Fogbow

We have been discussing this case over on the Laity thread but I figured it deserved its own topic since it is still technically alive. All the case documents are available at Court Listener.

I also have a post on it at the RC Radio blog.

Great article and nice photo of George Rombach. Will they go back for more? Didn't even see photos posted from their annual dinner; the marks seem to have moved on to audits.

Realist and I are still kinda panicked, they have their 30 days and Laity has been so quiet about "Big 'Plan B'" which means he must be over the target.

Thanks. The dismissal without prejudice is actually quite ridiculous. Judge Robinson (a Trump appointee) listed a number of reasons with citations why their case is hopeless yet allowed them a second bite at the apple. Robinson also ignored ex parte motions by the US claiming that the plaintiffs never properly served the Vice President. He briefly mentioned that the default was issued by his clerk but never explained if it meant anything, Since the complaint was dismissed one could assume the default was moot. Maybe one of the attorneys might comment on that.

I assume that the plaintiffs will file an amended complaint and will once again try to serve Harris as if she was not a government employee (which they claimed in a replay to the US) and will once again fail to effect service.

I think this one has been discussed in the Laity thread, the birther dregs thread, and the birther remainder thread. I have left Bob in charge of letting somebody know to go to Pacer and get the doc. Somebody is slacking lately.

My impression on the without prejudice was that, while realizing that it was very likely impossible to remedy the flaws, the judge felt the courts should error on the lenient side. Assuming they screw up service again, it won't really cause any time losses to boot it again. I somehow recall a great deal of the dismissals of the past were without prejudice. Most get the point that they have to actually fix the errors, except for folks like Klayman.

As for ignoring the service issue, he could. This ruling was sua sponte, on the court's own accord. The complaint was so lacking that the court needed no MTD to explain that the court lacked jurisdiction (which, IIRC as an IANAL, the court can rule on without waiting for a motion).

Even if the defendants were held in default, the ruling would have been the same. Default does not mean you win, it means the defendants cannot argue their side. In this case, no defendant argument is needed because the law is clear and that comes first.

The thing is with birther suits, I remember so many of them demanding jury trials but there would be nothing for a jury trial to decide. They decide the facts of the case, and there is no dispute on the facts. Both sides agree that Harris was born in the United States to parents who were not at the time citizens of the United States. Whether that makes them NBC is not a matter of facts for the jury but a matter of law for the judge. Granted, they rarely get that far as they fail way before that.

TL;DRW, but I'm assuming Gibbs agrees with Dr. Laity Esquire.

That reminds me of when some Republicans were arguing they could impeach Hillary Clinton before she was even elected.

They have been screaming to "lock her up" even before she was indicted and even after 4 years of Trump, she still remains unindicted unlike some in Trump's grand.

They love the Constitution when it's convenient.

bob wrote: ↑Mon Oct 04, 2021 9:58 pm
TL;DRW, but I'm assuming Gibbs agrees with Dr. Laity Esquire.

I wonder… does he mention Articles 2 and 3 of the UCMJ? They matter. Article 2 spells out who is subject to the UCMJ, and Article 3 discusses court-martial jurisdiction.

TL:DW but my experience with folks like Laity and Gibbs is that what the UCMJ or whatever law says is of little importance to their claim. You mention things like the specific laws involved to Laity and he tells you your wrong without any citation, changes the subject, or runs away to come back later as if nothing was said before.

I watched it. Gibbs actually says no.The president is not subject to the UCMJ and cannot be tried in criminal court. Robert Laity needs to edumacate poor Doug.

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 8:03 am They have been screaming to "lock her up" even before she was indicted and even after 4 years of Trump, she still remains unindicted unlike some in Trump's grand.

They love the Constitution when it's convenient.

They love the Constitution, but they don't understand it. Not. A. Clue.

The dismissal order was filed on 28 September with leave to file an amended complaint no later than 30 days from the filing of the order. By my count, that means last Thursday, 28 October, was the deadline. There is nothing new on the docket so either the court is scanning some pile of papers (not sure if they were inartfully collated and defectively stapled) or, it's dead Jim.

northland10 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 01, 2021 3:44 pm The dismissal order was filed on 28 September with leave to file an amended complaint no later than 30 days from the filing of the order. By my count, that means last Thursday, 28 October, was the deadline. There is nothing new on the docket so either the court is scanning some pile of papers (not sure if they were inartfully collated and defectively stapled) or, it's dead Jim.

Yeah; I've been waiting as well.

My WAG is the boys gave up, and now we're just waiting for the shipping clerk to enter the final dismissal order.

In theory, they don't have to file an amended complaint: they could just take their final dismissal and then appeal that to the 9th.

bob wrote: ↑Mon Nov 01, 2021 4:05 pm
Yeah; I've been waiting as well.

My WAG is the boys gave up, and now we're just waiting for the shipping clerk to enter the final dismissal order.

In theory, they don't have to file an amended complaint: they could just take their final dismissal and then appeal that to the 9th.

Me three. I just checked the docket this morning and there was nothing new. There hasn't been an update on the CA's website in forever. I think they got their 15 minutes of fame out of this one and are moving on.

I would not be surprised if the judge waits an additional 30 days before closing the case.

No way! They are secretly working with Rev Dr Laity Esq on "Big 'Plan B'" and will dazzle the court with an entirely new filing that is guaranteed to succeed! After their massively successful annual dinner, they're unstoppable. Laity is back with his dear friend the state judge going line by line through the complaint so it's perfection. Victory will be theirs!!*





* Or it'll just be trashed in a month, continuing the 100% FAIL rate of birfers.

Judgment entered today. Donezo.

But there's still time to file a notice of appeal. So not truly dead just yet.

bob wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 2:33 pm Judgment entered today. Donezo.

But there's still time to file a notice of appeal. So not truly dead just yet.

Filed under tossing out the garbage before the weekend.

What happened to the Birther spirit of filing motion after motion for reconsideration? Laity must have a sad.

If this is the best they could do with a Trump appointee then they would have less than zero chance on appeal to the 9th Circuit.

northland10 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 01, 2021 3:44 pm, it's dead Jim.

I'd say RIP, but we know old birther nonsense doesn't die, it just moves on to its next victim.

Reality Check wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 2:53 pmWhat happened to the Birther spirit of filing motion after motion for reconsideration? Laity must have a sad.

The boys were full of bluster at their presser, on the various blog shows, their own YouTube channel, etc.

I'm sure they'll use this time for self-reflection.

Dismissed w/o prejudice again so I assume they could refile the mess if they wished to cough up the filing fee?

Reality Check wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 3:01 pm gov.uscourts.casd.694824.19.0.pdfDismissed w/o prejudice again so I assume they could refile the mess if they wished to cough up the filing fee?

Maybe we could hook them up with Lindell and they can all just march into SCOTUS and make their cases.

Reality Check wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 3:01 pmDismissed w/o prejudice again so I assume they could refile the mess if they wished to cough up the filing fee?

Yeah. Self-sanctions!

Or they could appeal. Self-sanctions!

If they refiled the case would it be assigned to Judge Robinson again or be randomly assigned?

Reality Check wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 3:53 pm If they refiled the case would it be assigned to Judge Robinson again or be randomly assigned?

I presume the shipping clerk would ... ship it to the same judge.