After extensive research into the issue of taxes and the use of the social security number, and after extensive religious studies which have seriously affected my life, I decided to take a break from my studies and apply for a job.  This webpage will report the ongoing battle regarding my attempt to follow my religious beliefs and stand up for my rights under the law.

December, 2001 Click Here to read my ongoing journal of events relating to my attempt to work for Squaw Valley as a ski coach.

December, 2001 Click Here to read my first certified letter that I sent to Squaw Valley after all attempts to verbally convince the various people in charge at Squaw Valley had failed.  This is after several people at Squaw told me to sue them.  Ron Welton responded by certified letter and by phone saying that the EDD requires SSN's from all employees.

December, 2001 Click Here to read a letter I wrote to the EDD, asking to get in writing what they told me on the phone, that the SSN was not required.  I finally heard back from the EDD in writing.  Here is their response:  Click Here

January, 2002 Click Here to read a short follow up of mine to Ron Welton's initial response that he was "merely following EDD requirements," to let him know I was writing to the EDD.  Ron quickly replied by phone again and he asked if I was Amish, details can be found in my journal.

January, 2002 Click Here to read my third letter to Squaw Valley, appealing directly to the General Manager.  Han replied promptly with a certified letter saying he had confidence in Ron Welton.

February 14, 2002:  I spoke with Ron Welton in person, showing him the EDD letter in my favor.  His reaction was, "So what?"

February, 2002 Click Here to read my criminal complaint against Ron Welton, filed with the U.S. Jusitice Department.

February, 2002 Click Here to read my civil complaint against SVSC, filed with the EEOC.

April 15, 2002, The EEOC responds, and issues me a "right to sue" letter, so I can sue in Federal court.  I have 90 days to file.

May 30, 2002, The U.S. Justice Department responds, indicating they read my complaint, and they say two postive things:  1.  That my complaint "has been forwarded to the Employment Litigation Section of the Civil Rights Division for review and response.  2.  They refer me to my local "United States Attorney's Office" nearest me, which is in Sacramento.  (I contacted the U.S Attorney's Office in Sacramento on July 11, 2002, and filed a form, but I have not heard from them as of March, 2003)

July 11, 2002.  I file a 22-page Civil Complaint in Federal Court in Sacramento (68 pages with all attached Exhibits, such as all the letters above):  Hommel vs. Squaw Valley

Nov. 14, 2002  I request the status of my civil complaint.

Nov. 21, 2002  The court granted my "in forma pauperis" or "IFP" status, to waive the filing fee, and they opened the case.  I receive a "Findings and recommendations to dismiss" from the District court, and I receive a deadline to file my "Objections".

Dec. 6, 2002  I file my "Objections to the Findings and recommendation", in person in Sacramento.

Dec. 30, 2002 The District court dismissed my case, with no further explanation, other than saying, "Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis".

Dec. 31, 2002  The District court entered the order for the dismissal of my case, and gave me a deadline of 30 days to file a "notice of appeal".

Jan. 27, 2003  I filed a one-page "notice of appeal" with the District court.  They, in turn, then sent everything, their whole file, to the Appeals court.

Jan. 27, 2003 The District court mailed to me a copy of all the proceedings that I will need to include with my appeal, such as the "notice of appeal", the "findings and recommendations", the ruling of dismissal, the order of dismissal, and a docket sheet.  The docket sheet included a notice on file by the court that they received three letters from various people supporting my case.  

Jan 30, 2003 I received a notice from the U.S. Court of appeals for the Ninth Circuit that included a request for a brief, and instructions for what to include, and deadline of 40 days, until March 10th, to file the brief.  

March 10, 2003 I mailed by First Class Mail, in two large boxes, my "Informal Opening Brief" which was 9 pages double spaced (maximum allowable was 40) including copies of everything that had gone before.   Each copy included the 9 page brief, 4 pages of certification of service, 21 pages of the court's findings & recommendations, order of dismissal, notice of appeal, and docket sheet  + 45 pages of my "Objections" + the 89 page original Civil complaint for a grand total of 168 pages in each copy.  I sent 8 copies (one box) to the Ninth Circuit (7 plus one original) and I sent 8 copies (another box) to Squaw Valley (2 for each person named in the suit).  Ironically, now my employers, or their lawyers, now have to read 168 pages of a "brief" and attachments, all because they refused to read and obey a four line instruction of the law.

May 23, 2003 I recieved a short statement from the clerk of the Ninth Circuit, unsigned, not on any letterhead, asking me to submit reasons why oral argument should be heard, and a 10-day deadline.  I received the statement on Monday, they mailed it and dated it from Friday.

June 2, 2003 (Monday) I mailed by First Class Certified Mail, return receipt requested, 3 copies and one original to the Ninth Circuit, and 8 copies to SVSC, along with 4 proof of service statements, a five page statement: my Statement Why Oral Argument Should be Heard.  In this statement, I explain in more detail my religious objections, along with covering implications of what it would mean depending on how the court rules on my case.  I'm not really "arguing the case", but rather, stating forth the reasons why my case is important, and why the judges might want me to come in and present my case orally, so they can ask me questions.

July 28, 2003 I received from the Ninth Circuit a letter from the clerk saying that "Upon further consideration, the Court has decided that your case should be reassigned to an oral argument panel."  If they decide to hear oral argument, the office of the clerk will notify me by mail.

To all readers. Feel free to email me if you wish to provide moral support or advice, or if you have any questions, commentary, or criticism.

Sincerely,  Jason Hommel
bibleprophesy@yahoo.com