Main Menu

Barnett v Obama – September 8 (Updated)

Keyes/Bowen v Obama

Keyes/Bowen v Obama

It’s September 8. The hearing in California District Court is over. Here are the results (thanks to Politijab.com):

  1. The issue of service. Seven months after filing the lawsuit, the defendants have been served with the complaint.
  2. Recusal of the Magistrate. Orly had demanded that the magistrate assigned recuse himself for not allowing her filing on technical grounds of an alleged Kenyan birth certificate (not to be confused with a different alleged Kenyan birth certificate that she filed later). Motion denied.
  3. Reinstatement of plaintiffs. Drake and Robinson have been reinstated as plaintiffs, but represented by lawyer Gary Kreep instead of Orly Taitz. Taitz and Kreep told the judge that they couldn’t work together; the judge told them they must.
  4. Dismissal. Hearing on the government’s motion to dismiss October 5, 2009.

In what seems a reference to Orly’s totally irregular expectation that she should present surprise witnesses at this procedural hearing this morning and litany of prior failure to follow rules and procedure, the judge in his scheduling order said:

In order “to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 1, all counsel shall familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of the Central District of California.1 All civil actions or proceedings will be pre-tried according to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16 and 26 and applicable Local Rules.

In language that I am sure will be all over the Internet by tomorrow morning, the Judge also said:

Unless there is a likelihood that upon motion by a party the Court would order that any or all discovery is premature, the Court encourages the parties to begin discovery before the Scheduling Conference. The parties shall comply fully with the letter and spirit of Rule 26(a) and thereby obtain and produce most of what would be produced in the early stages of discovery, because at the Scheduling Conference the Court will impose tight deadlines to complete discovery. [Emphasis added.]

However, the judge is quoted in Court as saying: “No discovery can go forward while the motion to dismiss is pending.”  The full Scheduling Order is here. Notes taken at the hearing are here [thanks to richCares for the link].

If this ever goes to trial, a tentative date of January 26, 2010 is set.

Expect this to be spun to the sky, but the above is all that happened.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

43 Responses to Barnett v Obama – September 8 (Updated)

  1. avatar
    thisoldhippie September 8, 2009 at 5:39 pm #

    According to WND Orly’s original service was correct. Guess they missed the whole – she had to serve them at the hearing, part.

  2. avatar
    sponson September 8, 2009 at 6:03 pm #

    Jean Schmidt reneges yet again on whether the President is a foreigner or not, telling a birther “I agree with you, but the courts don’t.” If members of Congress are allowed to lie this blatantly on where they stand, how do we know that they are not actually supporting what Orly does, crazy as it may be?

  3. avatar
    Joe Horn September 8, 2009 at 6:07 pm #

    Well now we wait until October 4, 2009. I am glad Kreep is involved. No offense to Orly Taitz, she is passionate but here pleadings are not always perfect, (but then again who ever has perfect pleadings). I am just afraid that a bad mistake will get the case tossed when her determination has gotten it this far.

  4. avatar
    richCares September 8, 2009 at 6:19 pm #

    here’s wavy davey’s review of the proceedings, note that every ohter page is blank, just keep scrolling, it’s all there.
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/19546743/KEYES-v-OBAMA-Motions-Hearing-8SEP-20091

    [Scribd says “the document has been deleted”]

  5. avatar
    Bob September 8, 2009 at 6:30 pm #

    (but then again who ever has perfect pleadings).

    The government has a pretty good track record so far…

    I am just afraid that a bad mistake will get the case tossed when her determination has gotten it this far.

    “This” far? Where it took her months to properly serve her suit, and is looking at a motion to dismiss (just like every other birfer suit)?

  6. avatar
    John September 8, 2009 at 6:43 pm #

    Why should you worry about any trial being granted against Obama’s eligibility? You have all said it is all frivilous and meritless so no one should have any fear of trial?

    I tend to believe that is no so and many fear greatly about a trial.

    The one word which will ultimately bring down Obama is “DISCOVERY”

  7. avatar
    Bob September 8, 2009 at 6:46 pm #

    Why should you worry about any trial being granted against Obama’s eligibility? You have all said it is all frivilous and meritless so no one should have any fear of trial?

    Who has expressed any “fear”?

  8. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy September 8, 2009 at 6:52 pm #

    The AXJ folks are celebrating the Judge’s ordering discovery, so a certain spammer has told me.

  9. avatar
    richCares September 8, 2009 at 6:53 pm #

    example of projection not reality
    kinda like “dems are afraid of Palin”
    it don’t mean didley, just typical right speak!

  10. avatar
    Bob September 8, 2009 at 6:57 pm #

    The AXJ folks are celebrating the Judge’s ordering discovery

    Interesting, as there’s no indication that the judge did so.

    I’ve read that Judge Carter “really wants to hear this case on the merits” and isn’t inclined to grant the motion to dismiss.

  11. avatar
    kimba September 8, 2009 at 6:59 pm #

    Was I sniffing glue or didn’t I just read that the judge told Orly there couldn’t be any discovery until the motion to dismiss was considered? Have none of these people ever been involved in a legal proceeding? Heck, our county case system automatically schedules dates for hearings, pre-trial, trial when the case is filed. Bizarre. Gah, they sure hear what they want to hear don’t they.

  12. avatar
    Rickey September 8, 2009 at 7:13 pm #

    John: Why should you worry about any trial being granted against Obama’s eligibility?You have all said it is all frivilous and meritless so no one should have any fear of trial?I tend to believe that is no so and many fear greatly about a trial.The one word which will ultimately bring down Obama is “DISCOVERY”

    I’m sure that most of us are quite confident that Obama would easily prevail on the merits, if this case ever were to be tried on its merits. We’ve simply been pointing out that it isn’t likely to get that far, because Orly has yet to get past the procedural impediments in any of the lawsuits which she has filed.

    Anyone who believes that this case is going to trial in January is dreaming. The government was just served today. The government’s motion to dismiss is going to be heard a month before an Answer is due. The most likely outcome is that the lawsuit will be dismissed before the government has to file an Answer.

    The other thing which legal neophytes do not understand is that in the unlikely event that discovery is allowed, it isn’t going to be a carte blanche invitation for Orly to engage in a a fishing expedition. The plaintiffs have to file their discovery demands, and the defendants have the opportunity to object to those demands. If this case ever gets to discovery, it will be very limited.

  13. avatar
    Rickey September 8, 2009 at 7:21 pm #

    kimba: Was I sniffing glue or didn’t I just read that the judge told Orly there couldn’t be any discovery until the motion to dismiss was considered?Have none of these people ever been involved in a legal proceeding?Heck, our county case system automatically schedules dates for hearings, pre-trial, trial when the case is filed.Bizarre. Gah, they sure hear what they want to hear don’t they.

    Yeah, the defendants have 60 days to file an Answer, and the Motion to Dismiss is being heard next month. So if the court does not dismiss the lawsuit, the Answer will then be filed in November. Then and only then the parties would begin arguing about what discovery will be allowed. Anyone who says that the court has ordered discovery is living in a fantasy world.

  14. avatar
    Kevin Bellas September 8, 2009 at 7:30 pm #

    What kind of site is AXJ trying to push? Because it pretty strange mix of liberal european policies, but yet he is pimping the birther on AXJ-USA. It really makes no sense to a outsider.

    Also I see they have placed your site on a rss feed. Weird

  15. avatar
    richCares September 8, 2009 at 7:31 pm #

    “…is living in a fantasy world.”
    correction:
    “…is living in Birther fantasy world.”

    sorry, wavey davey link was changed, here is current link to summary of proceeding by wavt davey (scoll down as 1st page is blank:
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/19547316/Keyes-v-Obama-Motions-Hearing-8SEP-2009

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy September 8, 2009 at 8:04 pm #

    Thanks. That is soooo funny.

  17. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy September 8, 2009 at 8:09 pm #

    I am afraid I spend too much time on this business.

  18. avatar
    Ima Foreigner September 8, 2009 at 8:17 pm #

    From a report on Orly’s site regarding the crowd at the court-house:

    As far as crowd demographics the estimated age range is 18 to 80.
    70% Men
    30% Women
    age 60+ seems to be the majority.’

    Sadly, no word on how many of them were shakin’ their canes and yellin’ at kids to get off the lawn.

    Also no word on which shirt Lucas was wearing.

  19. avatar
    Bob September 8, 2009 at 8:33 pm #

    Also no word on which shirt Lucas was wearing.

    Money’s on the striped one.

  20. avatar
    thisoldhippie September 8, 2009 at 8:37 pm #

    wavey davey says there was about 120 people there – yet orly’s site says there were about 300. They count as good as they draft legal docs.

  21. avatar
    misha September 8, 2009 at 9:00 pm #

    “yellin’ at kids to get off the lawn.”

    Brilliant.

  22. avatar
    misha September 8, 2009 at 9:02 pm #

    Orly should write in Russian. She’s clearly not comfortable in English.

  23. avatar
    misha September 8, 2009 at 9:16 pm #

    I love her surprise witness trick. She thinks she’s another Perry Mason. That’s what happens when law school consists of correspondence and television.

    Too much.

  24. avatar
    John September 8, 2009 at 10:02 pm #

    I think there is good reason to believe that the government knows damn well that Obama’s ineligible. They know we will have real mess on our hands if Obama is found to be ineligible. Obama’s attorneys think they can behind procedural legalisms to keep Obama in office.

  25. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy September 8, 2009 at 10:13 pm #

    John: “I think there is good reason to believe that the government knows damn well that Obama’s ineligible.”

    Were you planning to share what those reasons are, or should we guess?

  26. avatar
    BlackLion September 8, 2009 at 10:34 pm #

    I think we have to guess…Kind of like JTX with Obama being subject to the BNA of 1948 but never explaining how British law can superceed US Law. As usual with the birthers we have to pick from the usual list of reasons….President Obama was born in Kenya/Canada, he was/is a British/Indonesian citizen, he is a Black Muslim, his COLB was forged, he does not meet the so called fake 2 parent requirement, he is/was a communist/socialist/nazi, he has hidden all of his so called records, or because we don’t like him.

  27. avatar
    Low Rider September 8, 2009 at 11:25 pm #

    It looks like the judge issued an entirely ordinary, boilerplate Initial Scheduling Order. The bit about encouraging early exchange of information, even before Rule 26 disclosures are due, is no comment on this case. In my experience here in Florida, though, a MTD doesn’t usually stay discovery.

  28. avatar
    Greg September 8, 2009 at 11:46 pm #

    Yeah, it doesn’t automatically stay discovery. Apparently, though, the government was going to file a motion to stay discovery until the MTD could be decided.

  29. avatar
    Bob September 9, 2009 at 12:19 am #

    Yeah, it doesn’t automatically stay discovery.

    The court is forcing the 26(f) conference because an answer has been filed. Is that common?

  30. avatar
    misha September 9, 2009 at 12:56 am #

    Great post. Here’s my take on it.

  31. avatar
    Expelliarmus September 9, 2009 at 1:26 am #

    Item 4 appears to be incorrect, probably picked up from the inaccurate WND report. You can see the court’s order here;
    http://tinyurl.com/mz8ku5

    No mention of “ordering arguments to be submitted”. Rather, the court said:

    “iv. The Court indicated at oral argument that it would consider whether discovery should continue to be handled by Magistrate Judge Nakazato. The Court finds that, since the Court and Judge Nakazato are closely communicating and coordinating in this case, the continued handling of discovery matters by Judge Nakazato is appropriate.”

    (from page 6 of the Court’s order)

    So there’s no discovery motion pending before Judge Carter — and anything further concerning discovery is to be handled by Judge Nakazato.

    [This has been corrected and item 4 deleted. What appears in the article as item 4 now is what used to be item 5. Doc C.]

  32. avatar
    CPTG September 9, 2009 at 2:06 am #

    Hey, let’s not bad mouth TELEVISION LAWYERS. Last time I’ve checked, Perry Mason was never disbarred (FYI, I’ve disbarred TWO lawyers and I have a State Bar Client’s fund cheque to prove it), never co-mingled client’s assets, never inflated his resume, never showed up unprepared, never engaged in Ex Parte Communications to screw over his client, never doubled his clients for services never rendered, etc.

    Misha, I have a solution: Pres. Obama invites CPT Barnett over the white house for a couple of beers just like the Prof and the Cop. None of this ‘single bottle beer’ crap. Pres. Obama sends me to the Liqour Store, I pick up a 40OZ of English 800, we sit on the white house lawn, we crank up the jams and pass the bottle around…it will be totally cool.

  33. avatar
    Bob September 9, 2009 at 2:57 am #

    Last time I’ve checked, Perry Mason was never disbarred

    When was Perry Mason barred? (And Perry Mason did occasionally commit misconduct, but the show would have been no fun had it dwelled on such issues.)

    I pick up a 40OZ of English 800, we sit on the white house lawn, we crank up the jams and pass the bottle around

    Obligatory “birthers aren’t racists” disclaimer in 5…4…3….

  34. avatar
    misha September 9, 2009 at 3:15 am #

    “What kind of site is AXJ trying to push?”

    Organized confusion.

  35. avatar
    Shrek September 9, 2009 at 4:31 am #

    ORANGE COUNTY NEWS BLOG report on proceedings is here:

    http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/naranja-news/orlys-day-in-court/

  36. avatar
    Shrek September 9, 2009 at 4:40 am #

    and the report, they would have you believe, of the same hearing from Birferstan

    “To:
    Undisclosed-Recipient@yahoo.com
    The expedited trial has been set for Jan. 26, 2010, just 4 1/2 months from now!

    I and many other concerned veterans and citizens attended the hearing today in Federal Court in Santa Ana in the lawsuit against Barack Obama to determine his eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief. About 150 people showed up, almost all in support of the lawsuit to demand that Obama release his birth certificate and other records that he has hidden from the American people.

    Judge David Carter refused to hear Obama’s request for dismissal today, instead setting a hearing date for Oct. 5, since Obama’s attorneys had just filed the motion on Friday. He indicated there was almost no chance that this case would be dismissed. Obama is arguing this lawsuit was filed in the wrong court if you can believe that. I guess Obama would prefer a “kangaroo court” instead of a Federal court! Assuming Judge Carter denies Obama’s motion for dismissal, he will likely then order expedited discovery which will force Obama to release his birth certificate in a timely manner (if he has one).

    The judge, who is a former U.S. Marine, repeated several times that this is a very serious case which must be resolved quickly so that the troops know that their Commander in Chief is eligible to hold that position and issue lawful orders to our military in this time of war. He basically said Obama must prove his eligibility to the court! He said Americans deserve to know the truth about their President!

    The two U.S. Attorneys representing Barack Obama tried everything they could to sway the judge that this case was frivolous, but Carter would have none of it and cut them off several times. Obama’s attorneys left the courtroom after about the 90 minute hearing looking defeated and nervous.

    Great day in America for the U.S. Constitution!!! The truth about Barack Obama’s eligibility will be known fairly soon – Judge Carter practically guaranteed it!

    Video from the press conference after the hearing coming soon. Congratulations to plaintiffs attorney Dr. Orly Taitz! She did a great job and won some huge victories today. She was fearless!

    Jeff Schwilk, Founder ”

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=4224

    Gotta luv those 3d glasses that lets you see the TRUTH

    /facepalm

  37. avatar
    AdrianInFlorida September 9, 2009 at 8:42 am #

    Low Rider: It looks like the judge issued an entirely ordinary, boilerplate Initial Scheduling Order. The bit about encouraging early exchange of information, even before Rule 26 disclosures are due, is no comment on this case. In my experience here in Florida, though, a MTD doesn’t usually stay discovery.

    Yeah but since he didn’t simply laugh at Orly, kick her out and censure her, the Birthers look at this as a victory. 😀

  38. avatar
    kimba September 9, 2009 at 8:58 am #

    CPTG wins the award for “Most Disparaging African-American stereotypes in a single sentence.” But birthers aren’t racists, oh, golly gee no. (Wouldn’t Molly bring her Pitcher?)

  39. avatar
    kimba September 9, 2009 at 9:01 am #

    That is some funny misha! did you notice how at the medal of freedom awards, Poitier didn’t let on hardly at all that he was standing with his son? ( That hug pretty much gave it away to me though.)

  40. avatar
    Rickey September 9, 2009 at 10:44 am #

    Greg: Yeah, it doesn’t automatically stay discovery. Apparently, though, the government was going to file a motion to stay discovery until the MTD could be decided.

    According to this recap, Judge Carter said that no discovery can go forward while the motion to dismiss is pending.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/19547316/Keyes-v-Obama-Motions-Hearing-8SEP-2009

  41. avatar
    misha September 9, 2009 at 11:05 am #

    “That is some funny misha!”

    Did you notice, Apuzzo replied to me, to paraphrase, ‘you are not contributing anything constructive, just disrupting, hence why are you here?’

    I replied “I am here for levity.” I showed it to my wife, and she was doubled over laughing. Just think, my wife has to live with this 24/7. She literally once said to me “Can’t you take anything seriously?” To which I replied, Yiddish style, “Are you serious?” Quited a change from her staid upbringing in China.

    Remember, as a child, I was dragged to the remnants of Yiddish theatre in NY. You should have been in my grandfather’s house (where I was raised). Every question was answered with another question. “Why are you sick?” Answer: “Do I look like a doctor?”

  42. avatar
    kimba September 9, 2009 at 1:04 pm #

    Well thanks for reminding us all this really is just a big disgraceful joke. Some enjoy arguing all the legalisms, you enjoy pointing out the irony, the silliness, the joke of it all. And Mario needs to find his sense of humor because when even us two non-legal eagles can tell his argument is shiitake, he’s gonna be in trouble in the courtroom!

  43. avatar
    Nullifidian September 10, 2009 at 12:05 pm #

    Were you planning to share what those reasons are, or should we guess?

    I would assume it’s the same reason why this sheriff was ineligible. (Youtube video at the link)