Main Menu

Plaintiffs’ motion … is difficult to decipher

The U. S. District Court for Eastern California has denied a motion to reconsider a moot issue, staying the counting the electoral votes from the 2012 election. Judge Morris C. England, Jr., wrote:

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration is difficult to decipher.

Orly TaitzI feel your pain, your honor. Judge England cited Local Rule 230(j) which says roughly that it you want a motion reconsidered, you have to come up with something new—new facts, new evidence, an inadvertent error. Taitz’ 24-page motion for reconsideration was just a rehash of the original motion.

Judge England writes:

Plaintiffs fail to describe material new facts that warrant the Court to reconsidering (sic) its decision…

,

27 Responses to Plaintiffs’ motion … is difficult to decipher

  1. avatar
    lane March 2, 2013 at 9:08 am #

    No, no, no …

    😮

    From expert Paul Irey. Correction from Orly Taitz: Mr. Irey made an error, Judge England in CA did not dismiss the case, he only denied emergency injunction, but the case is proceeding

    While IANAL, “Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED”, sounds an awful bunch like denied and not ‘case is proceeding’

    England’s snark is a beauty to behold

  2. avatar
    Reality Check March 2, 2013 at 9:13 am #

    Apparently Judge England doesn’t agree with Taitz claim that Obamaforgerygate is Watergate on steroids. 😆

  3. avatar
    lane March 2, 2013 at 9:37 am #

    But….

    A liberul reporter brought down the most-eggsalent administration of Nixon and is now attacking Obama.

    QED

    /orly logik

  4. avatar
    Bob March 2, 2013 at 9:54 am #

    Orly’s motion is like a riddle wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, smeared with mascara.

  5. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG March 2, 2013 at 9:54 am #

    Orly Taitz proving once again, that she is the “Always Save” of attorneys.

    …For those who don’t get the reference “Always Save” is this God awful generic food brand. They make terrible tasting everything!

  6. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2013 at 10:02 am #

    It is just a ruling on a motion to stay, not dismissal of the entire case. No ruling on that has occurred. In the mean time, Taitz is also asking the Appeals court to force the district court to rule that Obama is in default.

    lane: While IANAL, “Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED”, sounds an awful bunch like denied and not ‘case is proceeding

  7. avatar
    lane March 2, 2013 at 10:32 am #

    Mah bad.

    However, more fun to watch…

  8. avatar
    john March 2, 2013 at 10:44 am #

    I guess it is Orly’s hope that if Obama is found in default, she can move the case forward. In any event, Orly wants what birthers have been wanting for last 4+ years, DISCOVERY. I don’t think birthers will ever get but if they ever did, it would quite a find to dig inside of Obama’s past.

  9. avatar
    Reality Check March 2, 2013 at 10:54 am #

    I agree. When I first read the footnote I thought Judge England was ruling there would no more oral argument at all in the case. However, after I read it again and he was just being thorough and citing the rule that says he could dispense with this silly motion w/o a hearing.

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    It is just a ruling on a motion to stay, not dismissal of the entire case. No ruling on that has occurred. In the mean time, Taitz is also asking the Appeals court toforce the district court to rule that Obama is in default.

  10. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2013 at 12:16 pm #

    Only if Obama is in default she doesn’t get discovery. She has this crazy notion of “post default discovery” but that only relates to recovery of costs and such. It doesn’t apply to the underlying allegations in the case, which are defaulted.

    Besides that, there are two further issues.

    First, in any normal case, the judge would upon a motion to that effect, give the defendant more time. Second, even if the default stuck, the court has no power to grant the ultimate relief she wants, nullifying the election.

    Getting a default of any kind boosts Orly’s popularity on the Internet, but nothing else.

    Add to that, there’s no possibility of a default because the court records clearly show that Obama was never served in his personal capacity. End of story.

    john: I guess it is Orly’s hope that if Obama is found in default, she can move the case forward. In any event, Orly wants what birthers have been wanting for last 4+ years, DISCOVERY. I don’t think birthers will ever get but if they ever did, it would quite a find to dig inside of Obama’s past.

  11. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2013 at 12:21 pm #

    The motion really is difficult to decipher.

  12. avatar
    Bob March 2, 2013 at 12:39 pm #

    Orly’s latest post is difficult to decipher as well:

    “I AM TRYING TO FIND EVENTS WHERE JUDGES APPEAR TO ASK WHY THEY ARE COMMITTING TREASON AND COVERING UP OBAMA’S FORGED IDS. NEED HELP”

  13. avatar
    richCares March 2, 2013 at 12:54 pm #

    Doc, would you please not post pictures of Orly on posts about her. I do not enjoy throwing up!

  14. avatar
    US Citizen March 2, 2013 at 1:38 pm #

    john: I don’t think birthers will ever get but if they ever did, it would quite a find to dig inside of Obama’s past.

    Let me unbias that statement for you, John:

    “I don’t know how I’d handle seeing everything in his past exactly match what he’s been saying for years.”

  15. avatar
    Yoda March 2, 2013 at 2:29 pm #

    If I recall correctly (and birfer litigation is hard to follow sometimes), this Judge has also said that he did not have subject matter jurisdiction. Frankly, the case should have been dismissed on that basis alone. Putting aside that the inauguration has happened and that the request for a stay is moot, Orly should have asked for permission to file an appeal of an interlocutory order and asked the circuit court for either an immediate grant of the relief and/or a determination of whether the District Court has SMJ. Filing a motion for reconsider to a court that says that it cannot decide the issue is really an effort in futility. This is especially true where the motion did not even address the SMJ issue, but rather asserted that the US attorneys acted improperly by claiming that they were representing people who had no knowledge of the lawsuit.

    As was discussed previously, if President Obama himself came into court and admitted that everything Orly said was true, the Court could still not have granted the relief sought since it does not have subject matter jurisdiction.

  16. avatar
    realist March 2, 2013 at 4:09 pm #

    Reality Check:
    I agree. When I first read the footnote I thought Judge England was ruling there would no more oral argument at all in the case. However, after I read it again and he was just being thorough and citing the rule that says he could dispense with this silly motion w/o a hearing.

    He can also dispense with the entire case on the papers and without a hearing. He’s already held he does not have subject matter jurisdiction. He should have dispensed with the entire case at that time, or certainly shortly thereafter. All he’s doing now is causing defense counsel to waste time and resources (and his court as well) on utter BS.

    If he ends up sanctioning Orly for all her conduct, fine, but I doubt that’s going to happen (hopeful but doubtful) so there’s no reason not to dump the entire case.

  17. avatar
    donna March 2, 2013 at 4:28 pm #

    what’s a “forced selective service certificate”? is that like a certificate to induce labor and delivery?

  18. avatar
    Rickey March 2, 2013 at 6:15 pm #

    john:
    I guess it is Orly’s hope that if Obama is found in default, she can move the case forward.In any event, Orly wants what birthers have been wanting for last 4+ years, DISCOVERY. I don’t think birthers will ever get but if they ever did, it would quite a find to dig inside of Obama’s past.

    Orly is never going to get a default judgment against Obama or any other government official. Before she can even think about getting a default judgment she has to properly serve the defendant(s) – something she has failed to do time and again because she does not know how to follow the rules.

    When she does somehow manage to effect proper service, the defendant(s) file timely Answers, so once again there is no default.

    Your hero has an uninterrupted streak of 4+ years of fails, a streak which will continue for as long as she continues to file her foolish lawsuits.

  19. avatar
    Kiwiwriter March 2, 2013 at 6:37 pm #

    John, as Fred Gwynne said so brilliantly in the case of “The People of the State of Alabama vs. Henry Gambini,” in “My Cousin Vinny,”

    “This is why we have a thing called ‘procedure.'”

  20. avatar
    Lane March 2, 2013 at 7:56 pm #

    donna:
    what’s a “forced selective service certificate”? is that like a certificate to induce labor and delivery?

    And she can beat whomever with a shtick to make it more live like

  21. avatar
    bgansel9 March 2, 2013 at 9:10 pm #

    john:
    I guess it is Orly’s hope that if Obama is found in default, she can move the case forward.In any event, Orly wants what birthers have been wanting for last 4+ years, DISCOVERY. I don’t think birthers will ever get but if they ever did, it would quite a find to dig inside of Obama’s past.

    Yeah, you go ahead and hang your hat on that seeking discovery thing John. You’re going to be waiting a LONG TIME! Hehehe.

  22. avatar
    The Magic M March 3, 2013 at 5:46 am #

    donna: what’s a “forced selective service certificate”?

    I haven’t checked, but it would be funny if he actually quoted an Orly typo (“forced” instead of “forged”) to tell her “you expect me to understand your crazy theories but you can’t even be arsed to be careful when writing them down?”.

  23. avatar
    The Magic M March 3, 2013 at 5:49 am #

    Bob: Orly’s latest post is difficult to decipher as well:

    “I AM TRYING TO FIND EVENTS WHERE JUDGES APPEAR TO ASK WHY THEY ARE COMMITTING TREASON AND COVERING UP OBAMA’S FORGED IDS.

    Took me a couple attempts, too, but isn’t that more a problem of English punctuation in this case? The mind tends to read “appear to ask” (= “seem to be asking”) together. Or would you put a comma after “appear”?

  24. avatar
    Northland10 March 3, 2013 at 7:36 am #

    The Magic M: Took me a couple attempts, too, but isn’t that more a problem of English punctuation in this case? The mind tends to read “appear to ask” (= “seem to be asking”) together. Or would you put a comma after “appear”?

    Orly appears to have used up all her commas.

  25. avatar
    Majority Will March 3, 2013 at 9:02 am #

    Northland10: Orly appears to have used up all her commas.

    She’s a comma chameleon.

  26. avatar
    Paper March 3, 2013 at 9:14 am #

    By George, I think you’ve got it!

    Majority Will: She’s a comma chameleon.

  27. avatar
    J.D. Sue March 3, 2013 at 4:04 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: End of story.


    Well said, but I will add another. Once Taitz filed her First Amended Complaint, she mooted her default-the-original-complaint position.