pleadings were re-docketted in DC Court. Deputy called me at 5am and took care of the problem
Posted on | July 22, 2011 | 6 Comments
New DC Court Docs: Obama eligibility case–Judge Royce Lamberth
InboxX
Reply |tomflocco@cs.com
show details 4:22 PM (6 minutes ago)
The Obama presidential eligibility case continues to move forward. Links to explosive new court documents below proceeding before District of Columbia District Court Judge Royce Lamberth:
veracity of all the claims and allegations in the articles below:
https://www.orlytaitzesq.com/
LINKS TO COURT DOCUMENTS:
Posted on | July 15, 2011 | 20 Comments
Taitz v Astrue final opposition to MSJ
https://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Taitz-v-Astrue-final-opposition-to-MSJ.pdf
Taitz v Astrue Opposition to MSJ, exhibits 1-6
https://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Taitz-v-Astrue-Opposition-to-MSJ-exhibits-1-6.pdf
Taitz v Astrue opposition to MSJ exhibits final 7,8
https://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Taitz-v-Astrue-opposition-to-MSJ-exhibits-final-78.pdf
Taitz v Astrue opposition to MSJ exhibits 9-12
https://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/taitz-v-Astrue-opposition-to-MSJ-exhibits-9-12.pdf
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, STE 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-7603
E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com, orly.taitz@gmail.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Dr. ORLY TAITZ, ESQ, PRO SE §
Plaintiff, § Freedom of information violation
§ 5USC §552
v. § OPPOSITION TO
§ MOTION FOR SUMMARY
Michael Astrue, Commissioner of the § JUDGMENT
Social Security Administration, § 11-cv-00402
§
§ Honorable Royce Lamberth
Respondent § Chief Justice presiding
OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendants motion for summary judgment needs to be denied based on the genuine issue of material fact. Opposition will be based on the memorandum of points and authorities attached herein and oral argument, if the court deems oral argument necessary.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AGENCY PROFFERED A FRAUDULENT STATEMENT, CLAIMING THAT SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER 042-68-4425 BELONGS TO A LIVE PERSON, WHILE IT’S OWN RECORDS SHOW, THAT THIS NUMBER WAS NEVER ASSIGNED………………………………………………………………p5
DEFENDANT PROVIDED THE PLAINTIFF A FORGED SS-5 FOR ANN DUNHAM, OBAMA’S MOTHER, WHICH SHOWS A PATTERN OF EITHER COVER UP OF FORGERY OR EXTREME RECKLESSNESS IN ALLOWING FORGED OR FRAUDULENT RECORDS TO BE FILED AS GENUINE RECORDS…………………………………………………………………….p6
SSA DOES NOT SPECIFY THAT THE SS-5 FOR 042-68-4425 IS A VALID DOCUMENT, THAT IT IS NOT A FRAUDULENTLY OBTAINED OR FORGED DOCUMENT………………………………………………………………….p7
SSA DID NOT PROVIDE ANY ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, PROVING THAT SS-5 IN QUESTION EVEN EXISTS AND THAT IT WAS LEGALLY ASSIGNED TO A CURRENT “HOLDER” OF THE NUMBER……… p10
Cover up by SSA and Selective service point to fraud………………. p13
4. 5USC§552(B)(6) RELATES TO FULL SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS, IT DOES NOT RELATE TO THE REDACTED NUMBERS AND REDACTED APPLICATIONS……………………………………………p14
REDACTED SS-5 DOES NOT INVADE PRIVACY…………………………..p14
THE RIGHT OF 311 MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS TO HAVE A PRESIDENT, WHO IS NOT A FRAUD AND WHO IS NOT USURPING THE US PRESIDENCY BY VIRTUE OF FRAUD SUPERCEDES THE RIGHT OF BARACK OBAMA TO FRAUDULENTLY USE THE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, WHICH WAS NEVER ASSIGNED TO HIM….p15
my motion to compel Obama’s subpoena was docketted today in USDC District of Columbia 11-402 Taitz v Astrue Judge Royce Lamberth
Posted on | July 11, 2011 | 42 Comments
Taitz v Astrue final Opposition to motion for summary judgment
Posted on | July 15, 2011 | 20 Comments
Comments
6 Responses to “pleadings were re-docketted in DC Court. Deputy called me at 5am and took care of the problem”
Leave a Reply












29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy, 
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld 

July 23rd, 2011 @ 8:31 am
In the copy posted here the SS number is not redacted. I was under the impression that to be accepted by the Judge this number must be redacted.
July 23rd, 2011 @ 8:49 am
I am confused. Are you saying by this posting that the original unredacted pleading was re-docketed by Judge Lamberth?
If so, that is indeed a great victory.
July 23rd, 2011 @ 10:50 am
no, the redacted document will be posted next week
July 23rd, 2011 @ 1:09 pm
Thank you, Orly.
July 23rd, 2011 @ 2:10 pm
042-68-4425 was issued to a man born in 1890. This SS# was later stolen and is now being used by someone else. SS# are NEVER re-issued. Your unique SS# is yours ONLY. No one will ever be given the same number. The Obots like to tell people that SS numbers are ‘recycled’ which is a total lie.
July 23rd, 2011 @ 2:56 pm
Just for obots trying to convince the public SS#’s are recycled speaks volumes.