering:

(1) IMECE 2001/T&S-23408 paper, 7 pageswith partial section translation in Chinese.

(2) IMECE 2003-43540 paper, 3 pages.

Keywords

TRAJECTORY SOLID ANGLE,

WONG'S ANGLES,

NEW STATISTICAL MECHANICS,

NEW SCATTERING CROSSECTIONS,

NEW HYDROGEN MODEL,

THREE [FUNCTIONS,

)IMENSIONAL STREAM

VISCO-ELASTO-DYAN MAICS,

NEW NUCLEAR POWER PLANTSCOMPUTER CODES DEVELOPMENT,

THREE DIMENSIONAL GEAR BOXDESIGN,

HIGH POWER FUNCTIONS,

DIFFICULT GEOMETRY AND

1

VCR kRffAN'-_1 im &-e_ _2008--__tem-p'_1ate -doc'_-'7_.ýd`6_c_'__-I~ ~RATNMAN :tmce 2008 tem~Iatex1oc-7.doc -~ Pac~e 21

TRIGONOMETRY PROBLEMS

1. Introduction

As indicated from the ABSTRACT, on the themes ofthis TMCE 2008, subject number (7) "Explanationsof a popular geometry problem to satisfy 2 millionstudents in Turkey" and subject number (8) "Newsolutions of a few old geometry and algebraproblems with using calculators." are chosen herefor the presentations.

Subject number (7) can be obtained from thefollowing Weblink by pressing the key "CTRL +Click to follow link": They are open detaileddiscussions with Ali llik of Turkey and JohnBerglund of USA and with many others in theMathforum run by Drexel University in USA.

http://www.google.com/search?g=+site:mathforum.org+Po+Kee+Wone+Anizles&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&filter=0

8/2/05 Re: What is your Po Kee Wo ,

Go to the 2nd second tap of the aboveWeblink and open the number 5 th

Math Forum DiscussionsPo Kee Wong Posts: 23 Registered: 12/6/04 ... The Angle BDC=xexpressed in terms of Angle A and Angle B After applying the Law ofSine in Trigonometry with ...,mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadl D= 1180024&messagelD=3872622,23k - Cached - Similar pages

8/3/0 Re: What is your Po Kee5 opinion??? Wong

8/2/05 Re: What is.your Po Kee Woropinion???

It is my opinion that Po KeeWong's 8/3/05

Discussion provides the completeanswers to Ali Ilik's

Question on "What is youropinion???"

Subject number (8) is an expansionof subject number (2) from realnumbers to cover for complexnumbers. According to my April 29,2007 8:02 PM E-mailcommunication with Dr. BugraKoku,

(infoatmce.or ), paper No. (8)shows the importance of havingobtained the closed-formedmathematical solutions of problemsand then proceed the numericalevaluation of the solved problems.For examples:

(A) Given the 3 altitudes of aTriangle ABC as Ha=5; Hb=6;Hc=7, how to find all the otherunknown properties of theTriangle ABC from the three givensof the Triangle ABC?

(B) Given i=square root of (-) asthe unit imaginary number; Zl=X1+ iY 1; Z2=X2+iY2 where X 1;X2;Y1;Y2 are real numbers to bedetermined from solving the \

9

07/24/05 What is your

opinion???

7/25/05 Re: What is your.opinion???.

7/25/05 Re: What is youropinion???

Ali ilik

,John Berglund

Ai ilik

2

CHAIRMAN -tmce 2008 template. doc-7. doc CHAIRMAN - trnce_2008_tern piate.doc-7.doc Page3~

following two simultaneous equations:

ArcSin (ZL + Z2) = (i^i) ^i

ArcSin (Z1 - Z2) = i^(iji)

Equation (1)

Equation (2)Answers:

Both problems (8)-(A) and (8)-(B) had beensubmitted to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC) in March 2007 for consideration of reviewand evaluation and for presentation with challenge toreview the accuracy of NRC's computer codes forsafety analyses. The complete communication aboutthe problem with. USNRC can be obtained from:

Note to Po Kee Wong:

Please refer to Brian Sheron's email to you regardingthis subject. Although you have communicatedextensively with Dr. Sheron on this subject; I mustreiterate that NRC does not intend tocommunicate on this subject further, particularly inreference to the Regulatory Information Conference.

You do not owe me additional information.

Regards,

Mabel Lee, DirectorProgram Management, Policy Development andAnalysis StaffOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchUSNRC

>>> "Po Kee Wong" <pokwong@verizon.net>02/14/2007 11:36 AM >>>?

Dear Ms. Lee and NRC colleagues ET AL:

With reference to my communication with Ms.Mabel F. Lee, the subject matters are linked togetherand that I owe Ms. Lee answers to the very specificsimple high school mathematics problem such thatwe can compare the numerical values with the NRCcomputer codes:

Using a 1996 TI83 Calculator ID: 3360885 1-0898J,all the questions asked in the problem can beobtained from the following answers provided forcomparison with those independently obtained fromthe NRC Mainframe computers:

(1) Ta=5.020890995Tc=7.188898852

(2) Ma=5.061325394

Mc=7.233692532

(3) R=4.327894686

(4) r=1.962616822

(5) r(a)=9.130434764r(c)=4.468085103

Tb=6.297805152

Mb=6.502261858

r(b)=5.67367567

(6) Denote the Centers of Ex-circles as 1(a), I(b)and l(c) each point on the angle bisectors of interiorangle A; interior angle B and interior angle Crespectively

then :

Segment AI(a)=1 4.18947453BI(b)=12.2551884 SegmentCI(c)=1 1.74479173

Segment

(7) and (9) are the same question. Denote I as theCenter of the In-circle I ( Intersection of all threeinterior angle bisectors) then,

Segment AI=3.050073969

(8)Denote H as the Ortho-center of the triangle ABC,then

Segment AH=1.487971421Segment BH=4.94271009Segment CH=6.150321088

(10) Denote 0 as the Center of the Circum-circle ofTriangle ABC, then:

AO=BO=CO=R =4.327894686

(11) Denote M as the Centroid of the Triangle ABC,then:

AM=3.374216929BM=4.334841239 CM=4.822461688

IMPACTS FROM NEW SOLUTIONS OF OLD PROBLEMS IN MATHEMATICAL ANDEXPERIMENTAL SCIENCES

3

-CHAIRMAN -trnce 2008_template.doc-7.doc Page

(12) a=8.526935599b=7.105779667 c=6.090668286

Please double check over the numerical data that weobtain separately and independently. I may havemade typing errors and/or calculation errors in someof those numerical data being shown above.

I look forward to hearing from you that you are willingto accommodate me for presentations of papers inyour Sessions

Very truly yours,

Wong, Po Kee jA.ff .W

Po Kee Wong, Ph.D. 2007 Registrant ID: No.:999Pokwonoi.verizon.net

..... Original Message -----From: Po Kee WongTo: Brian SheronCc: Mabel Lee; DEKanrc.pov ; JED2(inrc.qov;KDJ(c.nrc.oov ; Po Kee WongSent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 1:22 AMSubject: Fw: Emailing: comp-codes

Dear Dr. Sheron:

Being forwarded to you is the 2nd of 4communications with Ms. Lee to identify the currentNRC computer codes from opening the attached linkin this E-mail.

Please use your current computer programs tosolve a very simple "' High School Mathematics "problem and compare with the numbers from minewith yours before we should even go further fromhere. Please note that.we may require the accuracyof the numbers to be smaller than the so-called Nano-range and why not look for (10)A(-50) range/or for(10)^ (-100000) range ( assuming our currentcomputer and calculators are perfectly designed tohandle that).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ------------

4

1,ZCHAIRMAN - tmce 2008 terplate.doc-7.doc

----- Original Message -----From: Po Kee WongTo: Mabel LeeCc: Po Kee Wong; pokwonoqcrcn.comSent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 9:07 AMSubject: Emailing: comp-codes

Dear Ms. Lee:

The information that I just send in my 2nd E-mailto you has direct impacts to your own NRC computerCodes as shown in the following website:

The message is ready to be sent with the followingfile or link attachments:Shortcut to: http://www.nrc.qov/what-we-do/reculatory/research/comp-codes.html

Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mailprograms may prevent sending or receiving certaintypes of file attachments.. Check your e-mail securitysettings to determine how attachments are handled.

Please check with NIST mathematicians and yours atNRC to do a very simple mathematical calculation asshown in the followings:

Given: The 3 altitudes of a Triangle ABC ( Verticesname A,B,C) Ha=5, Hb=6 Hc=7

Find: the following quantities of the Triangle ABC withaccuracy to infinite decimal places !!! ( assuming allcurrent computers and calculators are perfectlydesigned to do that)

(1) The lengths of 3 Angle bisectors of the TriangleABC :Ta=?;Tb=?;and Tc=?.(2) The 3 medians of the Triangle ABC:Ma=?;Mb=?;Mc=?(3) The radius of the Circum-circle of the TriangleABC: R=?(4) The radius of the In-circle of the Triangle ABC:r=?

(5) The 3 radii of the Ex-circles of the Triangle ABC:r(a)=?; r(b)=? r(c)=?(6) How to locate the 3 Centers of the Ex-circles ofthe Triangle ABC?(7) How to locate the Center of the' In-circle of theTriangle ABC?(8) How to locate the Ortho-center of the TriangleABC?(9) How to locate the In-center of the Triangle ABC?(10) How to locate the Center of the Circum- Circle ofthe Triangle?

-(11) How to locate the Centroid of the TriangleABC?(12) What are the lengths of 3 sides of theTriangle ABC: a=? b=? and c=?

Is it fair to ask the above questions from ourcomputer scientists and engineers who docomputer codes development for NIST andNRC? If you put this as a questionnaire toask all the RIC2007 participants , both youand I would like to know the answers from theparticipants!!!

Very truly yours,

Wong, Po Kee

WONG, PO KEETel:301-585-3453pokwongq,)verizon.net

From: Brian SheronTo: Po Kee WongDate: Tue, Jan 30, 2007 1:12 PMSubject: Re: NRC RegulatoryInformation Conference

.Dr. Wong,

Ms. Lee is the director of my ProgramManagement and development staff. She is notengaged in technical work and is not involvedwith scientific computer programs.

The NRC's computer programs have beenextensively peer-reviewed and and validatedagainst a wide variety of experimental data. As wehaverepeatedly asked you in the past, if youbelieve there are errors in the NRC's computercodes, we encourage you to identify those errorsto us. Otherwise, we do not intend to discuss thisissue with you further.

>>> "Po Kee Wong" <pokwong@verizon.net>01/30/2007 7:41 AM >>>Dear Ms. Lee:

Thank you for your E-mail in response tomine addressed to Dr. Klein, Chairman of NRCand to Dr. Brian Sheron, Director, Office ofNuclear Regulatory Research.

Instead of making our arguments by wordswritten in English, we should use the computersand calculators to solve many of the very simple

IMPACTS FROM NEW SOLUTIONS OF OLD PROBLEMS IN MATHEMATICAL ANDEXPERIMENTAL SCIENCES

5

c .. . . . . ..e -2008 template.d o. .d.c Pa ge 6

and very well defined specific mathematical ,engineeringand scientific problems to compare the numerical numbersthat you can obtain from your computer codes and tocompare with that from mine. If we have obtaineddeferent numerical numbers from all these well definedsimple problems, then for sure that one of us must bewrong!!! To start the comparisons with a verycomplicated computer code for engineering problems willonly add more confusions for the correct judgment ofwhich one is good.For these reasons, I would like to advise NRC to learn andto understand the technical and scientific contents of myproprietarily owned U.S. patents number 5,084,232(Trajectory Solid Angle);5,848,377 ( Wong's Angles);6,430,516 ( High Speed Rotating Shafts and Nuclear fuelPin Design) . Please note that all these proprietarilyowned patents were generated from my own previousreview and evaluation of nuclear power plants in USA andcome up with the new solutions. Please try to read theintroduction of all those patents. I am forwarding theformation in my next E-mail to you.

I will also call you at your number 301-415-7595 tosimplify any of the mis-understanding of the problems.

(RIC) several years ago. Moreover, the staff haspreviously reviewed your paper and provided youwith the areas where we disagreed with yourconclusions. Although, we have repeatedly askedyou if you were aware of any specific errors in thecomputer codes used by either the NRC or any of itslicensees, and if so, to identify them to us, you havenot identified any to date. I understand that youwould like to make a presentation at this year's RIC.The Agenda for the RIC has already been set and wecannot provide you with a forum to present yourpaper.

Mabel Lee, DirectorProgram Management Policy Development and

Analysis StaffOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchUSNRC

CC: Mabel Lee; pokwong@rcn.com

Very truly yours,

Wong, Po Kee *

Po Kee WongTel:301-585-3453pokwong~iverizon.net

In response to your message shown in the followings:

.. .... .... ... . ... ... .. . -- --.... ... .... . .. .. ........ ... ... ......... .... .... ...... ..

The principal and the general solutions of theproblem (8)-(B) for simultaneous equations of(1) and (2) are:

Zlmn -(m+n)(pi/2) + (1/2)(-1)Am (Sin(.1835902246)

Cosh (.9830028636))+i (-(-1)^ n Sinh(1) +(-1)^m

-Cos(. 1835902246)Sinh(.9830028634))

Z2mn =(n-m)(pi/2) -(1/2) (-1)^m Sin(.1835902246)

Cosh(.9830028636)'+i (-(-1) An Sinh(1)-(-1)Am Cos(.1835902246)Sinh(.9830028634))

Where n and m are integers in the ranges of

Negative infinite < n < positive infinite

Negative infinite < m < positive infinite

When n=O and m=O, ZIO and Z200 are calledthe principal solution of the simultaneousequations (1) and (2).

----- Original Message -----From: Mabel LeeTo: pokwohng~verizon.netSent: Monday, January 29, 2007 5:19 PMSubject: NRC Regulatory Information Conference

Dr. Wong:

Your emails to Chairman Klein, Chairman, U. S. NRCand to Dr. Brian Sheron, Director, Office of NuclearRegulatory Research has been forwarded to me forresponse. Based on a brief discussion with Dr. Sheron, Iunderstand that you have been in contact with the NRCover the years and that the NRC has responded to yoursubmittals and has also provided you with a forum forpresentation at a Regulatory Information Conference

6

IlCHAIRMAN - tmce 2008 templateA66...doc Page71

Z100=. 1390498169-.045371242 i

Z200= -.1390498169-2.305031146 i

In summary, the general solutions of Zlmn andZ2mn are:

Case 1:

m=Even integers n=Even integers

Zlmn= (m+ n) pi/2 +.1390498169-.045371242 i

Z2rnn (n-rn ) pi/2 -. 1390498169-2.305031146 i

Case 2:

m=Odd integers n= Even integers

Zlmn = (m + n) pi/2-.1390498169-2.305031146 i

Z2rnn = (n- rn) pi/2+.1390498169-.045371242 i

Case 3:

m=Even integers n=Odd integers

ZIrnn = (m+n) pi/2 +.1390498169+2.305031146 i

Z2rnn =(n-m) pi/2 -. 1390498169+.045371242 i

Case 4:

rn=Odd integers n=Odd integers

Zlran = (re+n) pi/2-.1390498169+.045371242 i

Z2rnn = (n-m) pi/2 +.1390498169+2.305031146 i

2. CONCLUSION

As can be read and seen from theINTRODUCTION of the three looks- likevery- simple geometry; trigonometry andalgebra problems (7); (8)-(A) and (8)-(B),their correct solutions have never beenobtained before until now. Our colleaguesmust be alerted that there are REALIMPACTS OF NEW SOLUTIONS OFMANY OLD PROBLEMS INMATHEMATICAL AND EXPERIMENTALSCIENCES waiting for us to discover them.

IMPACTS FROM NEW SOLUTIONS OF OLD PROBLEMS IN MATHEMATICAL ANDEXPERIMENTAL SCIENCES

7

L4~:M i e.8.. .. _ .. _ ... ._ P.g .1..

I Paaqe 2 11bOHAIRMAN - Mime.822 PaQe 2~l

Dear Solicitor General Clement ET AL:

This is to inform all of you that the relevant documents in the 17 attachments of this E-mail have beensubmitted in hard copies to the U.S. Federa! Supreme Court about Case No. 06-1705 and Case No. 07-209. It is my opinion that the Court Judges as well as your department officials should be well informedthe opinions from the expert referee in the relevant filed of expertise. There are no reasons for the Case06-1705 (Patent Application 08/980,657) should be lingered for more than 13 years at all. Please openthe attachment tmce 2008 template.doc-7.doc (159KB) and read the messages 6,7,8 and click on " showall messages " and read number 14 Thanks for Professor Rosa's Reply to "TI an order of operations bySusan Moore" by Po Kee Wong ( Post: Jan 9, 2004 3:46PM). There were many open discussionsshowing why the Judges have been making the wrong judgment on this case 06-1705.

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 1:16 PMTo: 'Rahul'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: An example of E-mails being sent for more than 20 times

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 12:02 PMTo: 'Rahul'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: FW: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Rahul:

Here is an example of the E-mail having been sent for more than 20 times which I having deleting sincewhen it was first sent.

JLCýHAIRMAN - Mme.822 Pg3

From: Po Kee Wong [mailto:pokwong@verizon.net] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:43 AMTo: 'Rotella, Robert F. (HQ-MA000)'Cc: 'Po Kee Wong'Subject: RE: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Dear Mr. Rotella:

Thank you very much for your message on behalf of NASA on the subject issues of (1) NASA-1-218 Caseand (2) request for sending a copy of my FOIA PI Information Report to U.S. Supreme Court as a result offailing responses from NASA officials for a long period of time about the subject issue number (1) and fortwo months about the subject issue of (2) until the response from Ms. Kathy Bayer.

All the subject matters of (1) and (2) can be fully cleared and explained from the attached 16 documents.

Please believe me that I did not repeatedly send you or any one of multiple identical messages. I was soannoyed by whoever did that to me repeatedly again and again for more than 10 times on my messagesof very large attachments like this one, I warned them openly in the internet that I will take them to theFCC and to the U.S. Judicial courts of levels for their intentional and illegally blocking and interfering mylegal communication with the U.S. governmental organizations. Those repeated messages are sent bysomeone who claims that we must buy their product of "Internet Communication Security "I have beendeleting those repeated messages from my computer more than 10 time everyday. The current messagebeing sent to you is only once by me. If you received this message of very large attachments more thanone time, please call me at 301-585-3453

And both of us can track down whoever do this to us and formally take them to the Judicial Court for theirviolation of U.S.C. 18 Section 2071.

Please answer this E-mail by giving me your telephone number such that we can talk directly clarify about

the subject matters further.

Wong, Po Kee

S 141

2413 Spencer Road, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-2344 USA

Va-6-6-4,E

CHIMA Mm.82Pi 4•I

Tel; 301-585-3453

E-mail; Pokwonpýverizon.net

Pro Se Petitioner for Supreme Court Cases: 07-209 and 06-1705.that can be obtained from the followingtwo websites immediately:

http://www.surpremecourtus.qov/docket/07-209.htm

And

http://www.supremecourtus.,ov/docket/06-1705.htm

From: Rotella, Robert F. (HQ-MAOOO) [mailto:Robert.F.Rotella@nasa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, September19, 2007 8:07 AMTo: pokwong@verizon.netSubject: Communications with NASA Office of the General Counsel

Dear Mr. Wong,

I have been assigned to review the request you made of the NASA Office of theGeneral Counsel in a series of E-mail messages addressed to Ms. Kathy Bayer of thisoffice.

Initially, I must respectfully request that you refrain from sending multiple identical E-mail messages to us. This practice only results in delaying consideration of yourrequest because every one of yourmessages needs to be read and evaluated. We

I I C HA I RMA N - M im e. 8-2-2 Page 5

have realized that all of the approximately twelve messages you sent to Ms. Bayeryesterday contained the identical text and attachments. Sending multiple messages inthis manner will not afford consideration of your request any higher priority. Any furthercorrespondence addressed to the Office of the General should be conducted withmeand not with Ms. Bayer, until further notice.

Second, we are not clear about the nature of what you are requesting from thisoffice. Are you making a FOIA request for the first time? Or, are you inquiring about thestatus of a FOIA request that you have already made? In general, requests under FOIAare directed to, and considered by, the NASA' FOIA Office, rather than the Office of theGeneral Counsel. Accordingly, you should pursue any FOIA-related inquiries directlywith that office.

Finally, the assistance we are able to provide you is limited to that which is specificallyauthorized by law and regulation. We are unable to file any documents with the UnitedStates Supreme Court (or anywhere else) on your behalf. To the extent that you makea proper FOIA request, we will provide those documents -- which are available andproperly releasable to you under the law -- that you are seeking, and you maythen make whatever use of them that you deem appropriate.

Again, I ask you to confine your messages to those which clarify the nature of theinformation you are seeking from NASA and to avoid sending us multiple messageswhich contain the same information.

Sincerely,

Robert F. RotellaSenior Patent AttorneyOffice of the General CounselNASA HeadquartersWashington, DC 20546-0001

Ii c6.\terný p\G-W1O 001TVmpW Page 11,

Mail Envelope Properties (46FD27FE.D06: 24: 7430)

Subject: Cordial invitation of relevant U.S. Government Officials; News Mediaand Worldwide Experts in relevant fields for open review and evaluation of U.S. SupremeCourts Cases:06-1705 and 07-209 from the 17 attachments.Creation Date Fri, Sep 28, 2007 12:01 PMFrom: "Po Kee Wong" <pokwong~verizon.net>

Created By: pokwong(verizon.net

Recipientsnrc.gov

TWGWPO02.HQGWDOO1BWS (Brian Sheron)

nrc.govTWGWPO01 .HQGWDO01

MFL-(Mabel Lee)SAM2 (Stephen Mcguire)

nrc.govOWGWPO02.HQGWDO01

CHAIRMAN

nrc.govkplpo.KPDO

SJC1 (Samuel Collins)

fcps.eduadam.wong CC

sjc.state.ma.usSJCReporterSJCCommClerk

yahoo.com.hksimonfctam ('simon Tam')

hotmail.comshiuhwen

yahoo.comshousunszu h

I ','-cAfem P\GW)OOOO-1'."T'- M"" -P'-' ....... Page-•qlI; ci\temp\GW}OOOO1 .TMP Page

nckudc ('NCKU DC')rahulshandilya ('Rahul')rtchuanisohedralchin8673mintenlee

post.harvard.edunateyen

kva.sersaa

mms.govronald.lai

btu.orgrstutman

nasagovRobert.F.Rotella (Robert F. (HQ-MAOOO)' 'Rotella) "

krobinsl (Kellie N. (HQ-NBOOO)' 'Robinson)

nobel.seMichael.Sohlman

mail.nlm.nih.govchouk

snet.netdomrosa

gmail.comaliilik

mathforum.orgrichard

lmco.comrichard.shih

fesi.org.ukfesi

buaa.edu.cn

esia9

comcast.netpapapizza

aol.comchensiungChihHongChen

email.ncku.edu.twem50920em50000

NBC4.comFenty

utdallas.edufengdmcaspari (Mary L' 'Caspari)

dc.govMichelle.RheeMayor

nsf.govmleeabement

longandfoster.commeesee.phua

boston.kl 2.ma.usmcontomp

hq.doe.govAlexander.Morris (Alexander' 'Morris)

ed.govMary.Mitchelson (Mary' 'Mitchelson)

foxnews. comfnsyourcomments

uspto.gov

I c wtkrv0GWIOOOOTMPF5

Chuong.Ngojon.dudas

pentagon.af.milChun-I.Chiang

usdoj.govsuprectbriefs

Post OfficeTWGWPO02.HQGWDOO1TWGWPOO1.HQGWDOO1OWGWPO02.HQGWDO01kpl_po.KPDO

Routenrc.govnrc.govnrc.govnrc.govfcps.edusjc.state.ma.usyahoo.com.hkhotmail.comyahoo.compost.harvard.edukva.semms.govbtu.orgnasa.govnobel.semail.nlm.nih.govsnet.netgmail.commathforum.orglmco.comfesi.org.ukbuaa.edu.cncomcast.netaol.comemail.ncku.edu.twNBC4.comutdallas.edudc.govnsf.govlongandfoster.comboston.k12.ma.ushq.doe.goved.govfoxnews.comuspto.gov

ii" 6ý-\f6iii-03WWOW-Tmp -Ai66-611[k c:\ternp\GWIOOQO1 :TMP Paae 5 IL

pentagon.af.milusdoj.gov

Files SizeMESSAGE 6152TEXT.htm 22554NASA-98-OES-02.doc 954880NASA 99-OES-08.doc 1426432NASA-1218-1 .doc 73728NASA-1218-2.doc 59904NASA-1218-3.doc 72704NASA-1218-4.doc 88064NASA-1218-5.doc 91136NASA-1218-6.doc 79360NASA-NRA-96-HEDS-03.doc 1822720Admiral Steidle.doc 27136NASA Proposal H&RT BAA No.TB-04-02.doc2007-final.doc 1720322006[1 ].doc Final_.pdf 146266Po Kee Wong-07-209.doc 70656Po Kee Wong-06-1705.doc 27648PI History Summary.pdf 5898tmce_2008_template.doc-7.doc 162304Mime.822 7399204

Date & TimeFriday, September 28, 2007 12:01 PM

98304

OptionsExpiration Date:Priority:ReplyRequested:Return Notification:

Concealed Subject:Security:

NoneStandardNoNone

NoStandard

Junk Mail Handling Evaluation ResultsMessage is eligible for Junk Mail handlingThis message was not classified as Junk Mail

Junk Mail settings when this message was deliveredJunk Mail handling disabled by UserJunk Mail handling disabled by AdministratorJunk List is not enabledJunk Mail using personal address books is not enabledBlock List is not enabled