• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
CASE BEING CONSIDERED FOR TREATMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 34(j) OF
THE COURT’S RULES [MOTION FOR ORAL ARGUMENT FILED]
__________________________________________________No 09-5080
Consolidating No. 09-5161
_______________________
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
GREGORY S. HOLLISTER, et al.,
Plaintiff-Appellants,
v.
in his capacity as a naturalperson; de facto President in posse; and asde jurePresident in posse, also known asBarack Obama, et al.Appellees.On Appeal from the United States Courtfor the District of Columbia:Case Below 08-2254 JR___________________________________________
CORRECTED
APPELLANTS’ REPLY BRIEF
John D.HemenwayD.C. Bar #379663Counsel for Appellants4816 Rodman Street, NWWashington DC 20016September 18, 2009(202) 244-4819December 9, 2009 (Corrected)
BARRY SOETORO,
Case: 09-5080 Document: 1219842 Filed: 12/09/2009 Page: 1
 
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary of Argument1The Tactic of Misrepresenting
The Classical Exposition of “Standing”
Under The Facts of This Case2
 LUJAN 
AND ITS ELEMENTS3STANDING WAS ANALYZED AND FOUND8
WHAT IS “USUALLY” THE CASE IS NO
T EXCLUSIVE11NO NEW THEORY: INTERPLEADER THROUGHOUT14RULE 11: NO INQUIRY INTO PRE-FILING INQUIRY;A HEARING STILL REQUIRED16CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE18CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 32(a)18
Case: 09-5080 Document: 1219842 Filed: 12/09/2009 Page: 2
 
ii
CASESPAGE(S)
 Bankers Trust Co. v. Mfrs. Nat’l Bank of Detroit 
,139 F.R.D. 302 (S.D.N.Y. 1991)11,12
 Berg v. Obama
, 574 F.Supp.2d 509 (E.D.Pa. 2008)8
 DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno
, 547 U.S. 332,242 (2006)8
 Dist. of Columbia v. Air Florida, Inc.
750 F.2d 1077,(D.C.Cir.1984)15
 Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555, 562,112 S.Ct. 2130, 1191 L.Ed.2d 351. (Opp. Brief p. 21)1,3, 7,8
 Murphy v. Travelers Insurance Company
,534 F.2d 1155 (5
th
Cir.1976)12STATUTES, RULES and TREATISES*28 U.S.C.§ 1335
(“Interpleader Act”)
1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,14, 15Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 111,16, 17Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 12(b)(6)1*Fed.R.Civ.P.Rule 2210The Federal Interpleader Act of 1936, byZecharia Chafee, Jr.
“DISPUTED SUBJECT MATTER” number 3
,Yale LawJournal, April 193613
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
Article III2Article III, Section 2 2
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Case: 09-5080 Document: 1219842 Filed: 12/09/2009 Page: 3
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...