I saw the post-it quote regarding class action for all of humanity in the preceding posts. While I can appreciate that statement juxtaposed against an individual property interest settling a dispute within one's estate, I also would like to point out that the district court establishes the common law of its jurisdiction by and thru judgements issued.

I would also like to consider what appears in my mind to be a distinction between say North Carolina and the State of North Carolina. State = Estate. Said Estate considers more than one beneficiary. Here is where it gets a bit fun. Recently I saw where the "State of Texas" tried to get the Supremes to consider the voting practices of four other States. But when I look at the original compact "the Constitution of the United States for the United States of America", I don't see that the "State of Texas" is a party to the contract. Therefore the Supremes are correct in denying the claim of the "State of Texas". Texas has standing but the action MUST be brought in the name of the "United States" as a real party in interest.

For this reason, since FRN's represent a mortgage against all property in the United States, then would it not be correct to reach out to the Solicitor General of the United States in regard to bringing into the cognizance of the Entire class of 14th Amendment citizenry an action whereupon the "United States" is plaintiff before the Supremes? I speak now to 12USC411.

The states in union, the United States would effectively be acting as a party in interest before the Supreme Court - the Heart of the Nation. This process may be the way to remove the parasite from our love feast. Said another way, kick the serpent out of the garden!

Everything in the foregoing is connected, if it appears recondite, I apologize to the new reader.

Best regards,
Michael Joseph