Educating the Confused – Orly’s Motion for Reconsideration

The United States Government failed to furnish an opposition or a response to the motion for reconsideration seeking SS-5, Social Security application for Social Security number REDACTED which was assigned to Harrison J. Bounel and which Obama is fraudulently using.
When there is a default on a case it is the same as a pleading of “No Contest.” By not showing up and defending themselves is a blatant admission of guilt. This is going to get very interesting in the coming weeks…

Sigh… People really should learn more about our legal system before making such foolish assertions.

Orly, after the case was closed, filed a motion for reconsideration even though the time limit had clearly expired and Orly failed to make any case as to why rule 60(B)(6) should apply.

The ‘defendants’, by not filing a response, merely signaled to the court that they too understand how Orly’s motion is deficient. The court now has to rule sua sponte as to whether or not Orly’s motion should be granted.

In addition, the court, after having observed how Orly has conducted herself several times in a manner that could have resulted in a motion for sanctions, had decided to document Orly’s behavior for possible sanctions at a later time.

Orly, by trying to open the case, has provided the court with the necessary jurisdiction over her and is now in a great position to sanction Orly for her filing a motion for reconsideration without any foundation.

Remember that the court wrote just recently

The Court has declined to previously impose sanctions because the defendant has not sought them. However, the Court has directed that prior improper submissions “be kept for consideration of possible sanctions against plaintiff.” Order, July 25, 2011, ECF No. 29.

and as observed in Why you should not file a motion for reconsideration

Most courts will acknowledge that almost none of these improper and unsound motions are granted; many are not given even a passing consideration by the court. They don’t work; they annoy and alienate the court; and they put the moving party at risk of sanctions, opposing party attorney fees, and contempt penalties.  It is hard to conjure a less worthy legal strategy.