Doctors sue the Government about the NAV

[David Merrill]

Count VII is CIVIL MONEY DAMAGES. Why move to dismiss that one?

Have you been injured as a result of the wrongful conduct of another? Call my office today to get the compensation you deserve. Or maybe not if I'm threatened by big pharma.

My theory is that BeCRAFT is under pressure.

The real reason to dismiss it though, is because it might detract from the Culling. Notwithstanding I will expose the strategy by linking the post in an email to the attorneys of record found above.

P.S. Some insight about Larry BeCRAFT may be helpful. I have always been wary of Larry and we go way back. I spoke with him one time and believe we did not get along fabulously.

My gut is that he is more protective of his bread and butter as an attorney than he is willing to go out on a limb. He seems to ride the fence, enjoying the reputation for being a Constitution lawyer, but not really putting money where his mouth is.

Therefore I looked again today. He has not filed a new dismissal for Count VII alone. So thank you Marcel. Abandoning the monetary claim, if that is Count VII makes no sense. No more sense than Larry throwing the case.