~ oasrmonsns Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 5 Filed: 03/14/12 Page 1 of 1 PagelD #:19 United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois ne Suet Oe than Asiaed Jade CASE NUMBER 12.€ 1063 DATE March 14, 2012 CASE Jason M. Gonzalez (#2009-0008062) v. Saad Noah TITLE DOCKET ENTRY TEXT: ‘There being no basis for removal, this case is remanded to the Circuit Court of Will County. M_[For further details se text below. | Docketing to mail notices ‘STATEMENT. Saad Noah, the Defendant in a Will County Circuit Court suit, Gonzalez v. Noah, No. 11 SC 6508, has filed a notice removing that case to this court. Defendant Noah and Plaintiff Jason Gonzalez are inmates in the Will County Detention Facility. In this lawsuit, Gonzalez brings state law claims of conversion and defamation ‘against Noah. Specifically, he claims that Noah accessed a computer at the facility and opened a file that contained @ letter Gonzalez had written to his attorney. and then attempted to mail a copy of that letter to local news agencies. Gonzalez claims damages in the amount of $11,000. Noah, a native of Finland, has filed counterclaims against Gonzalez and third-party claims against anumber ofadditianal parties, Mcluding Secretary Jof State Hillary Clinton, immigration agents, the ambassador to Finland, as well as Governor Pat Quinn and [current and former Will County Circuit Court judges. Noah contends that the newly added federal Defendants render this case removable. Noah is incorrect. ‘Removal cannot be based on a claim against a third-party defendant. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441, a case is removable only if federal jurisdiction exists when the case is initiated. When determining the existence of federal jurisdiction, this court follows the well-pleaded complaint rule, under which federal jurisdiction exists only if the suit—as the plaintiff framed or easily could have framed it in the complaint—would have been within the district court’s original jurisdiction atthe time of the removal.” Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Elefant, 790 F.2d 661, 667 (7th Cir. 1986) (citing Franchise Tax Bd. v. Const. Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1 (1983)). In ‘other words, the basis for federal jurisdiction must be presented in the original complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441; Elefant, 790 F.2d a1 667 The complaint filed by Gonzalez in state court presents only stale-law claims of conversion andior defamation. Noah’s counterclaims and the addition of third-party Defendants, who appear unrelated to any’ [claims Noah has against Gonzalez, cannot form the basis for federal jurisdiction to remove the state suit. Adkins ¥. Illinois Central R. Co., 326 F.3d 828, 835-36 (7th Cir,2003); see also 14C Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 3731 (3d ed.1998) (noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) authorizes removal by defendants only on the basis of claims brought against them and not on the basis of counterclaims asserted by them). Nor does the original complaint support diversity jurisdiction; Gonzalez seeks just $11,000 in damages, far less than the required $75,000 amount in controversy. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Accordingly, this case was improperly removed and must be remanded. Page tot 1Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 1 of 15 PagelD #:1. INITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORT! ‘DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION Jason M. Gonzales Plaintiff, Counter-Defendam, wite @UNTY Case No, 11 SC 6508 v. SAAD S.NOAH Defendant, Coumterslintit, 12. C 1063 ¥ : Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Uailed sats aimed ee" Magistrate Judge Sidney |. Schenkier {OTICE OF REMOVAL PURSUANT TO 28 USCS § 1446, RULE 11 OF FRCP FOR THE PURPOSES OF 42 U.S.C. § 1331, AND FOR THERE ARE FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS DEFENDANTS IN THE COUNTER-COMPLAINT UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE a a RECEIVED Psi Counter Defendant 4 ‘Will County Adults Detention Facility Be, 98 South Chicago, Set TyOMAs 6 BRUTOR Joliet, [llinois, 60436 CLERK, U.S DISTRICT COURT PLEASE BE ON NOTICE, that Defendant Counter-Plaintiff, SAAD S. NOAH ("NOAH") pro seis moving as a matter of law to remove the above captioned cause including his counter-complaint from ‘Will County 12° Hlinois Judicial Circuit Court. County of Will to the United States District Court for the Norther District Court of tiinois, Eastern Division pursuant to 28 USCS § 1446 for such as but not limited to the purposes of 42 USCS § 1331, and teates of the USA, and for there are federal government's defendants att declare NOAL has expatriated while he was in Finland European Union, and not citizen of the USA and he was unconstttionally and forcibly adoited to the USA while he is exeludable and deportable ‘alien for not having a visa to enter the USA, to dismiss the complaint against NOAH and to impose ‘Compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants for the violations of the Constitutional rights of NOAH ‘Accopy of NOAH'S pleadings ae attached hereto and served upon. Respectfully Submitted, whet 8 li Matic se Defendant Counter Plait CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, SAAD S. NOAH, the under signed declare under the penalty of Perjury that the above Notice and the attachment(s) are served upon Plaintiff Counter-Defendant Jason M. Gonzales by placing the same in Will ‘County Adult Detention Facility mailing system on November 20, 2011. SKADS. NOAH« Re Mev iblase Fen Fertile Tc MATE Phe TRE OSE. ABRs Plgee RTHERY DISTRICT OF (LUNGIS_GASTERN DIVISION. FRom sBLTHE CIRCUIT COURT OF THETWELETHUDICIAL CIRCUIL CAE YANI ET) Jason M. Gonzales Pato CounterDefendan, Watt COUNTY, Dec of 20H Cosa No. 11 $C 6508 ee v. MICHAEL W. SAAD S. NOAH. CLERK, U.S, DISTRICT | Defendant, Counter pani v United States o America; Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, as an individual and in official capacity for her violation of NOAH'S right to cexpatristion and 14" Amendment Right; “Ambassador of the United States in Helsinki, Finland, as an individual and in official capacity for his violation ‘of NOAHS right to expatration and 14* Amendment Right; Janet Napolitano, Director of Homeland Security, as an individual and in official capacity for foreibly admitting, NOAH into the USA, while he is excludable and deportable; “John Doe Homeland Security officer, who took custody of NOAH from inside the Fin ‘November 1, 2010, as an individual and in offical capacity; John Doe Homeland Security officer, who swiped NOAH'S passport and forcibly admitted NOAH to the USA ‘on November 1, 2020, as an individual and in official capacity; John Doe Homeland Security officer, who processed NOAH at New York JFK airport in the Immigration arrival ‘processing room, by taking NOAH'S pictures, finger prints and contacted Will County Sheriff Department and had NOAH arrested, on November !, 2010, as an individual and in official capacity; Jone Doe, Supervisor of JFK airport, who was on duty in the evening of November 1, 2010, Immigration Arrival processing room, as an individual and in official capacity: at Quinn, Governor of Ilinois, 8 an individual and in official capacity for granting the fraudulent Application for Requisition of Will County Circuit Court against NOAH and failure to investigate the fraud upon him when he was on due notice, while Court is absent of al jurisdictions; Gerald Kinney, Chief Judge of Will County, while absent of all jurisdictions issued the warrant of arest of May 20, 2010 against NOAH in case No. 10 CF 1042, as an individual and in official capaci Gerald Kinney, as a witness against NOAH, as an individual and in official capacity: Carla Policandriotes, Judge of Will County Circuit Court as a witness against NOAH, as an individual and i official capacity, ‘Stephen D. White, former Judge of Will County Cicuit Court as a witness against NOAH as an individual; Schoenstedt Richard, judge of will county circuit court, while absent of all jurisdictions, arraigned NOAH and ‘presided in the grand jury indictment of November 4, 2010, against NOAH in the charge of, ‘eavesdropping (3 Counts) as an individual and in offi Sarah Jones, judge of Will County Court, while absent of al jurisdictions presiding in the charge of ‘eavesdropping against NOAH and violating NOAH'S constitutional and Human Rights, as an i and in official eapavity, ‘Susan O'Leary, Will County Court as a witness against NOAH as an individual; New York Port Authority Police Department as a Corporation; Jone!fean Doe, Chief of New York Port Authority Police as an individual and in official capacity, New York Police Department, as a corporation; Jone/Jean Doe, Chief of New York Port Authority Police as an individual and in official eapacity; JonelJean Doe, Chief of New York Police Department as an individual and in offical capacity; ‘Maurice Murphy, New York Port Authority Policeman, who signed the complaint of fugitive against NOAH, ‘case No, 10 ON 64209 in New York Criminal Court Part Apar, County of Queens, as an individual and in official capacity; Jean Doe, judge of New York Criminal Court, County of Queens, who on November 2, 2010, while absent of ll “jurisdictions, presided in case No. 10 ON 64209, in the charge of fugitive against NOAK, as an ‘individual and in official capacity; Darlene Merritt, Warden of VCBC jail in New York as an individual and in official capacity; airlines aircraft on JCase: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 5 of 15 PagelD #:5 John/Jean Doe, judge of New York Criminal Court, County of Queens, who on December 2, 2010, while absent ‘ofall jurisdictions, presided in case-No, 10 ON 64209, and had an ex parte hearing, as an individual and in official capacity; : Dave Paterson, former Governor of New York, as an individual for granting Illinois fraudulent Requisition and ‘issuing his warrant of December 13, 2010, in extraditing NOAH from New York to Will County, Ifinois; [New York present Governor in official capacity for New York granting Illinois fraudulent Requisition and issuing the Governor warrant of December 13, 2010, in extraditing NOAH from New York to Will County, Illinois; ‘Acting Extradition Seoretary of the Governor of New York, who on December 13, ‘Warrant, as an individual and in otfical capacity for granting/signing issuing the Governor warrant of December 13, 2010, in extraditing NOAH from New York to Will County, Illinois; Jean Doe judge of Now York Criminal Court, County of Queens, who, on January 5, 2011, and whit absent of “all jurisdictions, made the order of extradition in ease No. 10 ON 64209, as an individual and in official 2010, ‘capacity; John Doe I through 6 of New York correction officers, who physically attacked NOAH on January 5, 2011, ‘outside New York courtroom and forcibly took NOAH! fingerprints and placed it on thei fraudulent release paper and physically barred NOAH from filing a notice of appeal as of righ, as individuals and offical capacities; PTS of America as a corporation for forcibly taking custody of NOAH on January 5, 2011, and extraditing him ‘rom New York to Will County, Ilnois, and delivering NOAH to Sheriff Paul KAUPAS; Mark, an employee of PTS of America, who physically attacked NOAH outside New York courtroom, and forcibly took custody of NOAH on January 5, 2011, and extraditing him from New York to Will County, lino, and his role of delivering NOAH to Sheriff Paul KAUPAS, after forcibly picked up NOAH from ‘New York hocpital, ae an individual and in officiel capacity; ‘Ms. Moore, an employee of PTS of America, who foreibly took custody of NOAH on January 5, 2011, and ‘extraditing him from New York to Will County, llinois, and her part of delivering NOAH to Sheriff Paul KAUPAS; picked up NOAH from New York hospital as an individual and in official capacity; John Doe # I, an employee of PTS of America, who on January 12, 2011, delivered NOAH from transfer Tocation and delivered NOAH to Will County, Iilinois, Sheriff Paul KAUPAS as an individual and in official capacity, John Doe #2, an employee of PTS of America, who who on January 12,2011, delivered NOAH from transfer Tocation and delivered NOAH to Will County, llinois, Sheriff Paul KAUPAS as an individual and in official capacity, Paul KAUPAS, Sheriff of Will County, Ilinois, as a complaining witness, as an individual and in official capacity; Michael O'Leary, Warden of Will County adults Detention Facilities as an individual and in official capacity; ‘Will County Sheriff department as corporation; James Glasgow, Will County State Attorney, for prosecuting NOAH in the charge of eavesdropping, while Court is absent of Jurisdictions, as an individual and in official capacity, in prosecuting, by his frauds and perjuries, the charge of eavesdropping against NOAH, while cour is absent of all jurisdictions, and for his frauds and perjuries upon the Governor of Iknoi Christopher Koch, assistant State's Atorney, Will County, Ilinois as an individual and in official capocity, in prosecuting by his frauds and perjuries the charge of eavesdropping against NOAH, while court is absent ofall jurisdictions; Mark J Fleszewski, assistant State's Attorney, Will County, Ilinis a an individual and in offical capacity for his frauds and perjuries upon the Governor of fllinois in the Application for Requisition; Jean Doe, assistant State's Attomey Will County, Illinois, who represented People on May 3, 2011, against 'NOAH'S motion concerning the usage ofthe law library at Will County Adults Detention Facility as an individual and in official capacity; Frank Astrella, Will County Public Defender, for his knowing and intentional misrepresentation of NOAH, and for forcibly representing NOAH in Court, as an individual and in official capacity; Michael Knight, Will County Assistant Public Defender, fr his knowing and intentional misrepresentation of 25. 9. ee Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 6 of 15 PagelD #6 NOAN, and for forcibly representing NOAH in Court.as an individual and in official capacitys ‘Todd Lenzie, Will County Assistant Public Defender, for his knowing and intentional misrepresentation of "NOAH, and for forcibly representing NOAH in Courtas an individual and in oficial capacity; John/Jean Doe 1 through 30, Will County Adults Detention Facility, Correction officers, each as an ‘individual and in official capacity; John Doe, 1 through 30, will be identified and sued during discoveries; Jean Doe, 1 through 30, will be identified and sued during discoveries; Defendants, DEFENDANT COUNTER-PLAINTIFE'S VERIFIED RESPONSE AND MOTION TO DISMISS (COMPLAINT AND COUNTER-COMPLAINT TO BE REMOVED TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT ‘COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION “The Defendant Courter Plaintiff, SAAD S. NOAH ("NOAH") on his behalf who isnot citizen of the USA for he expatriated on July 27, 2009, while he became a refugee in Finland, European Union, and he was outside the United States of America from Fune 26, 2009 until November 1, 2010, when he was forcibly refouted vo Mew ‘York JFK ator fom Helsinki, Finland, after he was forcibly transfered on October |4, 2010, from GERMANY. were he was a documented refugesto Helsinki, Finland, and he was forcibly and unconstitutionlly toutradited from New York to Will Count, lio into the custody of Defendant KAUPAS and O'Leary, moves the Court to transfer the above captioned cause to the United States Distriet Court because there are Federal bfficals as defendants, and this Court has no jurisdiction onthe federal defendants; NOAR'S counterclaim frses under federal laws questions under the jurisdiction of federal Gout pursuant to 42 USCS § 1331. And Federal District Court has jurisdiction to hear the counterclaim had it originally been filed in federal Court. Furthermore, NOAH moves to dismniss the claim against him because Will County Circuit Court is absent of all jursditions onthe person of NOAH as a matter of law pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-619(1, and pursuant to MWaszsr ch a.v. Bright $2 II 35, becauee Will County Circuit Court obtxined Jurisdiction on NOAH by Frauds ‘and NOAIT isnot waiving Jurisdiction, for NOAH isnot a resident inthis State or he was voluntarily inthe Jfaadieion ofthe State of Court: and the complaint against NOAH is legally insuficent to tat a claim against NOAL and also must be dismissed pursuant to 735 ILCS $/2-615. In support herein, NOAH states the following: (On June 26, 2009, NOAH departed the USA to CANADA by using his new USA'S passport (On July 27, 2009, NOAH arrived at Helsinki, Finland, from CANADA, and exercised his legal right to expatraton and Voluntarily and intentionally, commited acts of expatriation in Finland and he is nota citizen of the USA any more, but a refugee in Finland and an applicant of residency in Finland, EUs (On or about January 13,2010, while NOAH was at and within 4& Finland, NOAH talked o Defendant Sheriff Pu! Kaupes (KAUPAS") asking him to investigate the unconstitutional Default Judgment of Will County Circuit Court that was entered on December 17, 2002 inde re the Marriage of NOAH, case No. 02 D 1152, by Finding asking Defendant KAUPAS questions, ier alia to find i the two setiement agreements in the divorce ‘case No, 02 D 1152, do exist and if they are, NOAH asked KAUPAS te e-mail him the agreements; ‘The January 13,2010, the phone call between NOAH and Defendant KAUPAS that took place from Finland, while NOAH was in Finland and under the jurisdiction ofa foreign sovereign independent country of Finland, European Union EU") was recorded and published onthe Internet by a video with the following link nou -=z_ARI-OmIOQ on youtube channel ww youtube hinsbrs ‘On May 20, 2010, Defendant KAUPAS, by and through Defendant Glasgow, fraudulently alleged that on Sanuary 13,2010, NOAH was at and within Will County, Tinos, when be talked to Defendant KAUPAS on the phone: WRLE KaveAs ADAIT Ter Pleus ALCAME FREMY ER AUB LEAT “Fintan tw Hes $1cve9 pom [exelese A) Defendants James Glasgow and Defendant KAUPAS filed a'three Counts charge of eavesdropping against ‘NOAH at Will County Court, People v, SAAD NOAH, case No. 10 CF 1042; [ EXW/SIT- B] Defendant KAUPAS' charge OF cavestropping S Counts) agaist NOAH indicates that on January 13,2010, "NOAH, who was a party othe phone conversation from Finland, KAUPAS alleging that NOAH was at and ‘within Will Coungy ovhen faked to him on the phone and committed the eavesdropping offenses by recording the phone conversation with Defendant KAUPAS and publishing it. BE CHARGE re op aaTte (coos) pbs FRADLEOT. ‘On May 20, 2010, Defendant Gerald Kinney, absent ofall jurisdictions issued a warrant of arest against NOAH setting the bond for the amount of $300,000 10% cash; fe xHI6IT-C] 3Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 7 of 15 PagelD #:7 10, Also on May 20, 2010, Defendant of Will County Sheriff Department had a press release in which they made false defamatory statements that NOAH is not sane by stating that “we will get him the help he needs” and making NOAH looks that he committed felony crimes of eavesdropping while Will County Court is absent of Jurisdictions and no crime of eavesdropping was occurred. 11. On June 22, 2010, NOAH arrived to Germany applied for refugee status asa stateless person because he zen of the USA. pending appeal of his application for asylum of July 27, 2009. 1. On November 1, 2010, NOAH was forcibly deported, forciblgrefouled from Helsinki, Finland, EU to New York JFK airport; 14, Also on November 1, 2010, and upon the forcible refoulement and arrival at New York JEK airport, Homeland ‘Security (HLS) under Defendant Janet Napolitano (“NAPOLITANO”) took custody of NOAH from inside the Finnish Airlines, Frmairairraft by an agent of HLS, forcibly admiited NOAH into the USA and detained by Defendant Supervisor in Immigration arival processing room at JFK airport (“Supervisor”); 15, Defendant Supervisor contacted Will County Shevff Department, under the control of Defendant KAUPAS, ‘about the arrival andthe detention of NOAH, based on May 20, 2010, warrant of arest, supra; 16, Defendant KAUPAS requested Supervisor that NOAH be detained and placed for extradition tothe custody of Defendant KAUPAS; 17. Defendant Supervisor, who detained NOAH, called Defendant New York Port Authority Police Department (NYPAP), 18, Defendant Maurice Murphy (Murphy) policeman of NYPAP, arrived and arrested NOAH at New York JFK airport. 19. Also on November 1,2010, Murphy took NOAH to NYPAP station made a one count complaint of fugitive from Lino’ justice in the charge of eavesdropping against NOAH based upon Will County Court's May 20, 2010, Warrant of Arrest, supra. 20. On November 2, 2010 and in New York Circuit Court, County of Queens, Part Apar, Defendant Murphy signed a cone count complaint of fugitive, case No. 10 ON 64209, against NOAH based upon Defendant's KAUPAS May 20, 2010, charge of eavesdropping and warrant of arrest, supra, [ ExwiBiT-D]. 21. Defendant Jean Doe Judge of New York Court County of Queens, absent of All jurisdictions ordered NOAH be held inthe Custody of Defendant Darlene Merritt at VCBG New York Jail at One Hallack Street, Bronx, N.Y., with the retum date of December 2, 2010; NOAH was physically attacked by Corection officer and inmate at veBc; 22, On November 17, 2010, Defendants James Glasgow, Mark J. Fleszewski and Defendant Gerald Kinney, made a fraudulent Application For Requisition (AFR) for obtaining the requisition of Defendant Pat Quinn (QUINN) to Defendant David Paterson (Paterson) for tho extradition of NOAH from New York to Will County, Hino; that said defendant committed frauds and perjuries upon QUINN, who refuses to investigate by conniving it; for release by a Weit of Habeas Corpus in New York Court, stating the Court's lacking all jurisdictions on the charge of fugitive because he was outside the USA from June 26, 2009 until his forcible-refoulement from Helsinki, Finland, EU, and his forcible entry into the USA by HLS. Defendant Darlene Merit filed no response thereof. 224. On December 2, 2010, Jone/Jean Doo New York judge, while absent of all jurisdictions, had an ex parte hearing in the charge of fugitive, case No. 10 QN 64208, and made a return date of January 5, 2011. 25, Defendant QUINN granted the fraudulent reeked of perjuries| Will County Cour's AFR in the charge of eavesdropping (3 Counts) forthe extradition of NOAH from New York to the Custody of Defendant KAUPAS. 26. On December 13, 2010, Defendant Paterson granted the fraudulent requisition of Defendant QUINN. [EX#18!%— E] 27. Also on December 13,2010, DefendanyN.Y. acting Seoretary signed the Governors Warrant of Paterson [ EXWI0T- E] 28. On January 5, 2010, while absent of all jurisdictions, Defendant Jean Doe made an order ordering the extradition ‘of NOAH from New York to the custody of Defendant KAUPAS delivering NOAH to Defendants PTS of ‘America agents, Defendants Mark and Moore. 29. Also on January 5, 2011, and outside the courtroom and when NOAH refused to sign the fraudulent release papers of New York Police Department, and wanted to file his notice of appeal a of tight to and file his motion to sty the execution ofthe extradition onder; NOAH WAS PHYSICALLY ATTALKEOrTHAT; 130. New York Potice Correction officers John Bes I through 7 along with Mark of PTS attacked NOAH through 4Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document # 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 8 of 15 PagelD #:8 him on the floor, face down, while Mark handcuffed NOAH tightly behind his back, placed NOAHfindex finger print onthe release papers of New York Police; 31. As such NOAH sustained aggravation of his back injury and wes notable to move and asked for an ambulance, ‘which transferred NOAH to the Emergency Room of a local ares hospital, were NOAH incurred a charge of the ER visi; 32. Defendant Moore followed NOAH to the Hospital, while Defendant Mark went with NOAH in the ambulance, ‘and they took NOAH'S custody from the hospital after he was discharged, 33. On January 12, 2011, Defendants John Doe | and 2 of PTS delivered NOAH into the custody of Defendants KAUPAS and Michael O'Leary, ater they took the custody of NOAH from a transfer location of a certain County Jail in one ofthe States on the way from New York to Will County, Ilinois. 34. Will County Court obtained jurisdiction of NOAH by fraud pursuant tothe extradition ordes of January 5, 2010, cof New York Court that is null and void because it was obtained by the fraudulent AFR, of Will County Defendants inthe fraudulent false charge of eavesdropping (All Counts}; 35. On January 13, 2010, Defendant KAUPAS presented NOAH before Defendant judge Schoenstedt, were NOAH ‘objected tothe jurisdiction and entered no plea. 36. Will County Defendants are tampering with the records of case of People v. NOAH. No. 10.CF 1042; 37. Defendants are suppressing the record of the extradition proceedings from New York Court County of Queens, Part Apar, in the case of People of New York v, NOAH case, No. 10.QN 64209; 38. Will County defendants are altering the record of case No. 10 CF 1042 . Will County Defendants are falsifving the record of case No. 10 CF 1042; 40. Docket sheet of case No. 10 CF 1042 does not show that NOAH was extradited; 41, Docket sheet of ease No. 10 CF 1042. doesnot show the infamous December 17,2010, AFR; 42, The jurisdiction was obtained by fraud under the penalty of perjury of Will County defendants in the false fraudulent complaint of eavesdropping (All Counts); 43, The juriadicton was obtained by ffaud under the penaky of perjury of Will County defendants inthe complaint ‘of eavesdropping (All Counts) by the fraudulent AFR; 44, AFR of November 17, 2010, which Will County Cirout Court presented before Defendant QUINN, i faudulent rocking perjuries; 45. Defendant QUINN granted the fraudulent November 17, 2010, AFR that recking perjuriesy exw tsr7-E] 46 By fraud and perjuries Will County Court obtained jurisdiction ofthe person NOAH by the illegal unconstitutional forcible acts in violation of the Constitution of the USA and the laws of the USA as determined by the Supreme Court ofthe United States 47, Since November 1, 2010, Defendants obtained unconstitutional Jurisdiction of the person NOAH by frauds under the penalty of perjury, while no court is allowed to take jurisdiction frauds), 48, NOAH committed no offense(s of eavesdropping for he isnot barred from recording, if he recorded, his phone conversation and publishing it, if he published i. 49. Illinois Courts and New York Courts have no jurisdiction on NOAH since he let the USA on June 26, 2009 50. NOAH is nota citizen ofthe USA, and he wes wrongfully and forcibly admitted into the USA in violation of the United Sues Constitution and laws as determined by the Supreme Cour of the USA. 51, NOAH moves the Court to transfer the complaint and NOAH'S Counter Complaint tothe Federal Court fr there ae federal Questions and Issues, under the jurisdiction of the District Federal Court. 52, NOAH moves the Court to dismiss the charge of Plaintiff Counter-Defendan, all counts for lack of jurisdiction on the person of NOAH and lack of subject matter jurisdiction for failure to seta claim, DEFAMATION OF 53. NOAH re-alleges $¥ | through 52-as if they are re-instated here, that Defendants under the color of state Javiknowingly and with malicious intent and with their frauds and perjuries made the false charges of ‘eavesdropping and fugitive for the purposes of Defamation of the character of NOAH; ‘54, Defendants knowingly and with malicious intent made false statements in the press release that NOAH is not ‘55, Defendants state by stipulation that NOAH isnot fit to stand tial. COUNT2, ASSASSINATION OF CHARACTER eCase: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 9 of 15 PagelD #:9 56. NOAH ypaiges TE though 55a iffthey are re-instated here, that Defendants under the color of state law, knowing and intentionally and with malicious intent and with their frauds and perjuries assassinated the character of NOAL for stipulating that NOAH is mentally not fito stand trial eae MGA and stipulated to send NOAH for thirty days for treatment in a mental hospital 2.V1 JE PROCESS RIGHT PROTECTED BY. ENT RI THE 57. NOAH e-alleges $f | through 56 as if they are re-instated here, thet Defendants under the color of state lay, knowing and intentionally and with malicious intent and wit their frauds and perjuries violated NOAH'S 14° ‘Amendment right guaranteed hy the Constitution of the USA: Cor COUNT 3. TORT 58. NOAH alleges hrough 57 si they are e-instated here, that Defendants under the color of state lm, rowingand itensonaly and with malicious intent and wit ei frauds and perjuresinfitng the injury of tort upon NOAR. COUNT 4, INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 59. NOAH re-alleges f | through 58 as if they are re-instated here, that Defendants “under the color of state law, Knowing imestionlly and with malicious intent and with their frauds and pejuries inflicted emotional distress pon NOAH. w .WAS ISSUED WHILE: ABSENT OF ALLJURE a CAUSE. IN VIOLATION OF THE FO F ‘CONSIITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES 60, NOAH Gallegos HI trough 59 if they are re-instated hee, that Defendants under the color of tate law, Towing intetionlly and with malicious intont and with their frauds and peyures issued the warrant of arrest bof May 30,2010, without probable cause and absent of al urisiction in vilation ofthe 14° andthe 4 ‘Amendment right ofthe Constitution of the USA. ‘COUNT 6, WARRANT WAS ISSUED BASED UPON PERJURY OF DEFENDANT IN VIOLATION OF THE 61. NOAH p-alleges 1 through 60 sf they are re-instaed here, that Defendants under the coor of state law knowing intentionally and with malicious and with ther frauds and perjuries inten issued the May 20, 2010, warrant of arrest based upon fraudfand perjuries of KAUPAS in violation of the 14th and 4th Amendments Rights ofthe Constitution of the USA: ‘AMENDMENT RIGHT 62, NOAH re-alleges 77 | through 61 as if they are re-instated here, that Defendants under the color of state law, knowing! intentionally and with malicious intent and with their frauds and perjures seized and deprived NOAH of his liberty in violation of the 14% and 4" Amendments Rights of the Constitution of the USA. ‘COUNTS, Unusual and crvel punishment in violations ofthe 14%, 4% and 8% i 63, NOAH pallegss ff through 62 a if they are einsated here, tht Defendants under the olor of ate aw, Knowing intentionally and with maticious intent and with thie fauds und pesjuries inflicting unusual and cruel punishment and setting a bail without a probable cause in violations of the 148, 4*, and 8° Amendments Rights OF Ure Constitution of the USA. ‘9, DI OF THE RIGHT OF. S, FREE. 64, NOAH fe-alleges ff | through 6F as ifey are reinstated her, that Defendants under the color of stat law, knowing” intentionally and with malicious intent and with their frauds and perjuries denied NOAH'S free access to the Court in violation of the 6" Amendment Right of the Constitution of the USA. Fhe MENT! 1 GOVERNMEN FIRST AMEN! USA (65, NOAH re-alleges $Y 1 through 64 as if they are re-instated here, that Defendants under the color of state la, knowing! intentionally and with malicious intent and with their frauds and perjuries denied NOAH'S right 10 ‘tition the government in violation of the 14th and tt Amendments Rights of the Constitution of the USA. S. ION mr OF F ACCUSED GUARANTEE! 6%, and 4 Mi FT SI IN Of A éCase: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 10 of 15 PagelD #:10 66. NOAH gy-alieges through 65 as i they ane reinstated here, tht Defendents under the color of tte Law, inowingintentionally and with malicious intent and with their frauds and perjures are prosecting NOAH, Sie if the Cours are absent ofall ursictions inthe charge of eavesdropping (All Counts) against NOAH n Violations ofthe 4°, 6", 8" and 14% Amendments Rights ofthe Constitution ofthe USA» (COUNT 12, DENIAL OF THE 6" AMENDMENT RIGHTS. PUBLIC HEARIN' 67. NOAH -slleges 11 rough 66 asf they are e-nsated ere, that Defendants under the coor of state aw, Knowing’ intentionally and with malicious intent and with their frauds and peruries denied NOAH of the right {0 public hearings guaranteed by the 6 Amendment Rights of the Constitution ofthe USA that the hearings are hel atthe end of the day while no public ae inthe courtrooms). 13, DENIAL OF THE 6" AMENDMENT RIGHL-LO CONF KONT THE ACCUSERS GUARANTEED BY THE SIXTHAMENDMENT RIGHT OF THE CONSTITUTION 668. NOAH e-alleges fT through 67 as if they are reinstated here, that Defendants under the color of state lay, inowing?intentonaly and with malicious intent and wth their frauds and pequres denied NOAH the right to ‘onfroat his accuse(s) in Court guaranteed bythe 6 Amendment Rights ofthe Constitution ofthe USA for denying NOAH to have a hearing and all hs aceuse(s to the witness stand ‘COUNT 14, DENIAL THE 6” AMENDMENT RIGHT FOR AN EFFECTIVE ASSISTANT OF COUNSEL GUARANTEED BY THE SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT OF THE. CONSTITUTION OF THE USA 69, NOAH alleges |Unsoush 68 as if they are re-nstated here, that Defendants under the color of state ls, rowing intentionally and with malicious intent end with ther frauds and perjuries denied NOAH to have an effective asistance of counsel guaranteed bythe & Amendment Right of the Constitution ofthe USA NT 15, DENIAL THE 6" AMENDMENT RIGHT TO_HAVE COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR OBTAINING WITNESSES IN FAVOR OF NOAH 70, NOAH realleges | through 69 asf they ane e-instated here, that Defendants under the color of sate La, [nom inglitctionaly and with malicious intent and with ther frauds and peruries denied NOAM the right to Ive wompulsory proces for sbtaining witnesas in hie favor in violation ofthe 6* Amendment Right of NOAH. {usrantced by the 6" Amendment Rights ofthe Constitution ofthe USA. ‘COUNT 16, DENIAL OF THE 6" AMENDMENT RIGHT TO APPEAR IN COURT AND DE PERSON 7 NOAH realleges f | through 70as if they are insted here, that Defendants under the color of tate aw, owing intationlly and with malicious intent and with thelr rads and pojures denied NOAHfright 0 sppearin Courtand defend in person in violation of he & Ameadment Rights ofthe Constitution ofthe USA. ‘Count 17, DENIAL OF THE RIGHT TO HAVE A HEARING IN VIOLATION OF THES" and 1* AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF THE CONSTITUTION 72, NOAH eealleges | through TL asf they are resnsatd here, that Detendants under the cor of satel, Knowing intentionally and with malicious att and with their frauds and perjuries denied NOAMGright 0 have 2 hearing in voltion of the 6" and [4 Amendment Right of the Constitution ofthe USA. WHEREFORE, Defendant Counter-Plaintif SAAD S, NOAH, moves the Court as a matter of law to transfer the above captioned cause and his counter complaint 10 the United States District Court for Northern District Court of Iinois-Eastem Division, for the purpose of 42 U.S.C.S. § 1331 for ab there are federal questions related to the United States laves, and treatics of the USA, and for there are Federal governmep?’s defendants, and to declare NOAH not a citizen of the USA and he was forcibly admitted to the USA while he éxcludable and deportable for not having a visa to enter the USA, to dismiss the complaint against NOAH and to impose compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants forthe violations of the Constitutional rights of NOAH. Respectfully Submitted, Sox Pro Se Defendant and Counter-Plini Verification by certificat “The undersigned SAAD S. NOAH having knowledge of the matters stated above, under penalties as provided by law ‘pursuant t Section 1-109 ofthe Code of Civit Procedure [733 I,CS 5/1-108] erties that the statements set forth i this Instrument are tre and cores. eNcept as to matters therein stated to be on information and belief and as to such matters the ec Riraly tana ie Aaah gl Mat — ceCase: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 11 of 15 PagelD #:11 This memo is to reflect the conversation that I had with a subject known as ‘Saad Noah on 1-13-10 at approximately 2:15 pm. The phone number that was listed on the caller ID was 358404685066. ‘The subject started making demands to get copies of a court order number 02D1152 sent to him via E-mail at forhalal@hotmail.com. had to request several times his name before he would say it. (knew whom I was speaking to from previous conversations in the past). He kept repeating that he (Noah) wanted copies sent to him within 24 hours or he would put me out to the world as a scarecrow. When asked how this would be done, he replied that I would see in due time. He also accused me of making him loose his children in court and not defending his rights as a U.S. citizen. fps Keg Sheriff Paul J. Kaupasa 11/02/2010¢48)4-19 HRORUG4 Bbcument #: 1 FledFOZARAREPAYe 12 of 15 PagelD HA 69/77 count m on or about Samuary 13, 2010, t snd within Will County, Mixois, SAAD 5. NOAH, a male person, committed the offense of EAVESDROPPING (Cass 4 Felony) : sided nin inten da enveropeiag dvi ete purpose of ecording a couverstin between the defendant au Pant Paupas, without the consent of Paul Kawpn in ition of Caper 720, eatin S/4-27@X A), ofthe Tos Complies Sutter, 2010228 AOTC 0013010 OATH “The undersigned being duly sevom on oath says that the foregoing barge is tue. note LOA Subscribed and sworn to before me on 20.dey of May. 2010. CAE Thdge ot Noley Fablis LESKGlinw 'WCSD # 100503005776 Ca aloe WETS OO ZH wot ores my 0 pabe-per-o1) StoRM ata 7a/Tt_ aanTa' pp rr saver con tts a> die BBoument # 1 Filed SAAR EOTPABE 13 of 15 PagelD #285 CASE NO, _2010 CE 1032 WARRANT OF ARREST ‘o_ll Peace Ofer nthe State, GREETING. Whereas, complsiot in writing was presented s0 the Cout charging that the offease of EAVESDROPPING (3 COUNTS) has becn commited nd it appears that SAAD 8. NOAH commited the offense, ‘YOU ARE COMMANDED toweat SAAD S. NOAH andbring hin without unnecessary delay before this Cou, locued at Courthoure, 14 West Jefferson Steet, Joli, Wil Coury, incisor, iY 2m abtent or unable to at, before the ncarest or most accessible Court inthis County. “As a condition ofthe defendant's bond, the defendant shall have ng contsct mith the victim(s) i this case” BAIL is ecified in the amount of s__ 3@O, 000/070 . sssuen at toes, wit Conny, nico, tie LOEL, say has _ AD.2042 = ou eee MA BLK/BRN- Me 24 oe B19 cere LKS/KG/ aw < > BLEG 8s WHET?G Sid TE one ety Har popropee-Ale PESKA AAR YARrTY canterCase: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 14 of 15 PagelD #:14 hu22n10 Has Ti 24s JPR ARK PROC RM, paca own 10001987 (CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK PART APAR. COUNTY OF QUEENS ‘THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK STATE OF NEW NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS NO. 2010 QN 064209 v (Case No. inthe original appears ona sticker) i 1 1 1 1 1 SAADS. NOAH I DEFENDANT i ' POLICE OFFICER MAURICE MURPHY OF PORT AUTHORITY, TAX# 034631, BEING DULY SWORN, DEPOSES AND SAYS THAT ‘THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE OFFENSE OF: CPL $70 FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE IN THAT THE DEFENDANT DID: ‘THE SOURCE OF DEPONENT'S INFORMATION AND THE GROUNDS FOR DEPONENT'S BELIEF AREAS FOLLOWS’ ‘THE DEFENDANT SAAD S. NOAH, HAS BEEN CHARGED BY THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, WITH THE CRIME OF EAVESDROPPING, |ACOPY OF THE WARRANT ISSUED BY CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 12TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, WILL. COUNTY, THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ISSUED ON MAY 20, 2010 BY JUDGE GERALD KIOSIG, IS ATTACHED. SAID STATE HAD STATED THAT IT WILL EXTRADITE THE DEFENDANT. DEFENDANTS IDENTIFICATION HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY FBI FINGER PRINTS CLASSIFICATION NUMBER#695S40HA3, UNITED STATES. PASSPORT. ILLINOIS DRIVER'S LICENSE AND DEFENDANT STATED THAT HE IS AWARE OF THE WARRANT. DEPONENT THEREFORE ASKS THAT THE DEFENDANT BE HELD FOR A REASONABLE LENGTH OF TIME TO ENABLE THE DEPONENT TO PRODUCE FURTHER EVIDENCE AND ‘THAT UPON THE COMPLETION OF AN EXAMINATION PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW OR UPON DEFENDANTS WAIVER THEREOF, THE DEFENDANT BE COMMITTED TO ENABLE DEFENDANTS ARREST TO BE MADE UNDER A WARRANT OF THE GOVERNOR OF THIS STATE ON THE REQUISITION OF THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE HAVING JURISDICTION OF THIS OFFENSE. NOAH SAAD SQ 10001987 - FALSE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS DOCUMENT ARE. PUNISHABLE AS CLASS A MISDEMEANOR PURSUANT —~ ‘TO SECTION 210.45 OF THE PENAL LAW ——~ eM DI 11.02:10__ SIGNED BY 2. AL MURPHY 339 = DATE ‘SIGNATURE SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THE DAY OF Date SIGNATURE “The two pages complaint is printed on one page, word for word, and in caps as in the original Note by NOAHCase: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 2/14/12 ese Enel 15 STATE OF NEW Youk EXECUTIVE CHAMBER ey ALBANY 12224 ‘The Governor of the State of New York ‘To THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK ‘And any other police officer in the State of New York: having been represented to me, DAVID A. PATERSON, Governor ofthe State of New York, by the Governor of the State of Iinois that SAADS. NOAH is a fugitive from justice and stands charged in that State with the erime of Eavesdropping (Three Counts), which the said Governor certifies to be a crime under the Laws of said State, and that the accused was present in said State atthe time of the commission of the crime, and fled therefrom and has taken refuge in the State of New York, ‘The said Govemor of the demanding State having, pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution, the Laws of the United States and the Laws of said State, demanded that I, DAVID A. PATERSON, Governor of the State of New York, cause the said accused to be arrested and delivered to SHERIFF PAUL J. KAUPAS AND OTHER DULY DESIGNATED AGENT(S) of the Will County Sheriff's Department, Joliet, Illinois, duly authorized to receive, take into custody and convey the said accused ‘back to the said demanding State, which said demand is accompanied by an Tndietment and Warrant, duly certified by the Governor of the demanding State to be authentic and duly authenticated, and charging the said accused with having committed the said crime in the said demanding State and having. fled therefrom and taken refuge in the State of New York. You are hereby required to arrest and secure the said aceused wherever the said accused may be found within this State and after compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Criminal Extradition ‘Act and the laws of the State of New York, to deliver the seid accused into the custody of the said agents) to be taken back to the demanding State, pursuant to the said requisition; and also to return this warrant, including a record of all the proceedings had hereunder, and all of the facts and circumstances ‘cating hereto, tthe Executive Chamber within tity days fiom the date of final ation hereon in seid tate Given under my hand and the Privy Seal of the State, at the Capitol in the City of Albany, this 13" day of December in the year two thousand ten,Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 1 of 15 PagelD #:1 ‘THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION DEC\Q2 201 Jason M. Gonzales Plaintiff, Counter-Defendant, wite COUNTY MICHAEL w. Caso No. 11 SC 6508 4 : CLERK U8, ‘COURT SAAD S. NOAH Defendant, Counter-plainif, 12.C 1063 v Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer United States of America al; & | eee Magistrate Judge Sidney |. Schenkier NOTICE OF REMOVAL PURSUANT TO 28 USCS § 1446, RULE 1 OF FRCP FOR THE PURPOSES OF 4? U.S.C.S. § 1331, AND FOR THERE ARE FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS DEEENDANTS IN-[HE COUNTER-COMPLAINT UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE DISIRICI COURT RECEIVED To: Jason M. Gonzales noe : Sra reg 4 202 0 Joliet, Illinois, 60436 CLERK, US DISTRICT COURT PLEASE BE ON NOTICE, that Defendant Counter-Plaintiff, SAAD S. NOAH (“NOAH”) pro se is ‘moving as a matter of law to remove the above captioned cause including his counter-complaint from Will County 12" Illinois Judicial Cireuit Court, County of Will to the United States District Court for the Northern District Court of Illinois, Eastern Division pursuant 10 28 USCS § 1446 for such as but not limited to the purposes of 42 USCS § 1331, and weaties ofthe USA. and for there are federal oe sa Union, ving vi USA. To dismiss the complaint against NOAH and to impose ‘compensatory and pmnitive damages against Defendants for the violations of the Constitutional rights of NOAH. ‘Accopy of NOAH'S pleadings are attached hereto and served upon. Respectfully Submitted, Mow A= ___ SKAD'S. NOAM! pro se Defendant Counter-Plaintift CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. I, SAAD S. NOAH, the under signed declare under the penalty of Perjury thatthe above Notice and the attachment(s) are served upon Plaintiff Counter-Defendant Jason M. Gonzales by placing the same in Will ‘County Adult Detention Facility mailing system on November 20, 2011 Meek dM SKADS. NOAH.Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 2 of IES ENPTFRNED STATE OF ILLINOIS) + i ICHAEL W. ;OUNTY OF WILL ) cueniC U8 DISTR IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT WILL COUNTY, ILLINOIS i 11866508 JASON M. GONZALEZ vs. CASE NO. _ =e SAAD S. NOAH COMPLAINT AT LAW NOW COMES THE PLAINTIFF, Jas Noah, upon information and belief, states as follows: M. Gonzalez, and comp! COUNTONE INVASION OF PRIVACY 1) That the Plaintiff and defendant are both incarcerated at the Will County Adult Detention Facility (WCADF) at 95 South Chicago Street, Joliet, I. 60436; 2) ‘That the Plaintiff and defendant are housed in the same area in D-Pod of the WCADF; 3) That there exists a law library computer in the said housing pod, for inmate use and wiilization, for studying and creating legal work and documents; 4) That the Plaintiff’ and defendant both utilize said law library computer; 5) ‘That Plaintiff, during the course of creating a legal document, saved said document temporarily in order to return later and complete that document; 6) That said document was a letter to his attorney of record, Mr. Alexander H. Beck of Sabuco, Beck, tiansen & Shrock PC; 7) That defendant, with malicious intert and premeditated knowledge, copied said document and attempted to send that document to local news agencies: 8) That defendant had knowledge that this action would violate attorney client privilege and could cause harm to the Plaintiff, 9) That this action was clearly an unjustified intrusion into the personal activities of the Plaintiff for the sole purpose of causing harm to the Plaintiff; andoe Case: 1:12-cv-01063 Document #; 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 3 of 15 PagelD #:3 . COUNT TWO NEGLIGENCE 1) That the defendant, during the aforementioned actions, was negligent in that he acted with complete disregard of the consequences likely to result from his actions; 2) That the defendant failed to exercise the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person ‘would have exercised in a similar situation; and COUNT THREE NEGLIGENT INELICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 1) That the defendant, during the aforementioned actions, acted in such a manner s to create a zone of danger in which the Plaintiff could have come to mental, physical, psychological and ‘emotional harm; 2), That the defendant's actions were extreme and outrageous in that he caused emotional distress. by and through his intentional and reckless actions; and 3) That the aforementioned actions are the proximate cause of the Plaintiff's damages and injuries. RELIEF: ‘The Plaintiff, Jason M. Gonzalez, prays this Honorable Court for an award of damages in the amount of $10,000.00 (ten thousand) and punitive damages in the amount of $1,000.00 (one thousand) from the defendant, and/or any other damages this court deems just. Jason M. Gonzalez # 2009-0008062 Will County Adult Detention Facility 95 South Chicago Street Joliet, IL 60436