DKH111411

SECURITY - 15 USC THIS IS A U.S.S.E.C. TRACER FLAG, NOT A POINT OF LAW*

District court for the United States In Care of THE UNITED DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF Pennsylvania for the Eastern District
DEREK KIMBALL HAIRSTON Sramineus Homo, US Vessel Plaintiff )

Case # 11-cv 04152 ) Within the Admiralty

) ) V. ) ) MANUFACTURES AND TRADERS TRUST ) COMPANY, US Vessel ) ) US Vessel and ) DOES, ROES, and MOES 1 -100 et al ) Defendants ) ___________________________________________ ) Derek Kimball; Hairston, ) Lien Holder of the Vessel, the Real Party ) In Interest, Lawful Man ) Injured Third Party Intervener/Petitioner ) /Libellant ) ) V. ) ) MANUFACTRES AND TRADERS TRUST ) COMPANY, US Vessel And ) DOES, ROES, and MOES 1 -100 et al ) US VESSELS- CORPORATION, ) INDIVIDUALLY AND SEVERALLY ) Third Party Defendants/Libellees ) )

PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT The so-called, defendant DEREK KIMBALL HAIRSTON (Derek Kimball Hairston Real Party in Interest Living, Breathing, Man, Blood Flowing through his veins) is/was under injury at all times by and through its acts of counsel Klehr, Harrison, Harvey & Branzburg LLP, and Manufactures and Traders Trust Company. 1. Defendants nor its counsel has ever rebutted any Affidavit submitted by Plaintiff.

2. Defendants and its counsel operate under limited liability has at all times stultified all filings by defendant and lied. 3. Plaintiff, does not understand nor ever understood the position taken by Defendants and their counsel all documents/instruments filed by Plaintiff were/are lawful as well as legal. 4. Defendants counsel denies my last filing which is contrary to the Comptroller of the Currency Defendants as well as its counsel committed gross fraud upon Real Party in Interest, it is well founded in the record both in Montgomery County and Delaware County as well as this court, as none has plausible deniability. 5. The record is clear as it stands Defendants and its counsel committed ultra vires acts against the defendant and acted way outside of their corporate charters. 6. The judge may or may have not committed treason, but has failed and/or refused to fully research the facts of the entire case in all so-called jurisdictions as established in this case. 7. The recorder of deeds erred when she followed the order of Idee C. Fox, judge of court of common pleas of Philadelphia County to strike the lien on the Real Party in Interest Property as described in the record. 8. And at all times the defendant Violated, both federal/state laws as well as Real party in Interests rights under the law at all times. 9. I Jurisdiction Generally 10. A. Constitutional and Statutory Bases of American Maritime Law 11. - 2, Art. III of Const.: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases . . . of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction 12. a) Has been interpreted to allow federal sovereign the power to prescribe the substantive law in maritime cases pending in federal court 13. -Federal law preempts any state law in maritime cases 14. -First Judiciary Act of 1789 enacted maritime jurisdiction statute: 15. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of: 16. (1) Any civil case of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction, saving to suitors in all cases all other remedies to which they are otherwise entitled. 17. (2) Any prize brought into the United States and all proceedings for the condemnation of property taken as prize. 18. - 1333 generally provides federal and state courts w/ concurrent jurisdiction to adjudicate maritime matters (see saving to suitors clause).

19. -Need for uniformity is key 20. -In rem proceedings, generally actions brought against a vessel and binding against the world, are subject to exclusive federal jurisdiction b/c in rem actions were unknown at common law 21. -Federal courts generally have no right jury trial save for when created by statute, in state court, determined by state law 22. Defendants at all times willfully misled plaintiff by misrepresenting the facts of the case as in the entire record in the counties listed in the record.

THEREFORE, Based upon the foregoing and the record, the fraud as admitted and confessed by Defendants, and by right and by law, plaintiff has Demanded a Maximum Cure on his behalf from this court barl, bar, bar. Plaintiff never understood this whole matter from the on-set, Plaintiffs, request that this Court vacate and set aside the judgment of foreclosure and subsequent sale of the subject premises, dismiss Plaintiffs case with prejudice, re-convey title of subject premises to Plaintiffs and Order all other remedy this Court deems appropriate. November 14, 2011 Respectfully submitted, Derek Kimball Hairston,