HARRIS AND HARRIS Stephen B. Harris Esq New Attorney to replace corrupt Attorneys Warrington PA

MOTION FOR TIME TO FILE A RESPONSE A MOTION RECONSIDERATION PRINT DATES ARE NOW IN ERROR, COURT ERRORS INVOLVING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF BUCKS COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION – LAW 2021 -04674 Peter Sauers Pro-se 32 N. Westview Avenue Feasterville, PA 19053 Peter Sauers Pro-se v. Oak Property Management, Ashley Management Co., Builders County, Mike Meister, and Kevin Riley No. 2021-04674

Dear Mr. Sauers: Dated January 24, 2021 I am writing to you today to inform you that your communication with the Court of Judge Brian T. McGuff1n is not appropriate. The Court does not and cannot accept communication directly from unrepresented parties. All communication between the Court and parties must be in Court and on the record. All conmnunication with the Court from panies concerning pending matters must be by formal pleadings (petitions and 1110tions).

The Judge's staff screens correspondence and does not present letters to the Court which are ex parte, inappropriate communication, or in some other way not consistent with the above stated procedures and requirements. Thank you for your attention in this matter Christian Stoll The correspondence misdated to read January 24, 2021, received January 31, 2022, us mail Christian Stoll asked for my attention in this matter. "Communication” NOT "directly from an unrepresented party”. But a pro-s litigant: Communication was sent to the Clerk of the Court in the prothonotary’s office NOT directly to Judge Brian T. McGuffin...!

Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities." Judge's staff overlook this. Can a government legally put restrictions on the rights of the American people at any time, for any reason? The answer is found in Article Six of the U.S. Constitution: Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 426, 491; 86 S. Ct. 1603 "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no 'rule making' or legislation which would abrogate them."

This would include U.S and State Constitution...! Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void”. Would we not say that these judicial decisions are straight to the point --that there is no lawful method for government to put restrictions or limitations on rights belonging to the people? Other cases are even more straight forward: "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of practice.”

As a challenged pro- litigant, I`m requesting 60 days. (To address errors in last filing for and at J. Brian T. McGuffin staff requested.) Brian T. McGuffin Judge's staff asked for attention in this matter: "Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240 ; Pucket v. Cox,456 2nd 233 Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers. All law (rules and practices) which are repugnant to the Constitution are VOID".

Since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution states "NO State (Jurisdiction) shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the rights, privileges, or immunities of citizens of the United States nor deprive any citizens of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, ... or equal protection under the law", this renders judicial immunity is unconstitutional.” Procedures and requirements were / are unclear showing errors by Brian T. McGuffin Judge's staff. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE This motion complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(5) and the type style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6) because it has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Word in Times New Roman 16-point font and has NO personal information.

VERIFICATION PETER SAUERS ADA Pro-se verifies that he is one for himself in this action, and that the statements made in the forgoing are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. He understands that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of law "18 pa. C.S. Section 4904’, relating to unsworn, falsification to authorities. Respectfully Submitted, Dated: 2 4 2022 Peter Sauers 32 N. Westview Avenue Feasterville, PA 19053 (215) 396-6811 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE CERTIFIED MAIL I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served upon: Bucks County Justice Center, 100 North Main Street, Doylestown, PA 18901 I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy and copies of the foregoing was served upon Stephen B. Harris Esq. of HARRIS AND HARRIS1760 Bristol Rd, Warrington, PA 18976

Story: The rule of law. Michael J. Savona, Esq., was lying to federal agents and others while making deals as a solicitor for several municipalities, including Lower Southampton Township, where he was disregarding the rule of law by assisting Robert DeGoria, helping him bypass town supervisors, among other actions.

It can be argued that Mr. Savona’s actions are responsible for leaving one man dead, and many victims in his wake throughout Bucks County, PA, as well as in New Jersey, where the deceased man lived, killed in August 2016. Honorable Judge Gene E.K. Pratter, speaking on the record, asked Michael E. Peters, Esq., in Philadelphia, PA, on June 17, 2016, for confirmation that the rules of law were being upheld. (ABA) The other noted attorney in Hon.

Pratter’s Court at the time was Michael J. Savona, Esq., on record for Eastburn & Gray. This request involved demonstrating that Eastburn & Gray, Doylestown, Michael J. Savona, Esq., Michael Peters, John A. Vanluvanee, Esq., Michael T. Pidgeon, Esq., and other Township Officials were acting within the law in their dealings with County Builders Mike Mister, Kevin Riley, and associates. Others connected to the case are Robert P. Hoopes, John Waltman, Carol Drioil of zoning, the Zoning Hearing Board, the Board of Supervisors, Mr. John McMenamin, Wallace Bateman Jr., Oak Property Management Lp., and Ashley Management Co., with the possible involvement of others.

HARRIS AND HARRIS need show no wrongdoing by the parties named, and their clients’ falsehoods affect all Taxpayer-funded Government, leaving countless, unseen victims at the mercy of our Courts and Government! Taxpayer-funded Investigations: Francis X. Dillon of Begley, Carlin & Mandio, LLP, who serves as the Services Commission Solicitor for Lower Southampton Township stated: "Although a taxpayer-funded investigation was completed and available, the municipal planning code was not followed.”

Electronically generated evidence that appears in civil litigation in the case #19-1429 New Federal Rules of Evidence 902(13) and 902(14) as of Friday, December 1, 2017: the American Anti-Corruption Act makes it illegal to purchase political influence as an Argument as to pre-response. The Courts need to uphold the A.A.C.A, (transparency), considering the rule of law, and all rules of practice and procedure. Electronically Posted.

Honorable Judge Gene E.K. Pratter, a federal judge, was also being lied to by Eastburn & Gray, Attorneys Michael Peters Esq., and Michael J. Savona, Esq., in their actions. Witnessed by LANCE HAVER and MYSELF in Philadelphia, PA, on November 8, 2016, before the Honorable GENE E.K. PRATTER, in her Court. Throughout Bucks County, PA: Influence and wealth are walking hand and hand with corruption across all levels of government, and the Courts need to consider looking at new evidence presented under new laws, and the rule of law in all cases.

Savona resigned from the law firm Eastburn & Gray shortly after Waltman was indicted, and gave up solicitor positions in Warminster, New Britain Borough, Conshohocken, Lower Gwynedd, and Lower Southampton Township while at the same time working with many outside businesses, creating a conflict of interest and selling us, the people, short. We the People. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy and copies of the foregoing was served upon Stephen B. Harris Esq. of HARRIS AND HARRIS 1760 Bristol Rd, Warrington, PA 18976 US mail.

Date 8, 25, 2019 Honorable Judge Gene E.K. Pratter James A. Byrne U.S. Courthouse 601 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19106 Peter Sauers Pro-se 32 N. Westview Ave. Feasterville, PA 19053 Verification PLAINTIFF PETER SAUERS ADA Pro-se verifies that he is one for himself in this action and that the statements made in the foregoing are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. He understands that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of law "18 pa. C.S. Section 4904’, relating to unsworn, falsification to authorities.

Anyone who represents himself in a legal matter has a fool for a client.  You certainly have the right to represent yourself, but you do so at your own peril.  Opposing counsel will run circles around you and make you a complete fool. 

If you are really serious and believe your rights have been violated, then find a lawyer, have the lawyer go through the discovery process, and go to court.  If you can't afford an attorney, and if all you can do is represent yourself, then you're wasting your time.  Writing the attorney the way you did, without filing a suit, and filing an associated discovery request is a waste.  No court is going to take you seriously either.  You are what we call a gadfly.  Your opinions accordingly, are worthless.

Citing the EPC of the 14th amendment is also a waste.  EPC does not mean all applications of the law are equal, it only that protections for all are equal.  None of the precedents are applicable either.  Don't bother thinking they apply. 

BTW, starting your case with a New Testament verse does not help you either.  Righteousness in the proper context of Paul's Epistle only applies to your life in the spiritual realm - not the earthly one.