For the record this lawsuit, “Hollister v Soetoro” was dismissed by the US District Court for the District of Columbia and the judge imposed a reprimand sanction on the plaintiff’s attorney for filing a “frivolous” lawsuit. The dismissal was upheld by the US Court of Appeals.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 09-5080 September Term 2009
08-cv-02254
Filed On: March 22, 2010
Gregory S. Hollister,
Appellant
v.
Barry Soetoro, in his capacity as a natural
person; de facto President in posse; and as de
jure President in posse, also known as Barack
Obama, et al.,
Appellees
J U D G M E N T
These consolidated appeals were considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties.
See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s orders filed March 5, 2009, and March 24, 2009, be affirmed. The district court correctly dismissed the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Hollister v. Soetoro, 601 F. Supp. 2d 179 (D.D.C. 2009).
Moreover, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that counsel had violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2) and in imposing a reprimand as the
sanction for his part in preparing, filing, and prosecuting a legally frivolous complaint.
Hollister v. Soetoro, 258 F.R.D. 1 (D.D.C. 2009). Appellants have provided no reasonable basis for questioning the impartiality of the district court judge. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28745277/HOLLISTER-v-SOETORO-PER-CURIAM-JUDGMENT-filed-Lower-Court-Affirmed-Transport-Room
Shhhhhh. You're going to spoil their fun.
Isn't this the same judge who said the plaintiff said "[it has not been proven] that Mr. Obama is a native-born American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be president?"
Interesting that the judge would twist "Natural Born" citizen (which is what the plaintiff states in the lawsuit) to "Native-born American citizen which is NOT the requirement"
Isn't this the same case that the judge refused to sanction Atny Hemenway under rule 11 which would have given him (Hemenway) the all elusive "standing" in the court of appeals?
Oh yeah, that lower court decision!
For the record Judge Robertson reconsidered his previous more severe sanction and dropped the punishment to just the reprimand. Eligibility activists contend that the more severe sanction could have opened the door for Hemenway to request discovery of Obama’s HI vital records to prove that his lawsuit was not frivolous.
The judge also explicitly stated that he had made no ruling regarding Hemenway’s contentions that Obama was not NBC and the explicitly said he did not reach that issue as he had ruled that Hollister “failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted.” As with the other 66 dismissed cases you love to cite, the issue of Obama’s NBC statue has never been litigated on the merits.
Judge Rogerson:
“I have said nothing, and have nothing to say, about the
merits of the “natural born Citizen” question that Messrs.
Hemenway, Berg, et al., have sought to present here. I have no business addressing the merits, because, having found that Mr. Hemenway’s interpleader suit failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, I have dismissed it.”