MD- Taitz v Colvin – Dismissed

Orly loses another one. Poor Orly is not too happy. A wipeout on Thursday, normally these things happen on Friday 🙂



SueDB at the Fogbow helps understand

For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is this 13th day of May, 2014, by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, ORDERED:

1. Defendant’s “Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment” (ECF 28) is construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment and is GRANTED;

2. Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 31) is DENIED;

3. Plaintiff’s request for relief pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3332(a), see ECF 31, is DENIED;

4. Plaintiff’s request for an order directing defendant to prepare a Vaughn index, see
ECF 31, is DENIED as moot.

5. Plaintiff’s “Motion/Request for the Defense to Prepare Vaugn [sic] Index” (ECF 14) is DENIED as moot;

6. The Clerk SHALL MAIL a copy of this Order and the accompanying Memorandum Opinion to the plaintiff; and

7. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case

Well done Orly.


One thought on “MD- Taitz v Colvin – Dismissed

  1. Oh my

    Plaintiff’s “request under 28 USC 1002 for examination of the original (wet ink) SS Harry Bounel in light of evidence of forgery and fraud in other IDs” will be denied.

    In the first instance, the United States Code does not contain a 28 U.S.C. § 1002. In the event that plaintiff is attempting to state a cause of action under the Best Evidence Rule, Fed. R. Evid. 1002, no such cause of action exists. As discussed, the Best Evidence Rule is a rule of evidence that applies during a trial in federal court. It does not give rise to a cause of action

    The courts keep on having to educate Orly…

Comments are closed.