Certificate of Origin

[David Merrill]

Thank you for the skinny about all those bonds. That is interesting reading.

I have a suitor who many years ago had Pete HENDRICKSON stay with him to coach him through some very tired and worn out arguments. He paid the assessment for his day in the district court. He lost his assessment as the "judge" agreed with the IRS about the assessment.

I think that is what I am talking about regarding bonding. If I go into court I am expecting that the "judge" will be practicing law and the clerk will be executing the rules of court as they are published.

It is that my Mind overrules. At least that is how it feels, so much that it convinces me. Without any creative authority as I realize the nature of the "SO HELP ME GOD." deviance on the federal oaths, it comes into play that way. The clerk is reading these filings and believing me, that there are no judicial officers. The clerk probably asks the "judges" why their oaths are different than that prescribed by law. So the "judge" tells the clerk - "You know that we, the Judges are your boss, right?"

The clerk has a conundrum to ponder. If the Judge was bonded, then he would be in authority as a judge, but it is the clerk who enters it into the Records of the Court and who publishes that Record on PACER. So now a suitor has sent $400 and no refund, no explanation. It looks like maybe the clerk assigned a case # and was threatened:

Attachment 5057

Another suitor did some searching through the rules and there are methods to Strike or Reverse utterances but the docket report must reflect the truth.

Under the U.S.D.C. Rules I found:
C. ORDERS STRIKING PLEADINGS
1. The Clerk’s Office does not return pleadings that are not in compliance with the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules of this Court.
2. Generally, defective pleadings may be stricken from the record, or a judge might deny
a request for leave to file a document. In both cases, a notation will be made on the docket to alert counsel and parties of the outcome
Thanks for all the information you are providing us with.
breach of trust by clerk; govt. shut down allowed TRUMP and MNUCHIN used it to get out of personal garnishment.

So the clerk is being threatened if he or she executes process of garnishment and summons?

A suitor is being promised papers refused by a "motions judge" will be returned to him in the mail. But that trial judge is not the judge named who refused to touch it:

09/11/2017 1
NOTICE OF GARNISHMENT UNDER RULE B(1)(c) ( Filing fee $ 47.00 receipt number 4616087109) by TRUE NAME (zsb) Modified on 9/15/2017 document contains personal data (zrdj). (Entered: 09/13/2017)
09/27/2017 2
NOTICE of Proof of Delivery by TRUE NAME (zsb) (Entered: 10/04/2017)
10/31/2017 3
NOTICE of Garnishment Rule B(1)(c), Refusal for Cause by TRUE NAME. (md) (Entered: 11/19/2017)
11/30/2017 4
NOTICE of Garnishment Rule B(1)(c), Refusal for Cause by TRUE NAME. (md) (Entered: 12/08/2017)
12/08/2017 5
NOTICE of Refusal for Cause by TRUE NAME. (md) (Entered: 12/08/2017)
12/12/2017 ENTERED IN ERROR.....Case Reassigned to Judge John D. Bates. Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (md) Modified on 12/12/2017 (md). (Entered: 12/12/2017)
12/12/2017 Case Reassigned to Unassigned. Judge John D. Bates is no longer assigned to the case. (md) (Entered: 12/12/2017)

The "Motions Judge" will not put anything in writing or even allow his name onto the docket report! You can't make this stuff up!