A properly executed Security Agreement assigning all assets, rights, and interests to a private trust—paired with a UCC-1 financing statement and UCC-3 amendment claiming the Deed of Trust and Note—lawfully establishes the trust as the secured party and real party in interest. This perfected interest, under UCC §§ 9-203, 9-509, 3-301, and supported by controlling case law (e.g., Carpenter v. Longan, Ibanez, Veal), strips any servicer or third-party of standing to foreclose unless they possess the original Note, prove an unbroken chain of title, and rebut the trust’s perfected claim. Without that, all foreclosure attempts become void ab initio, commercial dishonor, and legal trespass on private trust property.
In an unthinkable display of judicial defiance, the United States District Court for the Central District of California—specifically Judge Kenly Kiya Kato—has openly violated federal disqualification statutes and constitutional protections, triggering a full-scale procedural breakdown. The Plaintiffs, Kevin Realworldfare and Corey Walker, filed a timely and sufficient affidavit of bias under 28 U.S.C. § 144—invoking a mandatory disqualification. Yet, Judge Kato continues to issue orders and direct proceedings as if the law simply does not apply to her.This is not a mere procedural oversight. This is a calculated refusal to follow the law, a violation of the U.S. Constitution, and an unmistakable act of judicial misconduct.
This article exposes verified judicial misconduct by U.S. District Judge Kenly Kiya Kato in the federal civil rights case Kevin Realworldfare et al. v. Tamara Wagner et al. Despite a verified motion for disqualification filed under 28 U.S.C. § 144, Judge Kato continued to rule without jurisdiction—rendering all subsequent actions void ab initio. Plaintiffs allege Kato deliberately misrepresented the law, falsely claiming an affidavit was required despite Ninth Circuit precedent confirming that a verified motion suffices. Meanwhile, state commissioner Tamara Wagner—whose jurisdiction ceased on April 28, 2025, upon federal removal—continued to obstruct access to remedy, deny motions, and execute dispossession orders without lawful authority. Rather than uphold federal supremacy and equity, Kato has doubled down on the fraud, sustaining ultra vires state actions under color of law. Plaintiffs demand her immediate disqualification, vacatur of all rulings, and reassignment to restore judicial integrity.
A federal lawsuit filed by Kevin: Realworldfare accuses Sailfish Point Realty, attorney Douglas J. Kress, and Judge Michael J. McNicholas of engaging in a $45 million real estate fraud scheme involving unrebutted tender, judicial collusion, and deprivation of rights under color of law. The complaint asserts that verified affidavits and commercial instruments lawfully transferred title to a luxury Florida property, yet were ignored in favor of a void dismissal without jurisdiction. Realworldfare claims the defendants conspired to sabotage the transaction and unlawfully dispossess him, violating UCC provisions, Florida statutes, and federal civil rights laws. The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, quiet title, and treble damages under civil RICO.
A family in Riverside County, California, was unlawfully dispossessed from their home despite having a valid quiet title claim and federal removal in place. Commissioner Tamara Wagner issued writs without jurisdiction, blatantly violating 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), and ignored federal supremacy. Federal Judge Kenly Kiya Kato failed to enforce the removal, refused to halt the state court’s void actions, and mischaracterized the plaintiffs as "pro se" to evade intervention. Multiple Supreme Court precedents make clear that judges acting without jurisdiction are not immune, yet no accountability has occurred. Meanwhile, public figures like President Trump, Pam Bondi, and Kash Patel remain silent as judicial officers aid in unconstitutional property theft under color of law.
A federal RICO lawsuit filed in the Central District of California exposes a coordinated conspiracy involving attorneys Barry Lee O’Connor and John Bailey, MARINAJ PROPERTIES, and the Doumit family. The Verified Complaint details simulated legal process, fraudulent conveyance, and theft of trust property through a void Trustee’s Deed. Despite unrebutted affidavits and perfected title filings, Judge Rachel A. Marquez has enabled the fraud by refusing to sanction the guilty and instead targeting Americans asserting their rights. The case alleges violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962, 241, 1341, and California Civil Code §§ 1709, 3346. This is judicial conspiracy at its peak—where bar members are protected, and real parties in interest are punished. The outcome will test whether equity and law still matter in California’s courts.
This in-depth article maps how UCC §§ 1-103, 3-104, 3-601, and 3-603 are codified and applied across all 50 U.S. states. It explains the legal foundations of negotiable instruments, commercial discharge, lawful tender, and equity-based supplementation of the Uniform Commercial Code. With every state’s statutory citation embedded, this resource is essential for litigants, researchers, and private parties asserting rights under the UCC. Whether executing a secured party strategy, challenging a debt, or invoking equity, this article shows where the law lives—and how to use it.
When a court acts without lawful jurisdiction—whether through improper removal, lack of subject matter or personal authority, or constitutional violations—its orders are void ab initio and carry no legal force. This article explains how judges who continue to issue rulings after losing jurisdiction are not merely mistaken—they are acting under color of law and are subject to direct civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Backed by black-letter case law and statutory authority, this piece dismantles the myth of absolute judicial immunity and affirms a fundamental truth in law: jurisdiction is everything. When it’s gone, so is the court’s power to act.
Federal summonses have been issued and served in Kevin Walker Estate v. Chad Bianco, a $1 trillion RICO lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Sheriff Bianco, deputies, and other officials face 18 devastating charges, including fraud, kidnapping, and racketeering. The verified complaint is backed by unrebutted affidavits, UCC filings, and self-executing contracts, which stand as judgment in commerce and law. Proof of service has been filed, and the 21-day response clock is already running. Failure to respond results in default judgment, lien enforcement, and final commercial adjudication.
This article explains how discharging a debt and assigning it to the U.S. Treasury initiates a lawful credit offset process. It clarifies that acceptance by the Treasury occurs through silence, acquiescence, and non-rebuttal—not by permission—under UCC §§ 3-601, 3-603, and federal statutes including 31 U.S.C. §§ 3123 and 5118. It outlines the legal structure, forms, and instruments needed to enforce the process, including an Affidavit of Assignment, UCC filings, and IRS reporting documents. The Treasury acts as a fiduciary once lawfully noticed and unrebutted. Most failures result from procedural errors, not flaws in the mechanism itself. This is a step-by-step breakdown of how lawful private discharge converts into public credit responsibility.
In a case that exposes the depths of judicial corruption and legal fraud, Marinaj Properties LLC and its attorneys have attempted to override constitutional law, equity, and intellectual property rights with baseless allegations and boilerplate deflections. They assert that no man or woman may defend their own property without a state-licensed attorney, blatantly denying U.S. Supreme Court precedent, federal statutes, and private trust law. Meanwhile, they remain in dishonor, procedural default, and have failed to rebut any verified filings or lawful demands. Motions to strike their fraudulent cross-complaint, along with demands for sanctions and summary disposition, have been filed and remain unrebutted. The record shows a coordinated RICO pattern of obstruction, unclean hands, and simulated process. Justice now requires action—or exposure of complicity by the courts themselves.
Multiple court officers in Riverside County, California — including Jeremiah Raxter, Monika Vermani, and Charles Rogers — have been exposed in a coordinated RICO conspiracy involving judicial fraud, civil rights violations, and obstruction of federal jurisdiction. A Verified Notice of Removal lawfully stripped the state court of power, yet officials fraudulently misfiled it as a “letter” to retain control. Meanwhile, the federal court has failed to docket the removal despite confirmed receipt, mirroring prior misconduct documented in Judge Jesus G. Bernal’s court. This pattern of concealment, tampering, and collusion reflects systemic corruption, not isolated error. These actions violate multiple federal criminal statutes and civil rights protections and form the basis for immediate enforcement and federal litigation. The system is cornered — and the record now proves it.