Citizen Sues Atlanta Fed

[Amaz]

Maybe I am reading the response incorrectly, however it seems to me that the Motion to Dismiss is based mainly on two points.

A. There has been no injury - hence no standing, which I believe you all are discussing with reference to the PAG.

B. That Federal Reserve Notes are lawful money.

"Plaintiff's apparent attempt to allege that his "redemption right" under 12 U.S.C. § 411
has somehow been violated, however, is wholly without merit under the law. Section 16 of the
Federal Reserve Act states, in relevant part, that "Federal Reserve notes… shall be redeemed in
lawful money on demand…at any Federal Reserve bank." 12 U.S.C. § 411. However, Federal
Reserve notes have been designated as "legal tender" by Congress under 31 U.S.C. § 5103.
Accordingly, such notes are "lawful money" as that term is used in Section 16 of the Federal
Reserve Act.

By this, the FRB-Atlanta is saying that FRN's are "legal tender" & "lawful money" which would essentially make 12 U.S.C. § 411 irrelevant. This argument seems idiotic on its face because that would negate the existence of US Notes and the laws that demand that US Notes be in existence.

Am I wrong in my assertion on point B, if not how does that argument get countered.

I would have sent a foia to the fed reserve first to get there interpretation of lawful money by code based off of a certified/seald copy of the defintion and or meaning per U.S.C. And then send another foia asking if lawful money is redeemable at the FRB by Code (using that specific code certified)....Then I would also do the same for Treas ........always remember the rules of evidence and how to get it in.