Questione giuridica chiave
Whether the appeal complied with the Federal Supreme Court Act's minimum reasoning and conclusion requirements.
Decisione estratta
The appeal was manifestly inadmissible because it contained no conclusions, no identifiable legal grievances, and relied on inadmissible new facts.
Motivazione estratta
Art. 42 LTF requires conclusions and reasons; Art. 106(2) LTF requires substantiated constitutional grievances; Art. 99(1) LTF bars nova. These requirements were not met, so the Court could not enter into the matter and applied the simplified procedure under Art. 108(1) LTF.