Carter denied Orly relief from stay of discovery

scribd ^ | 10/8/2009 | Judge David O. Carter

[Elderberry]

Orly's request of Relief from Stay of Discovery was denied

[Cherokee Conservative]

“even though I provide tons of vital insight into the problem”

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!! Parsy is quite taken with herself, but I’ve yet to see any of this VITAL insight. You’ll see more drama queen posts from parsifal than anything that will help you understand the facts. Her main obsession is a creepy and driving hatred of Orlly Taitz.

[American Constitutionalist]

But in a early hearing a few weeks ago, Judge Carter told Obama's lawyers that in these kinds of cases that it is very rare that this will be dismissed and he told both parties to read the rule book.
We need to find someone to compile all that Judge Carter has said ( the important quotes ) and post it here....
He also said something Monday that he wants to craft his decision so after his decision that whatever party could appeal it.

[American Constitutionalist]

Just pray for a good outcome in this case.

[American Constitutionalist]

So ? that means that he could have rejected the case flat out monday and ruled MTD and the case is over, so your saying, the longer this drags on, the judge is taking his time to review things, the more it might have merit to proceed.

[Cherokee Conservative]

“But if the ruling on dismissal was dragging on, instead of timely (in the view of those initiating the action), they could legally push the discovery even if knowing it won’t be allowed until the dismissal ruling, just to make a point.”

Exactly. Lawyers often file motions knowing they will likely be denied, but they do it because they must do everything they can to fight for their client. When clients are given the big picture of where the case stands and presented with options and likely outcomes, they will sometimes request that their lawyer take certain steps, even if the lawyer advises against it. The client is the boss. Truth is, no one knows why Orlly made this motion do they? It seems the trolls always decide it must be stupidity. The woman can’t be stupid considering her background. That’s not to say she is perfect. I worked for lawyers years ago, and I can testify that they are FAR from perfect....especially without their support staff. I doubt Orlly has many helping her.

[American Constitutionalist]

All discovery herein shall be stayed pending resolution of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ( except for any discovery as to which Plaintiffs can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of Magistrate Judge Nakazato, is necessary for the purpose of opposing the Motion to Dismiss. )

That's a interesting line there, does that mean ? Orly can move ahead with any kind of information in discovery ( for the purpose to not MTD this case, and not the information of discovery about Obama's documents, or testimony ?
So there is limited discovery before the Judge makes his decision, only that ? it pertains only to fight MTD ?
Let me get this right , she can introduce any new information to Judge Carter to counter any claims Obama's lawyers have to dismiss this case before he makes his decision ?

[etraveler13]

I don’t know, my thought is that he is reviewing everything, and considering what he must know is out there. But its pure speculation on my part.

If he had allowed the MTD, the case would be over. The DOJ would have won in getting the case dismissed.

I maintain that the longer he holds out, the more information becomes available. Look what is happening in Hawaii? Now the latest is that the people who created the COLB so widely publicized on the net, have come out and admitted its a fabrication (reported today on FR), so what else will happen while the tension is high. If the judge allows discovery, everyone associated with perpetrating a fraud will be held accountable. So its like a grace period, hucksters and trouble makers have a window of opportunity to come clean, before the court, and evidence convict them for their games...then again, maybe not.

We just have to wait and see...

[Cherokee Conservative]

Do you know if Orlly is or can use this new information about Hawaii fabricating the COLB as discovery to counter the MTD?

[American Constitutionalist]

I have a feeling that we will hear about his decision sometime tomorrow.

[American Constitutionalist]

" but I would take the word of 3 attorneys who currently practice law "

BINGO !

I have learned, don't take legal advice from friends, family, or MR. know it alls , but, find a attorney who actually practices law for legal advice.

[Red Steel]

Here is one of judge Carter’s last comment on the 5th Oct. that I’ve read. Paraphrasing Carter, I may take a day or a year to get back to you as he spoke to the opposing lawyers.

[American Constitutionalist]

I just hope Judge David Carter is very aware of the news today from Hawaii....
Is there anyone who can confirm he knows or is aware of this new information ?

[American Constitutionalist]

(reported today on FR) ??

I am looking for it, can't find it yet.

[Mr. Lucky]

The right to engage in pretrial discovery is heavily presumed in litigation. For a judge to stay discovery from the outset of a case indicates that there is a strong probablity that the case will be dismissed without regard to the factual contention.

[Sibre Fan]

From the 9/16/09 Discovery Stay Order: All discovery herein shall be stayed pending resolution of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ( except for any discovery as to which Plaintiffs can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of Magistrate Judge Nakazato, is necessary for the purpose of opposing the Motion to Dismiss. )

American Constitutionalist: That's a interesting line there, does that mean ? Orly can move ahead with any kind of information in discovery ( for the purpose to not MTD this case, and not the information of discovery about Obama's documents, or testimony ?

The 9/16 Order meant that the only discovery that could be done by either party was discovery that went to the issues set forth in the DOJ's Motion to Dismiss - i.e., discovery related to standing, political question doctrine, etc.

American Constitutionalist: Let me get this right, she can introduce any new information to Judge Carter to counter any claims Obama's lawyers have to dismiss this case before he makes his decision ?

Almost. She (and Kreep) could have conducted discovery on the issues that may have found evidence to counter the arguments re: standing, etc. -- and then included the results of her discovery in her Opposition to the Motion, or, I guess, brought the information to the hearing, and submitted as exhibits. And the DOJ could have conducted discovery against the plaintiffs (i.e., deposing plaintiffs to determine the facts they intended to rely on to support their claim of standing, etc.), and included it in their Reply (or brought to hearing).

However, neither party conducted discovery on the Motion to Dismiss before the hearing. The Motion has now been taking under advisement. So, the window of opportunity has passed.

But, I don't think that Orly made any mistake in not conducting discovery - because there really was no discovery of the defendants she could do that had any bearing on the legal issues raised in the Motion.

[Sibre Fan]

I have a feeling that we will hear about his decision sometime tomorrow.

I think it'll be today or, since Monday is a holiday, he could use the extra day to fine-tune his decision and then issue it on Tuesday. As he said at the hearing, he knows that his decision will be appealed, whichever way he rules. So, I think that he's taking extra care to make sure that it's "air-tight." No one likes to be reversed on appeal. So, I suspect that he really wants to make sure that his decision addresses all the issues, and does so based as much as possible on 9th Circuit and SCOTUS law (because that makes it far more likely that he'll be upheld). And that just takes time.

But - these are just my "rank speculation" thoughts.

[Sibre Fan]

I just hope Judge David Carter is very aware of the news today from Hawaii....
Is there anyone who can confirm he knows or is aware of this new information ?

What "news today"? I can't find it either?

[RebelTex]

“Has any of the cases filed toward uncovering the B.C. ever gotten passed this point where this case is currently at?”

No. All the other cases have been dismissed for lack of ‘Standing’ or ‘Jurisdiction’.

[classified]

Is this case basically at the same stage as the others, lack of “Standing” or “Jurisdiction”? Just curious if this case has made it further passed these prior cases?

[Sibre Fan]

classified: "Has any of the cases filed toward uncovering the B.C. ever gotten passed this point where this case is currently at?"

It depends on what "toward" means. If you mean cases that will bring to light any new information that could, in turn, lead to new information relevant to the "eligibility" claims, the answer is Yes: Strunk v. Dept. of State (D.D.C.) and Allen v. Soetoro (D. Az.)

In both of these cases, the Government moved to dismiss PART of the complaint, but Answered other parts of the complaint. The fact that the Gov. filed Answers means that it acknowledges the court's jurisdiction and does not contest standing. So - those two cases gotten beyond the motion to dismiss/standing issue - at least in part.

Neither case will likely result in production of the BC, but both may result in production of interesting information relating to Stanley Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro.

In fact, the Dept. of State has already issued "new" information in the Allen case. Allen issued several FOIA requests, seeking "alien information" regarding Obama, Dunham, and Soetoro. The DHS initially rejected the requests in total, and Allen appealed. On Sept. 17, the USCIS resolved Allen's appeal as follows:

Obama: USCIS affirmed rejection of request for failure to comply with requirements (of obtaining consent of living person to access records)

Dunham: USCIS conducted a search for alien records relating to Dunham: "With respect to your request for records pertaining to the deceased Stanley Ann Dunham, the USCIS observes that, according to your request and appeal, Ms. Dunham was a native-born U.S. citizen; as such, the USCIS would not be expected to maintain an alien file regarding her. Nonetheless, the USCIS has, at its discretion, conducted a search of the Alien File/Central/Index System for records maintained under, and retrievable by reference 10, that name and possible associated aliases. That search failed to uncover any responsive records."Soetoro: USCIS has commenced a search for his records: "The USCIS has also commenced a search for records maintained under, and retrievable by reference to, the name Lola Soetoro (also deceased). At such time as records pertaining to Lola Soetoroare located, the USCIS will disclose all nonexempt, non.privileged portions of the record to you." As far as I know, the USCIS hasn't yet delivered the Soetoro information, but it will be interesting to see when it does.

A further note. In the answers to both of these complaints, the DHS and DOS has gone on official record (subject to Rule 11 sanctions, etc.)
(b) denying that Obama was born in Kenya - or anywhere other than Hawaii;
(b) denying that Soetoro ever adopted Obama;
(c) denying that Obama was ever an Indonesian citizen; and
(d) denying that Obama is not a "natural born citizen."

As to some other allegations in the complaints, the DHS/DOS responded that they "lack[] knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in this paragraph."