Is it proper for a judicial "extern" who "drafts reports and recommendations/bench memoranda and reviews decisions for form and accuracy" for the U.S. District Court (NDNY) Judge David Peebles to seek extrajudicial information about an attorney who appears before that same judge in several current civil rights actions?

Now, this one took me by a complete surprise.
Between April 19, 2014 and April 22, 2014 my LinkedIn profile was visited by a "judicial extern" Matthew Holmes who "externs" at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York:

I visited the LinkedIn Profile of Matthew Holmes and found that Matthew Holmes is a judicial "extern" for the magistrate judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York the Hon. David E. Peebles, with the duties that Matthew Holmes describes himself below: 

Here is my problem.


WHY would a judicial extern for Judge Peebles visit my LinkedIn profile, and especially when Judge Peebles is scheduled to hear two motions with my participation, and when I am about to appear at an additional conference in the third case.   All of my cases are civil rights cases, in one of the cases a high-ranking judge is a defendant.  Did Judge Peebles ask Matthew Holmes to get extrajudicial information about me?  I cannot know for sure and I have a funny feeling nobody will ever give me an answer to that question, but there is an appearance of such a possibility, because it is otherwise simply too much of a coincidence, as to why a judicial extern for Judge Peebles would have a desire to visit a LinkedIn page of an attorney of record before Judge Peebles in 7 civil rights cases.


On my LinkedIn profile there are references to my blogs where I raise issues of judicial misconduct of different judges.  That is my political activity done in the public interest and outside of court. 


Judge Peebles was not the subject of my blog until this day when I found out his "judicial extern" is seeking and obtaining extrajudicial information about my personal and political activities, through my LinkedIn page, as well as my associations.


I have associations with people from other countries, and I do not know whether and how that can be used against me in lawsuits, but a judge is not supposed to know anything about an attorney or party that the record does not contain.


Here is the list of my current cases with Judge Peebles as an assigned magistrate (see last 3 letters DEP in the case name/number):

1. Argro v. Osborne, 3:12-cv-00910-NAM-DEP; 
2. Aron v. Becker, 3:13-cv-00883-TJM-DEP;
3. Gray v. Stoop, 3:13-cv-01269-GTS-DEP;
4. Neroni v. Becker, 3:12-cv-01226-GLS-DEP;
5. Neroni v. Grannis, 3:11-cv-01485-LEK-DEP;
6. Neroni v. Zayas, 3:13-cv-00127-LEK-DEP;
7. Weaver v. Lambert, 3:13-cv-00882-GTS-DEP.

To me, a judicial extern, or, in other words, a confidential law clerk working for a judge is bound by the same restrictions as the judge.    When such a judicial extern seeks extrajudicial information about an attorney of record in several pending cases, to me it is an extraordinary occurrence.  I've never had anything like that before.  


A judge must be constrained by the record of the case in front of him.  Seeking, obtaining or using extrajudicial information about a case is improper.   Matthew Holmes is part of Judge Peebles team, drafts Judge Peebles' decisions and, thus, when Matthew Holmes seeks and obtains extrajudicial information about my political activities pertaining to judicial misconduct and accountability, it is my belief that Judge Peebles may be presumed to have obtained that information, too.


Was it improper for Matthew Holmes to seek extrajudicial information about me as an attorney while I was attorney of record in 7 cases before the magistrate that Matthew Holmes was serving and drafting decisions for?  You be the judge.