FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PHILIP J. BERG, ESQUIRE :

:

Plaintiff :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION NO.

:

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, a/k/a :

BARRY SOETORO, a/k/a :

BARRY OBAMA , a/k/a : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

BARACK DUNHAM, a/k/a :

BARRY DUNHAM, THE :

DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL :

COMMITTEE, THE FEDERAL :

ELECTION COMMISSION AND :

DOES 1-50 INCLUSIVE ::

Defendants :

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND FOR EXPEDITED DISCOVERY

Plaintiff Philip J. Berg, Esquire [hereinafter “Plaintiff”] hereby offers this

Memorandum in support of his motion for a temporary restraining order, to enjoin

Defendant Barack Hussein Obama, a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack

Soetoro, a/k/a Barry Dunham, a/k/a Barack Dunham [hereinafter “Obama”] from running

for the office of President of the United States; to enjoin Defendant, Democratic National

Committee from Nominating Defendant Barack Hussein Obama, a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/

a Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Soetoro, a/k/a Barry Dunham, a/k/a Barack Dunham’s and

placing his name on the ballot for Presidential election, and for expedited discovery in

this case. Plaintiff’s Complaint challenges Defendant Obama’s eligibility to run for the

Office of President. Defendant Obama is unqualified and ineligible to run for United

States Office of the President, as he is not a “natural born” citizen as required by Article

II, Section I of the United States Constitution. The Democratic National Committee

[hereinafter “DNC”] has failed to perform due diligence, and to verify the eligibility of

Defendant Obama to run for the office of President of the United States.

As set out in Plaintiff’s Complaint, to allow Defendant Obama to continue

running for Office of the President will violate the United States Constitution and Laws,

which our forefathers set out to protect.

Plaintiff seeks focused and expedited discovery, so that he can demonstrate to the

Court, as soon as possible, the full breadth of innocent people affected by Defendant

Obama’s fraudulent campaign.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Since the adoption of the U.S. Constitution, in order to serve as President, one

must be a “natural born citizen” and may not hold dual citizenship or multiple citizenships

with foreign Countries. U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1.

There appears to be no question but that Defendant Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann

Dunham, was a U.S. citizen. It is also undisputed, however, that his father, Barack Obama,

Sr., was a citizen of Kenya. Obama’s parents, according to divorce records, were married on

or about February 2, 1961.

Defendant Obama claims he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961

and it is uncertain in which hospital he claims to have been born. Obama’s grandmother on

his father’s side, his half-brother and half-sister all claim Obama was born not in Hawaii but

in Kenya. Reports reflect that Obama’s mother traveled to Kenya during her pregnancy;

however, she was prevented from boarding a flight from Kenya to Hawaii at her late stage of

pregnancy (which, apparently, was a normal restriction, to avoid births during a flight). By

these reports, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama gave birth to Obama in Kenya, after which she

flew home and registered Obama’s birth. There are records of a “registry of birth” for

Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii.

Upon investigation into the alleged birth of Barack Hussein Obama in Honolulu,

Hawaii, Obama’s birth is reported as occurring at two (2) separate hospitals, Kapiolani

Hospital and Queens Hospital. Wikipedia English Version, under the subject “Barack

Obama,” states Obama was born at Kapiolani Hospital. Wikipedia Italian Version, under the

subject “Queens Hospital,” states Barack Obama was born in Queens Hospital.

There are further references circulating on the internet claiming examination of

the hospital’s records in Hawaii show no birthing records for Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama),

Obama’s mother. However, there are records of a “registry of birth” for Obama, on or about

August 8, 1961, in the public records office in Hawaii.

Wayne Madsen, Journalist with Online Journal as a contributing writer and

published an article on June 9, 2008 stating that a research team went to Mombassa, Kenya,

and located a Certificate Registering the birth of Barack Obama, Jr. at a Maternity Hospital,

to his father, a Kenyan citizen and his mother, a U.S. citizen.

At the time of Obama’s birth in 1961, Kenya was a British Colony. There is a

purported Canadian Birth Certificate, posted on the Internet, in the name of Barack Hussein

Obama, Jr.; however, the date of birth is shown as August 23, 1961.

Under the Independence Constitution of Kenya, Obama became a Kenyan citizen

on December 12, 1963. Chicago-based Internet journalist, broadcaster and critic Andy

Martin states that Obama has never renounced his Kenyan citizenship. Andy Martin further

states that, on Obama’s Senate web site, Obama tap dances around his own dual nationality

when discussing his father. Obama obviously knows, because his father told him, that he

(Obama) also held/holds Kenyan nationality.

If, in fact, Defendant Obama was born in Kenya, under the laws of the United

States, in effect at the time of his birth, if a child was born abroad, and one parent was a U.S.

citizen (which here, of course, would be Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham), Obama’s

mother would have had to have lived ten (10) years in the U.S., five (5) of which were after

she reached the age of fourteen (14). At the time of Obama’s birth, his mother was only

eighteen (18), and therefore did not meet the residency requirements under the law to give

her son (Obama) U.S. Citizenship. The laws in effect at the time of Obama’s birth did not

recognize U.S. Citizenship at birth of children born abroad to a U.S. Citizen parent and a

non-citizen parent, if the citizen parent was under the age of nineteen (19) at the time of the

birth of the child. Obama’s mother did not qualify under the law on the books to register

Obama as a “natural born” citizen. Section 301(a)(7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act

of June 27, 1952, 66 Stat. 163, 235, 8 U.S.C. §1401(b), Matter of S-F- and G-, 2 I & N Dec.

182 (B.I.A.) approved (Att’y Gen. 1944). Obama could only have become a U.S. citizen if

naturalized, and a naturalized citizen is not qualified and/or eligible to run for the office of

President of the United States. U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section I. Furthermore, if

Obama was born in Kenya, his birth father Barack Obama, Sr. was a citizen of Kenya;

therefore, Obama would necessarily have become a citizen of Kenya.

Furthermore, if Obama had been born in Kenya, his birth father Barack Obama,

Sr. was a citizen of Kenya; therefore, Obama would have automatically become a citizen of

Kenya.

Even if Obama was, in fact, born in Hawaii, he lost his U.S. citizenship when

his mother re-married and moved to Indonesia with her Indonesian husband. In or

about 1967, when Obama was approximately six (6) years old, his mother, Stanley Ann

Dunham, married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia, and moved to Indonesia with Obama.

At this time, if Obama was registered in Indonesia as a “natural born” citizen of that country

(which, in the absence of any proof that he was born in Indonesia, or that either of his birth

parents, for that matter, was Indonesian, he was not) Obama lost his U.S. citizenship, when

his mother married Lolo Soetoro, and took up residency in Indonesia. Loss of citizenship, in

these circumstances, under U.S. law (as in effect in 1967) required that foreign citizenship

have been achieved through “application.” Such type of naturalization occurred, for

example, when a person acquired a foreign nationality by marriage to a national of that

country. Nationality Act of 1940, Section 317(b). A further issue is presented that, at least

according to information in circulation on the Internet, Obama’s Indonesian stepfather, Lolo

Soetoro, may have adopted Obama.

The Nationality Act of 1940 provided for the loss of citizenship when a child

became naturalized in a foreign country upon the naturalization of his or her parent having

custody of such child. Obama’s mother expatriated her U.S. Citizenship when she married

Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia, and relocated with her son (Obama) to Indonesia.

Obama was enrolled by his parents in a public school, Fransiskus Assisi School in

Jakarta, Indonesia. Plaintiff has received copies of the school registration, in which it clearly

states Obama’s name as “Barry Soetoro,” and lists his citizenship as Indonesian. Obama’s

father is listed as Lolo Soetoro, Obama’s date of birth and place of birth are listed as August

4, 1961 in Honolulu, and Obama’s Religion is listed as Islam. This document was verified

by Inside Edition, whose reporter, Matt Meagher took the actual footage of the school record.

In or about 1971, Obama’s mother sent Obama back to Hawaii. Obama was ten

(10) years of age upon his return to Hawaii.

Sometime after the return of Obama to Hawaii, Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann

Dunham, returned to Hawaii and divorced her second husband, Lolo Soetoro. At the time of

this divorce, Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, could have regained her U.S.

Citizenship. In order to regain her U.S. citizenship, Obama’s mother would have had to take

the Oath of Allegiance required. Such Oath of Allegiance may be taken abroad, before a

diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, or in the United States, before the

Attorney General or the judge or clerk of a Court. Such Oath of Allegiance would have been

entered in the records of the appropriate embassy, legation, consulate, court, or the Attorney

General; and upon demand, a certified copy of the proceedings, including a copy of the oath

administered, under the seal of the embassy, legation, consulate, court or the Attorney

General shall be delivered. The certified copy shall be evidence of the facts stated therein

before any court of record or judicial tribunal and in any department or agency of the

Government of the United States. 8 U.S.C. § 1435.

As stated above, the Nationality Act of 1940 provided for the loss of citizenship

when the person became naturalized abroad, upon the naturalization of his or her parent

having custody of such person. Obama’s mother expatriated her U.S. Citizenship when she

married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia, and relocated her and her son (Obama) to

Indonesia.

Plaintiff believes that Obama’s mother failed to take the oath in order to regain

her U.S. Citizenship. If that be the case, Obama could not have regained the U.S. citizenship

that he lost upon his mother’s re-marriage and relocation to Indonesia, until he reached

eighteen (18) years of age, and unless he took the Oath of Allegiance before a diplomatic or

consular officer of the United States, or in the U.S. before the Attorney General or the judge

or clerk of court. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that Obama (assuming

he had had United States citizenship, by reason of his claimed birth in Hawaii, in the first

place) failed to regain his citizenship by taking the Oath of Allegiance. Since the oath of

allegiance would have been entered in the records of the appropriate embassy, legation,

consulate, court or the Attorney General, if Plaintiff is incorrect, then Obama should be able

to produce, in Court, a certified copy of the proceedings, including a copy of the oath

administered.

Investigation further showed that, in 1981, Obama traveled to Pakistan, using his

Indonesian passport. At the time of his travels to Pakistan, Obama was twenty (20) years

old. He certainly knew that he retained his Indonesia citizenship, and it is implausible that he

could not have known that he had failed to regain his United States citizenship (if, again, he

had been born in Hawaii). Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship. Had Obama regained

his United States citizenship, he would have been traveling on a United States Passport.

Obama and his campaign office have been asked for Obama’s Certificate of Birth,

in order to prove he is a “natural born” citizen as required by the U.S. Constitution.

After many requests by the media and members of the public for a copy of Obama

Obama’s Certificate of Birth, a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) was placed on

Obama’s campaign website. However, as posted all over the internet three (3) independent

document forensic experts have performed extensive forensic testing on the Certificate of

Live Birth posted on Obama’s campaign website. The forensic experts’ findings were the

Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) is in fact a forgery. It was further discovered that the

original Certificate of Live Birth which had been altered and forged was issued to Maya

Kasandra Soetoro, born in 1970. Maya Kasandra Soetoro is Obama’s half-sister, who was

born in Indonesia, and her birth was later registered in Hawaii. The altered and forged

COLB is still on Obama’s campaign website located at

http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert .

Further investigation led to Obama’s State Bar Registration and Public

Disciplinary Record. On the Illinois State Bar Registration and Public Disciplinary Record,

it specifically asks for “Full former name(s). Obama put “None”, when in fact he went by

the name Barry Soetoro, and Barry Obama. It is further believed Obama has used the name

Barry Dunham. Obama lied on the State government form that he signed under the penalty

of perjury.

Even if Obama had and maintained United States citizenship (which Plaintiff

believes he failed to do) he also holds citizenship in Kenya and Indonesia. Obama has

divided loyalties with foreign countries. Thus, Obama carries multiple citizenships, and is

ineligible to run for President of the United States. United States Constitution, Article II,

Section I.

All the efforts of supporters of legitimate citizens, candidates for the Democratic

presidential nomination were for nothing, because Obama cheated his way into a fraudulent

candidacy, and cheated legitimately eligible, natural-born citizens from competing in a fair

process, and the supporters of their choice of an eligible U.S. citizen for the nomination.

Voters donated money, goods and services to select a nominee, and were

defrauded by Obama’s obfuscations. Obama clearly shows consciousness of guilt by his

actions by posting a forged birth certificate on his website, and by and the falsifications he

told to cover his loss of citizenship.

Obama proclaims himself a Constitutional scholar and lecturer, but apparently

failed to detect his own ineligibility to become President.

Injunctive relief must be granted, because failing to do so will permit the

perpetuation of a fraud and the disenfranchisement of every person who voted in a

Democratic primary in 2008. Failure to grant injunctive relief would allow a corrupted,

fraudulent nomination process to continue.

The denial of injunctive relief would not only allow such a process to continue,

but would foster an overwhelming degree of disrespect and cynicism for the electoral process

(already sullied in the public mind by irregularities in the last several election cycles) and

threaten to confirm the unfortunately widespread belief that no potential candidate has to

obey the laws of this country, respect our election process, follow the Constitution, or even

suffer any consequence for lying and defrauding voters to get onto the ballot, when they have

no chance of lawfully serving if they fraudulently manage to get elected.

If declaratory and injunctive relief is not given, it would be extremely unfair to

the country for candidates of either party to become the nominee, when there is any question

as to the nominee’s eligibility to serve if elected.

As stated above, Plaintiff as well as tens of millions of American voters,

Democrats and persons disinclined to vote for the presumptive nominee of the Republican

Party, Senator McCain, will suffer irreparable harm, if declaratory and injunctive relief is not

granted. Plaintiff does not have any other way of redress regarding these very significant and

important issues.

The DNC has failed Plaintiff as well as voters across the country, by its failure to

perform due diligence, and to properly ascertain Obama’s ineligibility to run for Office of the

President.

Should Obama become the Nominee of the Democratic Party, and it should then

be discovered by virtue of malfeasance, or negligence, on his part not to have revealed

material evidence showing him to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United

States of America, presumably his nomination or his election will at some point be voided, to

the irreparable harm of Plaintiff and others, including but not limited to:

A) Functional, or actual, disenfranchisement of large numbers of citizens,

being members of the Democratic Party or other persons wishing to

vote for a viable candidate other than Senator McCain, who will have been

deprived of the ability to choose and to elect a Constitutionally eligible

candidate of their liking;

B) Irreparable Harm to the structure and integrity of the Democratic Party

and the Democratic National Committee. In turn this too would lead to

Disenfranchisement; and

C) A severe and genuine likelihood of turmoil or even civil disturbance, by

virtue of reaction to such disenfranchisement.

II. THIS COURT SHOULD GRANT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PUT A STOP

TO DEFENDANT OBAMA’S FRAUDULENT CAMPAIGN SCHEME

Plaintiff is plainly entitled to a temporary restraining order, pursuant to Rule 65 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to halt the use of Defendant Obama’s fraudulent

campaign schemes to secure the Office of President of the United States, knowing he is

not eligible under the provisions of the United States Constitution, Article II, Section I.

Specifically, this Court must grant Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining

order (“TRO”) because: (1) there is reasonable probability that Plaintiff will succeed on

the merits; (2) they will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief; (3) there will be

little or no harm to the Obama if relief is granted; and (4) the public interest demands a

grant of relief. See, e.g. Swartzwelder v. McNeilly, 297 F.3d 228, 234 (3rd Cir. 2002);

Alessi v. Pennsylvania Dep’t of Public Welfare, 983 F.2d 1444, 1447 (3d Cir. 1990);

Prison Health Servs., Inc. v. Umar, Civil Action No. 02-2642, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

12267 (E.D. Pa. May 8, 2002). The standards for a preliminary injunction and a TRO are

the same. Mertz v. Houstoun, 155 F. Supp.2d 415, 425 n.12 (E.D. Pa 2001); Bieros v.

 Back to top of page