You are on page 1of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA


_______
JANICE WOLK GRENADIER
Pro se
Plaintiff
v.

Civil Action No. 1:14 - cv - 00827

No. 15-1169
BWW LAW GROUP BWW LAW GROUP
HOWARD N. BIERMAN,
EQUITY TRUSTEES, LLC
MARK R. GALBRAITH Lost License ,
WELLS FARGO
BANK OF AMERICA, f/k/a - as successor-in-interest to LaSALLE BANK,
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC - Defendants,

Jointly and Severally, in their Official and Personal Capacities.


MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DATED JUNE 29, 2015
PLAINTIFF HAS BEEN SHUT OUT OF DUE PROCESS ET AL
BY THE FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM TO PROTECT THEIR OWN OF KNOWLEDGABLE
WILLFUL ACTS THAT WERE AND ARE MALICIOUS, VIOLENT, OPPRESSIVE, FRAUDULENT,
WANTON AND GROSSLEY RECKLESS AGAINST PRO SE PLAINTIFF
REQUEST FOR LAW USED FOR JUDGE LEONI BRINKEMA TO NOT RECUSE HERSELF
WITH THE OBVIOUS FAVORTISM, CRONYISM AND

FINACIAL CONFLICT OF THIS CASE

MOTION AND CASE TO BE SENT TO THE CHIEF JUDGE OF THIS COURT FOR REVIEW

Comes Now Plaintiff requests the Chief Judge of this court to review all actions in this case.
That Judge Brinkema in her Order once again trivialized protected liberties and libeled Pro Se Plaintiff with
allegations against Plaintiffs pleadings stating Neither motion presents a coherent claim for relief So here is a
very coherent claim for relief:
That Judge Brinkema has not acted in good faith, has allowed and ignored the criminal acts and actions of the
Defendants ignoring the Rules and the Laws of this Court and the Supreme Court of the United States of
America. When Defendants did not respond to the Amended Complaint the statements of Plaintiff
become TRUE FACT. That Plaintiff gave the Defendants close to 20 days extra time to respond with
conversation as to when they would respond which ended with disingenuous promises. That defendants being
lawyers should be held to a higher standard of integrity to not defame the Courts reputation. That Judge
Brinkema has libeled and Slandered Plaintiff in all Orders to take the eye off the criminal acts of Herself and
Defendants. That Plaintiffs deprivation of her Constitutional Rights, Civil Rights have been deliberate,
knowledgeable, willful acts were malicious, violent, oppressive, fraudulent, wanton, or grossly reckless denied
1

her by Judge Brinkema not Ordering Defendants in Default. That the Defendants are so confident in the rulings
of Judge Brinkema in their favor they did not even respond to the Default Motion. The Professional Standard of
care has been ignored by Judge Brinkema and Defendants.
The Relief should be swift and immediate to uphold the integrity of this court and the integrity of the
United States Constitution on Due Process. The enforcement of the Motion for Default against Defendants
should be signed immediately and the Judge Brinkema should be immediately investigated for her acts and
actions and her obvious refusal to follow the Law and Rules and recuse herself. That Plaintiff will be filing
complaints swiftly to try and prevent this unjust behavior against any other Litigants that step into the court
house that the People pay for and have a right to JUSTICE.
The Relief as stated in the Amended Complaint and Affidavit in Support of Motion for Entry of Default
Judgment.

The relief of the Plaintiff is for Quit Title of 15 W. Spring Street, Alexandria, Va 22301 and

Damages of Thirty Eight Million Dollars ($38,000,000.) and whatever else this court deems for the further
damages by Judge Brinkema, this court and the defendants.
Further that Plaintiff has been advised by the Court of Appeals that any and all new evidence must go through
this court prior to the Court of Appeals recognizing it. The Statement in the Order Lastly, because this civil
action is on appeal, it is not proper for Plaintiff to continue filing documents in this civil action. Should be
considered as a statement to intimidate a pro se Plaintiff.
Plaintiff demanded and still demands a Special Grand Jury be convened to investigate misconduct and violation
of laws by the Defendants, the Judiciary, the Government, Elected Officials, and this courts actions in the above
case, and case No 1:11 - cv - 1136 where Plaintiff was denied access to Justice, in this court for financially not
being able to afford the filing fee. To include the actions in the Lee Farkas et al trial including the actions of
this court against Paul Allen , Raymond Bowman 1:11 c 118 - LMB, Lee Bentley Farkas, Desiree Brown 1:11 cr
84 -LMB, Catherine Kissick 1:11 cv 88 LMB, Sean Ragland, and Teresa Kelly and the Case Shapiro &
Burson vs Westport Insurance Co.(1:12 cv 70 LMB/JFA) not all case numbers known. That where fitting,
Indict for prosecution and conviction for violation of Due Process Rights of Citizens of the United States of
America and any and all other criminal acts and actions that have been violated by this court et al.
The Basic Liberty of Due Process has been violated. The basic liberty that our Flag stands for and here is
where the standard of Liberty is set for the rest of the World. It is under the Oath that each Judge has taken that
this heavy burden lies on your shoulders to protect the Rights of each and every American Citizen. That the
Appearance of Justice is just as important as Justice itself.

Wherefore Plaintiff requests this Special Grand Jury to be immediately put into action to investigate the
appearance of the criminal actions in this Court house et al and for others. The Special Grand Jury is due to
the peculiar nature and lack of federal and state oversight. The appearance is the Judiciary, the Government
and Elected Officials in policing themselves has given them virtually unlimited authority, discretion, and few
reviewable questions of law for appeal. There is little to no federal oversight through civil rights actions. Many
federal courts have abstained from accepting even when they assert violations of federal civil rights laws, and
state actors regularly assert immunities under the Eleventh Amendment or personal immunities for judicial or
quasi-judicial activities. That the entire industry has set its own best practices to incorporate fraud and
extortion as relevant standard of care. The industry regards itself as untouchable by its own vulnerable client
base.
The result of this unusual absence of checks and balances has become a perfect storm of unchecked power,
absence of meaningful oversight, and financially-motivated professionals who operate the systemlawyers,
city/ county-level bureaucrats, none of whom are open to input from litigants. Litigants encounter the system as
a revolving door process with short term goals. There is no longer term litigant-side input to protect the legal
and ethical integrity of the processes which deployed and policed by the system operators themselves. The
resulting exploitation ruins the American Citizen and their families while enriching attorneys, governments,
elected officials and judges who administer the processes they, and they alone, created.
Date: July 2, 2015

Respectfully Submitted,
/S/_____________________________
Janice Wolk Grenadier
15 West Spring Street
Alexandria, Virginia 22301
Telephone (202) 368-7178
Email jwgrenadier@gmail.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 2nd day of July, 2015, I served a true and correct copy through e-mail, hand deliver or the foregoing by
First Class United States Mail, postage prepaid, upon the following parties:
Robert R. Michael (VSB #74148)
BWW Law Group, LLC
8100 Three Chopt Rd., Suite 240
Richmond, VA 23229
Counsel for Defendant Equity Trustees, LLC, BWW Law
Group et al
Syed Mohsin Reza, Esq.
Mary Catherine Zinsner Esq.
Troutman Sanders, LLP
1850 Towers Crescent Plaza
Tysons Corner, VA 22182

Counsel for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and Ocwen Loan


Servicing, LLC
Nathaniel Patrick Lee, Esq.
McGuireWoods, LLP
1750 Tysons Blvd Suite 1800
McLean, VA 22102-4215
June 24, 2015

Suite 500
Janice Wolk Grenadier
ProSe