You are on page 1of 2


.'-iw h'
. 1- r-I
r.. . r IL,:'tJ
. ,0 ... ,. ~,S .us SIST!,!CI COURT
, JIS1f~Ic[ Ji' ~i'!'i\YLf\hO
Hogewashl is a trademark of W. J. J. Hoge
CL::-~-,~:'":''' ~I';.i~,.
i'\ I 7f'" 'Ut 28
Snail Mail to 20 Ridge Road, Westminster, Maryland 21'1'57 - -
(410) 596-2854
1-\ q: 11 LI
Hon. George J. Hazel
United States District Court
6500 Cherrywood Lane
Greenbelt, Maryland 20770
28 July, 2014
\ i.
RE: Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club, et al., GJH-13-CV-3059
Dear Judge Hazel:
Pursuant to the Case Management Order (ECF No. 97), I ask the Court's
permission to file a motion to compel Plaintiffs compliance with Fed R. Civ. P. 5. In
his letter dated July 24,2014 (ECF No. 167), Plaintiff mentions a motion for a
preliminary injunction. He has served no such motion on me. This is not the first
time he has either failed to serve me or grossly delayed service to me. Judge Grimm
specifically admonished him about failure to serve me with court papers in a Letter
Order. See ECF No. 26 at 2. Plaintiffs flouting of Rule 5 and the Court's specific
on service severely prejudices my ability to defend the instant lawsuit.
"[T]here are certain immutable principles of justice which inhere in the very idea of
free government which no member of the Union may disregard, as that no man
shall be condemned in his person or property without due notice and an opportunity
of being heard in his defence." Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366, 389-390 (1898).
"'The fundamental requisite of due process of law is the opportunity to be heard.'
Grannis v. Ordean, 234 U.s. 385, 394 [1914]. This right to be heard has little
reality or worth unless one is informed that the matter is pending and can choose
for himself whether to appear or default, acquiesce or contest." Mullane v. Central
Hanover Bank Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314 (1950).
1 Most recently, Plaintiff has not obeyed the Court's order to serve the Second
Amended Complaint on the Defendants. See ECF No. 133 at 1. I have not been
served, nor, on information and belief, have Messrs. McCain, Stranahan, or Walker.
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l69 Filed 07/28/l4 Page l of 2
I gather from reading Mr. Levy's correspondence (ECF No. 166) that Plaintiff
is attempting to file his motion under seal and that he does not intend to provide
service to me or any of the other pro se Defendants. I have contacted Messrs.
McCain, Stranahan, and Walker, and they have told me that they have not received
service of the court paper mentioned in Mr. Levy's letter, although Mr. Walker has
obtained it by other means.
My motion will be no longer that five or six pages. There will be no more
than four exhibits.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Very truly yours,
I certify that on the 28th day of July, 2014, I served copies of the foregoing
upon the following persons by First Class Mail or email as indicated below:
Brett Kimberlin, mail
The American Spectator, mail
Michael Smith, Esq., for Michelle Malkin and Twitchy, email
Mark Bailen, Esq., for Erick Erickson, RedState, Simon & Schuster, Glen Beck,
Mercury Radio Arts, The Blaze, and James O'Keefe, email
Christina Sirois, Esq., for DB Capitol Strategies and Dan Backer, email
Linda S. Mericle, Esq., for The Franklin Center, email
Ron Coleman, Esq., for John Patrick Frey and Mandy Nagy, email
Paul Alan Levy, Esq., for Ace of Spades, email
Aaron Walker, Esq., email
Robert Stacy McCain, email
Ali Akbar for himself and the National Bloggers Club, email
Lynn Thomas, email
Lee Stranahan, email
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l69 Filed 07/28/l4 Page 2 of 2