In a shocking act of judicial fraud and procedural sabotage, U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez entered a void Final Judgment in a verified civil rights and equity case—without adjudicating jurisdiction and in defiance of Rule 60(b)(4). The court ignored multiple unrebutted affidavits and relied solely on an unsigned, unsworn, and procedurally defective motion submitted by defense counsel Carin Silberman of Silberman Law Firm, PLLC. The record proves service was perfected, jurisdiction was never challenged, and summary judgment was pending—yet the case was dismissed under false pretenses. This is not a legal error; it is a deliberate conspiracy to obstruct justice, suppress lawful remedy, and protect financial defendants through collusion. The Plaintiff has filed a Verified Motion to Vacate, and federal escalation is now underway.
When a court ignores a Conditional Acceptance, Affidavit, or Challenge of Jurisdiction and proceeds with a hearing or issues an order, it commits a fundamental violation of due process, rendering its actions void ab initio—invalid from the outset—as it lacks lawful authority and jurisdiction. Legal precedents confirm that unrebutted affidavits stand as truth, and jurisdiction must be proven before any court action. This article explores the legal foundation behind void judgments, fraud upon the court, and how to challenge unlawful rulings. Learn how to invoke U.C.C. § 3-505, Pennoyer v. Neff (1878), and 28 U.S.C. § 2201 to declare a fraudulent order null and enforce your rights.
The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by the socialist minister Francis Bellamy (1855-1931). It was originally published […]
This explanation clarifies the distinction between state citizens and nationals in the context of U.S. law, emphasizing that individuals born in a state are primarily state citizens with allegiance to their state, not to the federal United States, which is defined as a federal corporation occupying only 10 square miles. It highlights the absence of explicit references to "state citizen" in official documentation and how this ambiguity may be intentionally designed to centralize federal control. Understanding these distinctions can illuminate the complexities of citizenship and legal identity within the U.S. legal framework.
All contracts with the government are fundamentally voluntary, allowing every man and woman to stand on their rights and exemptions as private citizens. When proceeding, In Propria Persona, sui juris, One can reserve their natural common law right not to be compelled to perform under any contract that they did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. One can not be forced to accept the liability associated with any compelled and pretended "benefit" of any hidden or unrevealed contract or commercial agreement. As such, the hidden or unrevealed contracts that supposedly create obligations to perform, for persons of "subject status," are inapplicable to a private citizen/non-citizen national/national/State Citizen/national of the United States, and are null and void