Fogbow

bob wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:08 pm

northland10 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:28 pm So, GIL is supposedly going to file a class action in the Central District of California against the FBI and Christopher Wray for arrests stemming from an insurrection in DC where some folks have already pled guilty.

Voluntary dismissal.

I noticed there was an in chambers order since the case, being pro se, triggered a screening. Executive Summary:

1. Class action - nope, not without counsel.
2. Bivens - nope
3. Other claims nope
4. Don't forget Twombly and Icqbal.

File first amended complaint by 15 September or the case is done (and, btw leave out the class action without an attorney and do not add defendants, which Klayman never does). So, GIL and his prop filed for voluntary dismissal.

I have read pro se dismissals and I have read Klayman dismissal orders. This reads like a Klayman dismissal.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 03.4.0.pdf

In his case where he is suing Friedrich, Kelly, and McFadden, I saw this docket entry from Friday (two weeks after the case was filed).

Oct 15, 2021

SUMMONS Not Issued as to DABNEY L. FRIEDRICH, TIMOTHY J. KELLY, TREVOR N. MCFADDEN (zsb)

Oct 15, 2021

Summons Not Issued

Not sure what that means.

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 11:33 pm In his case where he is suing Friedrich, Kelly, and McFadden, I saw this docket entry from Friday (two weeks after the case was filed).

Oct 15, 2021

SUMMONS Not Issued as to DABNEY L. FRIEDRICH, TIMOTHY J. KELLY, TREVOR N. MCFADDEN (zsb)

Oct 15, 2021

Summons Not Issued

Not sure what that means.

In federal court, a plaintiff files a complaint, along with draft summonses that the court -in the ordinary case - executes and provides to the plaintiff for service on the defendant(s). I would suspect that the docket notation you quoted means that someone (perhaps the district court judge) has determined not to issue the summonses for the three federal judge defendants who Klayman is suing. I would hazard a guess that a sua sponte dismissal order may be issued in the near future and the court saw no reason issue summonses to allow Klayman to serve defendants in a case that is D.O.A.

I missed that the 11th Circuit had denied GIL admission to practice based on his discipline in DC. He has filed a petition for a Writ of Mandamus with SCOTUS. He claims he is being denied his Constitutional right to practice and due process. He claims he should be admitted because he is in continuous good standing with Florida and DC is full of leftists which is why he was suspended.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... ndamus.pdf

His appendix mentions some stuff but I did not see any actual ruling from the jurisdictions that suspended him. Funny how he forgot that.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... pendix.pdf

Oh, and Larry likes supplements, but apparently, SCOTUS does not.

Sep 08 2021 Supplemental Brief of Larry Klayman not accepted for filing. (September 29, 2021)

northland10 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:20 am I missed that the 11th Circuit had denied GIL admission to practice based on his discipline in DC.

"For completeness," Klayman represented Corsi in yet another defamation lawsuit. Klayman/Corsi filed in Florida state court. Newsmax removed to federal court, and then successfully moved to dismiss. Not taking no for an answer, Klayman/Corsi filed a notice of appeal (to the 11th).

Interestingly, the 11th Cir. required Klayman to seek admission (and not just PHV).

He is making a run for Orly's spot as TWLITHOTU. ND of Texas? Yes, they have let him practice there but neither he nor the defendants have any attachment to Texas, and he's pro se anyway.

I assume some of this was because of the recent entry about not sending summons for DC Federal Court judges in his other case. Serving them can be easy because they are in the building (or just send to the DOJ). I bet he wanted to send a process server to their house late at night to harass them. He did that to the disciplinary office folks, even after they notified him that they would accept alternate service.

FW: Prosecutor Larry Klayman reconvenes the Citizens' Grand Jury to seek the indictment of Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray.



Klayman let his citizensgrandjury.com site lapse, but it is for sale for only $3500!

bob wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:16 pm FW: Prosecutor Larry Klayman reconvenes the Citizens' Grand Jury to seek the indictment of Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray.



Klayman let his citizensgrandjury.com site lapse, but it is for sale for only $3500!

Who wants to pay so much when prices for "citizensgrandjury" domains start at $1 (.xyz) or for the fun $3 (.club)

I guess that price is based on last name recognition and traffic numbers and is the extortion price for the previous owner.

TL;DRW, but Klayman apparently also is inditing Omar.

Given the effort Klayman and Goldman are putting into this, the grift must be reasonably successful.

Klayman v. D.C. Cir. [Rao, etc.] is donezo.

Twombly and Iqbal, as always. But Sibley also gets a shoutout! (Twice!)

The court also cites similar Klayman fails written by ABJ and Leon.

bob wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:05 pm Klayman v. D.C. Cir. [Rao, etc.] is donezo.

Twombly and Iqbal, as always. But Sibley also gets a shoutout! (Twice!)

The court also cites similar Klayman fails written by ABJ and Leon.

Sua Sponte. I actually was expecting that when I noticed they were holding back on summons on this and the other sue the judges case. Of course, it was obvious anyway. Cooper will be on the next sue the judges lawsuit.

bob wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:05 pm But Sibley also gets a shoutout! (Twice!)

As no nit shall go unpicked, four times. Three times for Sibley v Roberts (pg 5, 9, and 14) and once for Sibley v US Supreme Court (pg 8).

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:36 pm As no nit shall go unpicked, four times. Three times for Sibley v Roberts (pg 5, 9, and 14) and once for Sibley v US Supreme Court (pg 8).

Two cases (one referenced more than once).

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:19 pm Sua Sponte. I actually was expecting that when I noticed they were holding back on summons on this and the other sue the judges case. Of course, it was obvious anyway. Cooper will be on the next sue the judges lawsuit.

I nailed it on October 19, 2021:

jcolvin2 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:04 am I would suspect that the docket notation you quoted means that someone (perhaps the district court judge) has determined not to issue the summonses for the three federal judge defendants who Klayman is suing. I would hazard a guess that a sua sponte dismissal order may be issued in the near future ... .

jcolvin2 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:01 pm

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:19 pm Sua Sponte. I actually was expecting that when I noticed they were holding back on summons on this and the other sue the judges case. Of course, it was obvious anyway. Cooper will be on the next sue the judges lawsuit.

I nailed it on October 19, 2021:

jcolvin2 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:04 am I would suspect that the docket notation you quoted means that someone (perhaps the district court judge) has determined not to issue the summonses for the three federal judge defendants who Klayman is suing. I would hazard a guess that a sua sponte dismissal order may be issued in the near future ... .

Well, not entirely since the case you mentioned was the other GIL vs mean judges case but it appears they never did provide the summons in the RAO case so basically the same. You were right that they were not going to bother the others for an easy dump case. So I will give at least half a point, or just the whole point for calling it.

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:23 pm Well, not entirely since the case you mentioned was the other GIL vs mean judges case but it appears they never did provide the summons in the RAO case so basically the same. You were right that they were not going to bother the others for an easy dump case. So I will give at least half a point, or just the whole point for calling it.

My bad. I did not realize that there were two Klayman v mean federal judges cases. Maybe that's Klayman's secret: volume volume VOLUME!

Yeah well it certainly isn't location location location.

Nothing, like we've seen before!

Klayman v. D.C. Cir. [Rao, etc.] is donezo.

Because Klayman gotta Klayman, he filed a notice of intent to file his obligatory reconsideration and recusal motions.

bob wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:53 pm

Klayman v. D.C. Cir. [Rao, etc.] is donezo.

Because Klayman gotta Klayman, he filed a notice of intent to file his obligatory reconsideration and recusal motions.

Judge Reggie Walton has made things a bit easier on the Klayman vs the bar cases as there were 4 (2 Klayman v Porter and 2 Klayman v Kaiser, and Porter). 2 Porters and 1 Kaiser ended up in Walton's court. Earlier last week, or this week (I am on vacation this week and time has lost some meaning), he combined the 2 Porters. He has now combined a Kaiser with it. The remaining Kaiser is in Amy Berman Jackson's court and she has stayed it pending the outcome of the other cases (that one is case 21-727 and was filed, or transferred, I forget which, in March 2021).

So back to the combined case. Here is the order along with scheduling stuff.
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04518863879

Some of the interesting parts besides the motion to combine being granted:

ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion for an Injunction Against Vexatious Litigation
by Plaintiff, ECF No. 21, is REINSTATED. It is further

ORDERED that, on or before November 29, 2021, the plaintiff shall file his supplement
to his opposition, ECF No. 35, by November 29, 2021. It is further

ORDERED that, on or before November 19, 2021, the defendants shall file one motion
to dismiss that combines all of their arguments in support of the dismissal of all three complaints. It
is further...

It would appear the bar folks have had enough of his constant lawsuits.

The status conference is 22 March 2022 and apparently he is planning on dealing with the motions at that time which would likely be dismissal unless GIL finds a new way to stretch it out.

I forget exactly which nutter was filing all those fake indictments (mainly in N.D.N.Y.) with the swirly signature, but I came across this order in one of them and thought of Klayman:

N.D.N.Y. wrote:On August 19, 2019, Plaintiff submitted a voluminous filing in violation of the September 29, 2017 Bar Order, Dkt. No. 60, which requires Plaintiff to obtain permission from the Court to file additional papers in this closed action. This submission does not warrant a response by Defendants and will not be recognized by the Court. Plaintiff is directed to pick up his August 19, 2019 submission within 30 days of this Order. Should Plaintiff fail to pick up this submission within the allotted time the Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to dispose of it.

"I ORDER YOU to take out the trash!"

John Vidurek (goes by John Darash online and with his NLA faxes). That was the case where he kept filing a bunch of, generally unrelated, trash from various folks after it was dismissed and multiple times after he was told not to. Either the last rejection did it, or the court did not even bother with putting the trash on the docket before tossing it.

He said he opened the magical "court of record" so he dumped a whole bunch of stuff there, save for all his loser IRS cases, oddly enough but they may have had their own multiple courts of record.