Sorry-- my bad. That was a typo for "maneuver."
Where did Col. Hollister claim he wanted to interplead his loyalty?
In his Complaint in this lawsuit.
And why isn’t a duty to answer as an officer in the Individual Ready Reserve an asset?
Because it is not "property" as defined in the law, and because this is not the type of case for which the interpleader statute was intended.
That’s the beauty of a vague order of dismissal. The judge said the suit was “frivolous” and you have maneuvered that into an adjudication as to legal definition of property, the correct interpretation of an Interpleader complaint and the interchangeability of duty and loyalty.
Does an officer have a duty (a/k/a loyalty) to present his credentials upon arrival at post? Shouldn’t the Commander in Chief do the same?