Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Phillip Berg Lawsuit’

Finaly some media coverage!

 

CQ

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/obama-and-dnc-motion-for-protective-order-staying-discovery-pending-decision-obama-is-indonesian-obama-is-an-illegal-alien/

Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

ORDER

AND NOW, THIS ___ DAY OF ___________, 2008, upon consideration of the
Motion of Defendants Democratic National Committee and Senator Barack Obama for
Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending Decision On Dispositive Motion, and of the
submissions of the parties relating thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motion is
GRANTED.

Surrick. J.

DMEAST #10127194 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 2 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

MOTION OF DEFENDANTS
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE AND
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON DISPOSITIVE MOTION
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1), defendants Democratic National Committee
and Senator Barack Obama respectfully move the Court for a protective order staying all
discovery in this action pending the Court’s decision on defendants’ motion to dismiss
the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1), on October 6, 2008, counsel for defendants
conferred with plaintiff about agreeing to stay or defer discovery, including deferring
responses to the discovery requests already served by plaintiff (attached as Exhibit A
hereto). Plaintiff refused to consent to any such stay or deferral.

DMEAST #10127157 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 3 of 10

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1, accompanying this Motion is a Brief in Support of

Motion for Protective Order and a proposed Protective Order.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.

Dated: October 6, 2008
John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Attorney I.D. PA 54279
BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL,
LLP
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103

(215) 864-8603
(215) 864-9125 (Fax)
lavellej@ballardspahr.com

Of counsel:

Joseph E. Sandler
General Counsel, Democratic National Committee
SANDLER, REIFF & YOUNG, P.C.
300 M Street, S.E. #1102
Washington, D.C. 20003
Telephone: (202) 479-1111
Fax: (202) 479-1115

Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com

Attorneys for Defendants
Senator Barack Obama and
Democratic National Committee

DMEAST #10127157 v1

2
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 4 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

BRIEF OF DEFENDANT DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
AND DEFENDANT SENATOR BARACK OBAMA
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON
DISPOSITIVE MOTION
Defendants Democratic National Committee and Senator Barack Obama submit
this Brief in support of their Motion for Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending
Decision on Dispositive Motion. Plaintiff has served extensive discovery requests on
defendants. As noted in Defendants’ Brief in Support of their Motion to Dismiss, this
lawsuit is entirely without merit and plaintiffs’ allegations are patently false. Defendants
have moved to dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to
state a claim. That motion presents solely issues of law; no discovery is needed in order
to resolve the motion. If the motion is granted, it will dispose of the entire action,
obviating the need for the burdensome discovery sought by plaintiff. A protective order
staying discovery is therefore warranted.

DMEAST #10127159 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 5 of 10

I. Procedural Background
In his Complaint, plaintiff Berg alleges that Senator Barack Obama, the
Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States, is not eligible to serve as
President under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution because, Mr. Berg alleges
(falsely), Senator Obamais purportedly not a natural-born citizen. Complaint ¶3. Mr.
Berg seeks a declaratory judgment that Senator Obama is ineligible to run for President;
an injunction barring Senator Obama from running for that office; and an injunction
barring the DNC from nominating him.

On September 15, 2008, plaintiff Berg served on Senator Obama’s office a
request for production of seventeen different categories of documents, including copies of
all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests for financial aid, college
and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being
vetted.” Plaintiff also served 56 requests for admission on Senator Obama. On that same
date, plaintiff served on the DNC 27 requests for admission and requests for production
of five categories of documents, including all documents in the possession of the DNC
relating to Senator Obama.1

On September 24, 2008, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, on the grounds that, as a
matter of law, plaintiff has no standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for
President of the U.S. and has no federal cause of action.

True and correct copies of these discovery requests are attached as Exhibit A hereto.

DMEAST #10127159 v1

2
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 6 of 10

II. Discussion
Rule 26(c)(1) authorizes the Court to enter a protective order to protect a party
“from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense,” including an
order forbidding the discovery or specifying terms for discovery. “While the court should
not automatically stay discovery because a motion to dismiss has been filed, ‘a stay is
proper where the likelihood that such motion may result in a narrowing or an outright
elimination of discovery outweighs the likely harm to be produced by the delay.’” 19th
St. Baptist Church v. St. Peters Episcopal Church, 190 F.R.D. 345, 349 (E.D. Pa. 2000),
quoting Weisman v. Mediq, Inc., 1955 WL 273678, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5900 *2 (E.D.
Pa. 1995). “Where a pending motion to dismiss may dispose of the entire action and
where discovery is not needed to rule on such motion, the balance generally favors
granting a motion to stay.” Weisman, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS at *5.

In Weisman, in which this Court found that a motion to dismiss could be decided
on the pleadings, and could be decided in a relatively short time period, the Court granted
a stay of discovery. Similarly, in Norfolk Southern Rwy Co. v. Power Source Supply,
Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15306 (W.D. Pa. 2007), defendant filed a motion to dismiss
based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction; plaintiff served interrogatories and document
requests while that motion was pending. The court granted defendant’s motion for a
protective order staying discovery, ruling that, “where, as here, an objection to the
Court’s jurisdiction made under Rule 12 might compel the dismissal of an entire action,
the Court finds that considerations of fairness and efficiency suggest the prudence of
limiting discovery to those facts necessary to resolve the motion. Because the Parties in
this matter have fully briefed the jurisdiction issue and await only the Court’s ruling,

DMEAST #10127159 v1

3
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 7 of 10

discovery in this case shall be stayed and Defendant protected from the requests that
Plaintiff has already propounded.” Id. at *4.

In this case, as in Weisman and Norfolk Southern Rwy., defendants’ pending
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction would dispose of the entire
action. The motion does not involve any disputed issues of fact: defendants contend that,
as a matter of law, plaintiff lacks standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate
for President and that there is no federal cause of action that could serve as a means for
such a challenge. Thus, discovery is not needed in order to rule on the motion. In these
circumstances, a stay of discovery is warranted and appropriate.

DMEAST #10127159 v1

4
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 8 of 10

CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, the Court should grant the motion of defendants
DNC and Senator Barack Obama for a protective order staying discovery pending a

decision on their motion to dismiss.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Dated: October 6, 2008 John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Attorney I.D. PA 54279
BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL,
LLP
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 864-8603
(215) 864-9125 (Fax)
lavellej@ballardspahr.com
Of counsel:
Joseph E. Sandler

PLEASE TAKE NOTE: EMPHASIS ADDED TO POINT OUT THE ATTY FOR THE DNC AND OBAMA IS ALSO THE SAME ATTY WHO REPRESENTS LOUIS FARRAKKAN AND THE NATION OF ISLAM AMONG OTHER QUESTIONABLE CLIENTS! COINCIDENCE?? DOUBTFULL!

General Counsel, Democratic National Committee
SANDLER, REIFF & YOUNG, P.C.
300 M Street, S.E. #1102
Washington, D.C. 20003
Telephone: (202) 479-1111
Fax: (202) 479-1115  (Emphasis added)

Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com

Attorneys for Defendants
Senator Barack Obama and
Democratic National Committee

DMEAST #10127159 v1

5
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 9 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 26.1(F)

Undersigned counsel for Defendants Democratic National Committee and Senator

Barack Obamahereby certifies pursuant to Local Rule 26.1(f) that the parties, after reasonable

effort, are unable to resolve the dispute that is the subject matter of Defendants’ Motion for

Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending Decision On Dispositive Motion.

/s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.

Dated: October 6, 2008
John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Attorney I.D. PA 54279
BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103

(215) 864-8603
(215) 864-9125 (Fax)
lavellej@ballardspahr.com

DMEAST #10127199 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 10 of 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this day, a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Defendant Democratic National Committee’s and Defendant Senator Barack Obama’s
Motion for a Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending Decision on Dispositive Motion
and Brief in Support thereof was served by First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, upon the
following:

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 09867

Plaintiff

Dated: October 6, 2008 /s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.
John P. Lavelle, Jr.

DMEAST #10127407 v1

Jeez! Am I the only one who thinks it’s getting too deep here? I mean instead of just showing the proof Obama and the DNC filed a motion to dismiss and then when Berg filed for discoverey ect. they request an order to delay any and all discovery until after the motion to dismiss has been ruled on. In other words ( I’m no lawyer) they don’t want to respond or show proof. They filed to dismiss on grounds they don’t think Berg has a case (yeah right) and when berg filed to force discovery (in other words show the documents) they ask the court to protect them from having to show proof until they get the judge to dismiss the case so they won’t have to.

BULLSHIT! Show us the proof you fucking cowards! All this posturing and begging the court to do his bidding is just too much! They are wasting time and resources instead of simply digging out the documents requested and putting his money where his mouth is so to speak! For crying out loud! He wants the top job in the country and he gets insulted and asks for special treatment, special protection from the rules and laws the rest of us have to live by every time anyone questions him on qualifications, experience, eligibility, specific definitions of his “Hope” and “Change” you know little things like that.

I recently read a comment about how we should all just fall on our knees and worship the “great leader” instead of wasting time on such tiny, little technicalities. I suppose the Constitution is just a technicality then?

Read Full Post »

Citizen Wells has a new post with some very revealing information about the vetting process where it concerns elected officials.

We have received a lot of question asking “How did Obama get this far, he must have had background checks as he is a U.S. Senator.”

However, this is inaccurate according to Special Agent-in-Charge: C. Frank Figliuzzi of the Cleveland FBI. Background checks are not performed on those elected, once elected they work for Congress and are handed a secret clearance. See below:

This is a conversation between the Special Agent-in-Charge: C. Frank Figliuzzi of the Cleveland FBI and Mike Trivisonno on the Mike Trivisonno Show, WTAM 1100, 7/02/08, Hr. 2.

Caller – Do they perform background checks on candidates and fellows who are in Congress and the Senate and perhaps potential presidential candidates?.

FBI – The short answer is no, no we don’t, but they’re given top secret clearances because they’re members of Congress, or Senators, or even higher ranking officials.

Host – Time out. There are no background checks from the FBI on the people that lead the country, the United States of America?.

FBI – Let me emphasize, elected officials. This is a democracy, the people have elected an official to represent them in Washington, and we do not routinely run background checks on those people.

Host – Even people running for president of the United States of America?.

FBI – That’s correct.

Host – That’s a little weird

FBI – Well, its part of democracy, its part of what the American people want, they want to be able to vote for somebody to represent them in Washington and they don’t want us to get in the way of that and we have no predilection to get in the way of that.

Host – Yeah, but what if they’re voting for a bad person and they don’t know that person is bad, do you follow me?. I’m saying, if the guy’s got a background and maybe he’s involved with some people that he shouldn’t be involved with, shouldn’t we know that as voters?.

FBI – Well, I think you’d agree that the American political process is about as rigorous as you’ll ever see and if there’s dirt back there, probably the opponent is gonna get it out probably before anyone else will.

Host – Now I know why you’re the head of the FBI, they’re good, aren’t they?.”

Read the whole post for more here.   http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/09/20/philip-j-berg-lawsuit-obamacrimescom-colb-update-comments-insights-fbi-response-special-agent-in-charge-background-checks-elected-officials-american-political-process-berg-website-comments/

Now isn’t that an interesting little tidbit? Nobody does background checks or vetting in an official capacity on elected officials even candidates for President of the United States!

They figure it’s the discretion of the voters and that political campaigns will expose and vet candidates potential problems. In other words the people voted for them it’s up to them to make sure of who and what they really are.

So all the people out there saying the Birth Certificate thing is a non issue because he would have been checked out before running I guess that’s not the case at all. I suppose next they will “justify” why Obama should not have to show proof that he’s eligible for the job.

McCain faced similar questions and had at least the consideration for his supporters, the country and his own reputation to show proof and put the matter to rest. Will Obama do the same? Or will he continue to show us the fake COLB on his website even though it’s been examined and shown to be a forgery. Yet another crime that is going unpunished and “justified”!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Obama supporters may never really catch on to what is happening here. They still insist this is all about Hillary and punishment, revenge all that stuff. Well to an extent they may be right but for the wrong reasons.

For myself and most PUMAS I know this has not been about Hillary for a long time. At least not entirely.

This is about R E S P E C T. Respect for our candidate, respect for all 18 million Clinton supporters and respect for Democracy, fair elections, one voice, one vote. We the people are not just the people who love Obama and it is highly insulting and disrespectful to act as though they are the only people who matter.

We saw the disrespect all around us and we have watched it grow and fester becoming so vile that many of us will never forget it. We watched as they rigged the primaries and pressured and prodded and pushed our candidate out with a parade of Super Delegate endorsements meant to push the idea that Senator Clinton had no chance and no real support in the party.

We saw the terrible way she was treated by the media who used every opportunity possible to either criticize her looks, laugh, voice and we heard and read many documented sexist comments like it was a free for all on any and all traits female. We also saw that the leadership of the DNC stood by and did absolutely nothing to stop it or to even speak out against that sort of treatment for a fellow Democrat, a human being.

We saw them praise Obama constantly, bury negative stories if they bothered to report them at all. They only reported the Rev. Wright story after the youtube clips were getting a lot of play and they decided they would look like the fools and shills they truly are if they didn’t jump on the bandwagon. Even then so many of the MSM and the DNC went to great lengths to try and downplay and deflate the story.

They had known about it for over a year but had held back on those journalistic standards we hear so much about for one reason. They loved their rock-star-money-machine more than their standards. Same with the DNC leadership.

They buried the Edwards story for over a year also yet they had absolutely no problem earlier this year reporting on McCain’s supposed “affair” with the lobbyist which was false. They refuse to report or investigate the Larry Sinclair story as well even though the “alleged former lover” has repeatedly spoken out to tell his version of what happened. I guess the lobbyist, who by the way denied any inappropriate relationship was a more juicy story? True or not the investigated and reported on that but The One is OFF LIMITS.

 They reported too that certain groups were calling for McCain to prove his citizenship and that he was qualified to be the president. They reported on the lawsuit that was filed and had no issues of whether or not they should without knowing if it was false or not. They still haven’t reported on the lawsuit filed by Atty.  Philip Berg declaring Obama may not be constitutionally qualified and asking him to prove that he is, the very same argument the other groups were making about McCain as they don’t want to “smear without knowing” yet this same protection was not afforded to smears against Hillary Clinton, John McCain or more recently Sarah Palin.

More even than all this is the treatment of Hillary supporters by Obama supporters and even Obama surrogates and campaign workers. We have been subjected to some of the most disgusting underhanded thug tactics and  threats. We have been constantly plagued with their angry, demanding posts on every blog or forum we visit (even our own) and ceremoniously kicked out of many sites that were supposedly Democratic sites like Move on, Democratic Underground, HuffPo, Talk Left and even the Official DNC Blogs were full of attack bots. 

You name it they did everything they could to purge us from their ranks and then they were incensed that we were not crazy about holding hands and singing Kumbyya with them after the farce that was the primaries and then the even more ridiculous spectacle that was the Convention.

They have heaped abuse on us, called us racists, bitter, old, spiteful and pretty much everything else they could think of. They said PUMAS were not real, they were really republicans, plants.

They have nothing but scorn for PUMAS and they are not bashful about getting in your face to say so. They have spent the better part of the last two years telling us we did not matter, we weren’t needed and in the same breath that we had damn well better fall in line.

News Flash! It ain’tgonna happen. We are not children to be told what to do and furthermore we will not reward the despicable behaviour that landed us in this situation. Most of us are quite sure that if we let the atrocities that took place stand and allow an outcome that was determined by false and in many cases illegal and imoral methods we will only suffer worse the next time around.

Every time we have to put up with Obama supporters infiltrating our blogs and hijacking our threads with their own agenda and their angry, threatening posts many of us move one step closer to voting for McCain.

Every time we see and hear Obama supporters attacking Sarah Palin not for the issues or her political views, (admittedly there is a lot there to go after as she is a republican and a lot of issues are not exactly in line with Dems) but instead they attack her for her looks, her children, is the last one hers? Her daughters? Her daughter’s with her son? Did she fake pregnancy with a pregnancy suit? Is it somehow her fault that her son was born with Downs Syndrome?  Her daughter is pregnant! She should have had an abortion and kept it quiet. Yes as if that’s perfectly in line with Sarah’s Pro-Life, Pro-Family values.

The more that Obama supporters continue to act like high school bullies and make completely sexist attacks on Sarah Palin instead of focusing on actual issues that have nothing to do with gender the closer we move toward voting for McCain.

The more they scream and rail and tell us we had better fall in line and do as they say the farther away from ever doing that we get.

This is about respect and this is about a lesson our party needs to learn. Many of us know what we must do. We don’t like it one bit. We have far less in common with the republican party than we do the Democratic party or at least the remnants of it.

The core principals and ideals that our party once stood for have been compromised by the rotten, festering wound that is the Move On crowd. The hyper-radical wing that has taken over our party. We may not have much in common with the republicans but we are realizing more and more that we need to do whatever is necessary to teach out party a sorely needed lesson. They cannot take us or our votes for granted. We must never allow this type of corrupt leadership to prosper under the name of our great party. We must take it back and we must never let their treachery stand or be sanctioned for the sake of all we hold dear.

We know what we must do and Obama supporters and Sarah Palin just make it a little bit easier. Kind of like the spoonful of sugar making the bad tasting medicine go down smoother. We will do what we must and the DNC and their leadership will be tasting the foul taste of our remedy. I hope they gag and cry over every minute of it. Tough love is sometimes a necessary thing in order to keep things from getting any further out of hand. PUMAS will administer it with help from the republicans and most of middle America.

Maybe we should start a fund for councilors to be on hand on November 5th to console them after their loss lesson.

Read Full Post »