As usual after 2 years the court is siding with
the government regulator lawyer and is not willing to rule on the argument of the MSJ that I filed, stating that plaintiff counsel is right I have failed to qualify and everything I argued in MSJ is better to be determined in a Trial.
I have prepared a Motion to Reconsider. citing that this erroneous because:
e.g. In my MSJ I argued that the counsel has failed to comply with Rule 26, Rule 34 to produce an exact computation of his claim, and Rule 19 a Trial or Judgment cant be had because all the defendant entities were salvaged and dissolved by a Gov appointed Trustee, as such without them a Judgment or trial cannot be had.
Further I cited Congressional Act. 11 USC ss 78(j), the BK Discharge Injunction etc. and cases deciding on these Laws. Also cited Supreme Courts rulings that ruled previliges doesn't apply to a Gov when is seeking money especially a Gov Reg Agency
Yet completely ignores the conclusions of Law cited and cites there was NO qualifying arguments;
Can you please cite a Rule or any case that explains the purpose of a Motion for Summary Judgment and indeed the argued Laws and Rules are qualifying basis for a Pre-Trial MSJ disputes and courts ruling is necessary where party without following Rules e.g. Rule 34, or 19 etc. and other Acts of laws cannot be bound for trial
I know 99% he will deny the MTR again but at least then I can go to the 9th circuit, it is weird that rather than examining the evidence and remain impartial, seems that the court is automatically on their side. Even refusing to cite or examine the evidence that MFG was stealing cash from our Company.
By the way I pre-advance rated you lastnight