What is unfolding across these consolidated and related cases — including Realworldfare v. Marinaj Properties LLC (5:25-cv-01357), WG Private Irrevocable Trust v. Marinaj Properties LLC (5:25-cv-01434), Marinaj Properties LLC v. Realworldfare (5:25-cv-01450), together with the already-filed Ninth Circuit appeal No. 25-4877, and now compounded by the newly-filed appeal briefing in No. 25-5113 — is not adjudication but fraudulent theater under color of law.
The record is unrebutted. Every affidavit, UCC filing, grant deed, negotiable instrument, and verified motion stands as admitted fact under Rule 8(b)(6), Rule 55, and Rule 56. See, e.g., Verified Affidavit and Motion to Disqualify (ER-19–42, Exhibits D–E); Verified Motion for Summary Judgment (ER-43–56, Exhibit F); Verified Affidavit Establishing Void Title Transfer and Secured Interest (ER-67–76, Exhibit H); Recorded Grant Deed (ER-182–184, Exhibit S); UCC-1 Financing Statements and Amendments (ER-185–195, Exhibits T–W); and Affidavit of Dishonor and Default (ER-196–226, Exhibit X). Appellees have offered nothing but unverified attorney chatter and silence. Silence in law is confession. Their failure to rebut admits everything.
Instead of enforcing equity, common law principles, and the constitutional guarantees enshrined in the Bill of Rights, the California district court has operated in open defiance of 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b) — which prohibits using mere “procedure” to abridge substantive rights. By striking verified filings (ER-7–8, Exhibit A) and enforcing fraudulent foreclosure instruments such as the void ab initio Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale (ER-9–13, Exhibit B), the court has not adjudicated — it has erased rights in property, contract, and due process.
The Fifth Amendment was shredded: no person shall be deprived of property without due process. Verified affidavits sworn under 28 U.S.C. § 1746 were suppressed, while fraudulent unverified filings were elevated. Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes — disqualified as of July 11, 2025 under 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 and 455 — nevertheless denied her own recusal (ER-14–18, Exhibit C), issued a fraudulent remand order (ER-9–13, Exhibit B), and struck jurisdictional filings (ER-7–8, Exhibit A) — all without jurisdiction. These acts are ultra vires, void ab initio, and incapable of producing legal effect.
The pattern is undeniable: the courts of California and now the Ninth Circuit itself are operating as engines of fraud, peonage, and theft, forcing individuals into servitude to extinguished debts and fabricated contracts — in direct violation of the Thirteenth Amendment and the Anti-Peonage Act (42 U.S.C. § 1994). Every appeal now pending lays bare this fraud. Instead of correcting it, the Ninth Circuit appears compromised and complicit, sustaining fraud by silence and omission, and treating the People as chattel and peons.
Fraud vitiates everything. The unrebutted record — as preserved in the Excerpts of Record (ER, Exhibits A–Z) and the already-filed Opening Brief in No. 25-4877, together with No. 25-5113 — proves beyond dispute that these proceedings are void. What remains is not law but theater: a system that openly defies jurisdiction, statutes, equity, common law, and the Constitution in order to preserve fraud.
Fraud in the Courts: How California and the Ninth Circuit Betray Justice
The American judicial system proclaims fidelity to due process and equal protection. But in practice — especially in California and throughout the Ninth Circuit — litigants face a machine hijacked by fraud, collusion, and judges who treat the Constitution as optional. What has unfolded in recent cases is not adjudication; it is simulated legal process carried out under color of law.
Disqualification Ignored: Judges Acting Without Authority
Federal law is explicit. Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 and 455, once a verified affidavit of bias is filed, disqualification is mandatory and immediate. The statute is self-executing: the judge “shall proceed no further.”
-
United States v. Sibla, 624 F.2d 864, 867 (9th Cir. 1980) confirms this command.
-
Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 335, 351 (1871) holds that a disqualified judge is without any lawful power.
-
In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955) warns: “No man can be a judge in his own case.”
Yet in California, judges routinely defy this absolute law — ruling on their own recusals in direct violation of statute and precedent. This is not error; it is fraud on the court. Every order entered after mandatory disqualification is void ab initio. To enforce such orders is to enforce nothing.
Civil Rights Removal: A Statutory Shield Ignored
Congress created 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1) to allow removal of cases from hostile state courts where civil rights cannot be protected. To ensure review, Congress carved out 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d), requiring appellate review of § 1443 removals.
-
BP p.l.c. v. Mayor of Baltimore, 141 S. Ct. 1532, 1538–39 (2021) reaffirmed that review is mandatory, not discretionary.
-
Thermtron Prods., Inc. v. Hermansdorfer, 423 U.S. 336, 351 (1976) held the same.
Yet Ninth Circuit judges and California district courts have repeatedly suppressed this right, issuing remand orders that pretend § 1443 does not exist. This is fraud by omission — the calculated deletion of controlling law.
When the Constitution guarantees a remedy and Congress mandates review, refusal to acknowledge those commands is not discretion. It is jurisdictional usurpation.
Verified Evidence vs. Fraudulent Pleadings
The Federal Rules are black letter:
-
Rule 8(b)(6): Allegations not denied are admitted. Silence is confession.
-
Rule 56: Verified facts unrebutted must be accepted as true.
-
Walker v. Johnston, 312 U.S. 275, 287 (1941): Uncontradicted affidavits are conclusive truth.
Yet in California federal courts, verified affidavits, notarized declarations, perfected UCC filings, and recorded grant deeds are ignored — while unverified attorney chatter and hearsay pleadings are elevated.
-
United States v. Lovasco, 431 U.S. 783, 788 n.7 (1977): “Statements of counsel in brief or argument are not evidence.”
-
Carrillo-Gonzalez v. INS, 353 F.3d 1077, 1079 (9th Cir. 2003): The Ninth Circuit itself confirmed unsworn filings are nullities.
To suppress verified evidence while enforcing fraud is to invert the law entirely. This is not judicial discretion; it is systemic collusion.
Fraud Vitiates Everything
The Supreme Court has spoken for over a century:
-
United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 61, 68 (1878): “Fraud vitiates everything.”
-
Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 245–46 (1944): Fraud is never harmless — it destroys jurisdiction.
-
United States v. Estate of Stonehill, 660 F.3d 415, 443 (9th Cir. 2011): Fraud “strikes at the integrity of the judicial process.”
Yet California and Ninth Circuit courts sustain judgments built entirely on fraud, void deeds, fabricated foreclosure instruments, and post-disqualification rulings. Every such judgment is a legal nullity masquerading as law.
Peonage by Fraud
Non-judicial foreclosures enforced after obligations have been lawfully discharged through UCC instruments and negotiable notes amount to peonage — forced servitude to extinguished debts.
-
The Thirteenth Amendment and the Anti-Peonage Act (42 U.S.C. § 1994) outlaw this practice.
When courts enforce these fraudulent foreclosures, they do not protect rights; they impose slavery under color of law.
The Ninth Circuit’s Complicity
The Ninth Circuit’s mandate under § 1447(d) is clear: review civil rights removals. Yet panels have acted as if they have discretion to ignore Congress, the Constitution, and verified records.
When an appellate court sustains fraud and refuses jurisdiction it is commanded to exercise, it does not act as a court at all — it acts as an accomplice.
Such behavior is not merely unjust. It is treason to the Constitution.
Conclusion: A System in Collapse
The evidence is overwhelming: California federal courts and the Ninth Circuit are complicit in fraud, foreclosure racketeering, and systemic denial of due process. Their rulings are void ab initio, their conduct ultra vires, and their suppression of verified evidence a crime against both law and conscience.
Fraud vitiates everything. No judgment, no order, no ruling built on fraud, concealment, or post-disqualification acts can stand. To enforce such nullities is to abandon the Constitution itself.
If the Ninth Circuit refuses to enforce the supreme law of the land, it proves itself not a court of law, but an engine of fraud.
