| 16th
Amendment - The Sixteenth Amendment Bill Benson Litigation Make a Donation JEFFREY
A. DICKSTEIN
Attorney at Law 500 W. Bradley Rd., C-208 Fox Point, WI 53217 16th Amendment - The Sixteenth Amendment Bill Benson
Litigation
In this historic 16th Amendment litigation, the Government has sued Bill Benson seeking an injunction prohibiting him from falsely telling people the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was not ratified and therefore people are not required to file an income tax return. The Government contends it is entitled to an injunction because Benson is promoting an abusive tax shelter, conduct made subject to a penalty per 26 U.S.C. Section 6700. All of the pleadings filed in the case can be found here. In 1894 Congress passed an income tax act very similar to the current income tax law. That law was challenged on the basis that a tax on income is a direct tax, the United States Constitution requires direct taxes to be apportioned, and the act passed by Congress was not apportioned. The United States Supreme Court agreed and held the income tax act was unconstitutional in Pollock v. Farmer's Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429, aff. reh., 158 U.S. 601 (1895). In 1909 President Taft called a special session of Congress. Taft asked Congress to propose a constitutional amendment to overcome the Supreme Court's Pollock decision. Congress proposed the Sixteenth Amendment, which was then sent to the states for ratification by Secretary of State Knox. Certificates of Ratification were sent back to Knox, but the language on the certificates differed from the 16th Amendment language passed by Congress. Knox sent the certificates to the Solicitor of the United States and asked for a legal opinion as to whether the states had ratified the proposed Sixteenth Amendment. The Solicitor noted the differences between what Congress proposed and the states ratified, and presumed, that because states do not have the authority to alter a proposed Constitutional amendment, that none did. He concluded, therefore, that the differences in language were nothing more than minor clerical errors in the preparation of the Certificates of Ratification. Knox then declared the 16th Amendment had been ratified. The legislative journals conclusively establish, that despite not having the power to do so, several states intentionally modified the language of the proposed amendment. The presumption relied upon by the Solicitor was wrong! Benson discovered other discrepancies too. He wrote and published a book on what he discovered, The Law That Never Was, available on his web site at http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com. Benson contends that less than thirty-six states actually ratified the proposed Sixteenth Amendment. In the absence of the 16th Amendment, the current income tax is an unapportioned direct tax, and is just as unconstitutional today as it was in 1894. Since 1985 Benson tells everyone who will listen about what he found, and urges people to exercise their First Amendment rights to rectify the situation. Benson's message is gaining acceptance in the marketplace of ideas. The Government now seeks to silence him. Many people ask why, if the 16th Amendment created no new taxing power, as stated by the Supreme Court in Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916), it is necessary to litigate whether the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified? The Supreme Court ruled Pollock that the income tax enacted by Congress in 1894 was a direct tax, the act passed by congress wasn't apportioned, and therefore the tax was unconstitutional. The decision wasn't unanimous. The court was split five to four. Those in the minority believed a tax on income was not a direct tax, but an indirect, excise tax. One of the dissenters was associate justice White. Notwithstanding the decision was split five to four, the result was that the constitutional requirement that direct taxes be apportioned was upheld. To overcome the holding of Pollock, Congress proposed the 16th Amendment. It was allegedly ratified in 1913. Subsequent to the alleged ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court does not agree on exactly what the 16th Amendment did:
The issues in Bill Benson's case, however, transcend whether or not the 16th Amendment was ratified. More important is the issue that the government believes it can take a position and punish someone who disagrees with that position, without affording the person any opportunity to prove the government's position is wrong. The government, unable to refute Bill Benson's facts conclusively establishing less than three-fourths of the states voted to ratify the proposed amendment, objected to the facts on the grounds they were irrelevant, immaterial and scandalous. The court agreed, and issued an order that Bill Benson is not to be allowed to defend based upon the truth. If this posture is allowed to stand, every semblance of justice in America will be trashed. It is inconceivable that the Star Chamber becomes again the type of court justice to be utilized to resolve disputes between the people and the government. Equally disturbing is the position of the federal government that it has the unfettered right to obtain the names and addresses of any person who so much as ordered Benson's material, read it or possesses it. The pleadings, filed by the government, make it perfectly clear the government intends to obtain the names and investigate any person whose name they obtain. The issue of taxation and the Sixteenth Amendment is a political question. We, as Americans, supposedly have an inalienable right to the free debate of these issues without government interference. We, as Americans, supposedly have the right to require the government to answer our questions. We, as Americans, supposedly have the right to require the government to prove its allegations against us in Court. We, as Americans, supposedly have the right, when charged with a crime, to present a defense. To counter the government's efforts to destroy our First Amendment rights, three people have intervened in the Benson litigation. They intervened as John Doe I, John Doe II and Jane Roe to protect their names from the government. They are demanding a protective order preventing the government from obtaining their names, as well as, the names of anyone else involved in this important political debate on the Sixteenth Amendment. If we don't take a stand, together, we lose. It's that simple. The Bill Benson litigation is, perhaps, the single most important litigation in the court today. The issues affect YOU, just as much as they affect Bill Benson. I am representing Bill Benson and the three interveners for free. They do not have funds to prosecute and defend their rights in this 16th Amendment litigation. I am asking for your donations to keep me in housing and with food and supplies while this litigation is pending. Whether you agree with Bill Benson or not, this litigation is not about one of us being right or wrong. This litigation is about preserving YOUR freedom. It is about your right to even have an opinion and express it without fear of government retaliation. Our country is in serious distress, as we now have East German like checkpoints at our airports, and wholesale government disrespect of, and contempt for, our Constitution. Ben Franklin said during another time of intolerable governmental action: "We must all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately." Please support this litigation and make a donation to support those who have taken a front line position to defend liberty for all of us. Click here to Make a Donation. Also, please pass along the link to this case to your family and friends. United
States District Court
|
USA v. Benson Assigned to: Honorable Mark Filip Demand: $0 Cause: 28:7402 Refund of Taxes |
Date Filed: 11/16/2004 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 870 Tax Suit: Taxes Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff |
| Plaintiff | ||
| United States of America | represented by | Robert D. Metcalfe United States Department of Justice Post Office 7238 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 (202) 514-6540 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel D Brooks United States Attorney's Office (NDIL) 219 South Dearborn Street Suite 500 Chicago, IL 60604 (312) 353-5342 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED |
| V. |
||
| Defendant | ||
| William J Benson | represented by | Jeffrey A. Dickstein Attorney at Law 500 W. Bradley Road C-208 Fox Point, WI 53217 414-446-4264 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED |
| Intervener Defendant | ||
| John Doe, I | represented by | Jeffrey A. Dickstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED |
| Intervener Defendant | ||
| John Doe, II | represented by | Jeffrey A. Dickstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED |
| Intervener Defendant | ||
| Jane Roe | represented by | Jeffrey A. Dickstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED |
Date Filed |
# |
Docket Text |
| 11/16/2004 | 1 | COMPLAINT
for permanent injunction and other relief - Civil cover sheet - (
Summons(es), original and one copy, issued.) (Documents: 1-1 and 1-2) (ar) (Entered: 11/17/2004) |
| 11/16/2004 | 2 | MOTION by plaintiff USA for preliminary injunction ; Memorandum of law in support (Attachments) (1 vol.) (ar) (Entered: 11/17/2004) |
| 11/23/2004 | 3 | MINUTE ORDER of 11/23/04 by Hon. Mark Filip: Status hearing is set for 01/27/05 at 9:30 a.m. and parties are to report the following: (1) possibility of settlement in the case; (2) if no possibility of settlement exists, the nature and length of discovery necessary to get the case ready for trial. Plaintiff is to advise all other parties of the court's action herein. Lead counsel is directed to appear at this status hearing. Parties to prepare and submit a joint status report within two days prior to status. (See Judge's web page for status report.) Mailed notice (cdy) (Entered: 11/24/2004) |
| 01/20/2005 | 4 | APPLICATION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of William J Benson by Jeffrey A. Dickstein; Order entered granting leave by Mark Filip. Filing fee $50 paid, receipt number 0633528. (cdy, ) (Entered: 01/24/2005) |
| 01/24/2005 | 5 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip : Status hearing reset for 2/14/2005 at 09:30 AM. By agreement of the parties,time for defendant to answer or otherwise plead is extended to and including 2/7/05. (Notified counsel by telephone) (tbk, ) (Entered: 01/24/2005) |
| 02/07/2005 | 6 | MOTION by defendant William J Benson to dismiss plaintiff's complaint and for preliminary injunction for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a cliam upon which relief can be granted. (cdy, ) (Entered: 02/09/2005) |
| 02/10/2005 | 7 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip :
Status
hearing reset for 2/17/2005 at 10:00 AM. |
| 02/15/2005 | 8 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip : Status hearing reset for 2/24/2005 at 10:00 AM. (Notified parties by telephone) (tbk, ) (Entered: 02/15/2005) |
| 02/23/2005 | 9 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip : Defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint and motion for preliminary injunction for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is stricken without prejudice for failure to comply with the local rules. Judical staff mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 02/23/2005) |
| 02/24/2005 | 10 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip : Status hearing held on 2/24/2005. Defendant given to and including 3/10/05 in which to file motion to dismiss. Plaintiff given until 3/24/05 to respond to motion to dismiss. Defendant given until 3/31/05 to reply. Ruling on motion to dismiss will be by mail. Judical staff mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 02/24/2005) |
| 03/02/2005 | 11 | MOTION by defendant William J Benson to dismiss plaintiff's complaint and motion for preliminary injunction for lack of subject matter jurisdiction for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (cdy, ) (Entered: 03/04/2005) |
| 03/11/2005 | 12 | BRIEF by plaintiff in opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss 11. (mjc, ) (Entered: 03/15/2005) |
| 04/19/2005 | 13 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Enter memorandum opinion and order: defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint of the United States 11 is denied. Status hearing set for 5/4/2005 at 09:30 a.m. Mailed notice. (cdy, ) (Entered: 04/21/2005) |
| 04/19/2005 | 14 | MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order. Signed by Judge Mark Filip on 4/19/2005.(cdy, ) (Entered: 04/21/2005) |
| 04/29/2005 | 15 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Status hearing reset for 5/5/2005 at 10:30 AM. Judicial staff mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 04/29/2005) |
| 05/05/2005 | 16 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Status hearing reset for 5/19/2005 at 10:30 AM. Judicial staff mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 05/05/2005) |
| 05/19/2005 | 17 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Status hearing held on 5/19/2005. Defendant is given to and including 6/3/05 in which to answer the complaint. Set deadlines as to motion for preliminary injunction 2; Responses due by 6/3/2005. Replies due by 6/17/2005. Status hearing continued to 6/30/2005 at 10:00 AM. Judicial staff mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 05/19/2005) |
| 06/07/2005 | 19 | MOTION by defendant William J Benson for leave to file, out of time, his answer to complaint and opposition to motion for preliminary injunction. (cdy, ) (Entered: 06/13/2005) |
| 06/07/2005 | 20 | ANSWER to Complaint for permanent injunction and other relief and request for trial by jury by William J Benson.(cdy, ) (Entered: 06/13/2005) |
| 06/07/2005 | 21 | OPPOSITION by William J Benson to United States motion for preliminary injunction. (cdy, ) (Entered: 06/13/2005) |
| 06/08/2005 | 18 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Defendant's uncontested motion for leave to file, out of time, his answer to complaint and opposion to motion for preliminary injunction 2, instanter, is granted. Mailed notice. (cdy, ) (Entered: 06/09/2005) |
| 06/17/2005 | 22 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip : Defendant is instructed to please submit a short letter brief no later than June 24, 2005, explaining what evidence, if any, Defendant would adduce at a hearing concerning the alleged invalidity of the Sixteenth Amendment that is not contained with The Law That Never Was. Mailed notice (ntf, ) (Entered: 06/20/2005) |
| 06/20/2005 | 23 | REPLY BRIEF by plaintiff United States of America. (mjc, ) (Entered: 06/23/2005) |
| 06/20/2005 | 24 | CERTIFICATE of Service by United States of America regarding preliminary injunction. (mjc, ) (Entered: 06/23/2005) |
| 06/29/2005 | 27 | SHORT BRIEF by William J Benson explaining evidence of non-ratification of 16th amendment not contained in the law that never was. (cdy, ) Modified on 7/1/2005 (cdy, ). (Entered: 07/01/2005) |
| 06/29/2005 | 28 | MOTION by defendant William J Benson for leave to file, out of time, his letter brief as ordered by the Court. (cdy, ) (Entered: 07/01/2005) |
| 06/29/2005 | 30 | MOTION by defendant William J Benson for leave to file, out of time, his letter brief as ordered by the court. (cdy, ) (Entered: 07/05/2005) |
| 06/29/2005 | 31 | SHORT BRIEF by William J Benson explaining evidence on non-ratification of 16th amendment not contained in the law that never was. (cdy, ) (Entered: 07/05/2005) |
| 06/30/2005 | 25 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Status hearing held on 6/30/2005, Status hearing set for 9/8/2005 at 09:30 AM. Judicial staff mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 06/30/2005) |
| 06/30/2005 | 26 | MINUTE
entry
before Judge Mark Filip: Status
hearing held. The Government's Motion for Preliminary Injunction 11
is stricken without prejudice. USA given to and including 7/21/05 to
file motion for summary judgment with accompanying request for
injunctive relief and supporting brief which may be filed in excess of
fifteen pages but no more than 30. Defendant Benson given until 8/22/05
to file response brief to motion for summary judgment. USA's reply
brief
due by 9/5/05. Defendant Benson given to and including 7/14/05 in which
to file brief regarding history on ratification of the Sixteenth
Amendment. Said brief to be no more than 25 pages. The Court further
notes that the issue of whether the Sixteenth Amendment was properly
ratified or not will not be the subject of the hearing, but rather that
Mr. Benson will be given an opportunity to explain why he did not have
the requisite illicit state of mind concerning the alleged statements,
as explained further during the last status. Mailed notices. |
| 07/01/2005 | 29 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip : MOTION by Defendant William J Benson for leave to file 28, out of time, his letter brief as ordered by the court is Granted. No notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 07/01/2005) |
| 07/12/2005 | 33 | UNCONTESTED MOTION by defendant William J Benson to extend briefing schedule by two weeks (cdy, ) (Entered: 07/14/2005) |
| 07/13/2005 | 32 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: MOTION by Defendant William J Benson for leave to file 30 His letter brief out of time is granted. NO notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 07/13/2005) |
| 07/14/2005 | 34 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Defendant's uncontested motion to extend briefing schedule is granted. The government is given to August 4, 2005 to file a motion for summary judgment and injunctive relief with supporting memoranda. Defendant's response is due September 5, 2005. Reply is due September 19, 2005. Defendant is given to July 28, 2005 to file his Sixteenth Amendment brief. Mailed notice (cdy, ) (Entered: 07/18/2005) |
| 08/01/2005 | 35 | THE LAW THAT NEVER WAS BRIEF by William J Benson (cdy, ) (Entered: 08/03/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 36 | NOTICE by United States of America (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 37 | MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America for summary judgment (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 38 | RULE 56.1 Statement by United States of America regarding motion for summary judgment 37 (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 39 | MEMORANDUM by United States of America in Support of motion for summary judgment 37 (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 40 | DECLARATION of IRS Revenue Agent Paul Ponzo regarding motion for summary judgment 37 by United States of America (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Part 1# 2 Part 2# 3 Part 3# 4 Part 4# 5 Part 5# 6 Part 6# 7 Part 7)(Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 41 |
DECLARATION of Judithe K. Howell regarding motion for summary judgment 37 by United States of America (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 42 | DECLARATION of Barbara Cantrell regarding motion for summary judgment 37 by United States of America (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/04/2005 | 43 | CERTIFICATE of Service by Robert D. Metcalfe on behalf of United States of America regarding declaration 40, MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America for summary judgment 37, memorandum in support of motion 39, Rule 56 statement 38, declaration 41, declaration 42, notice of filing 36 (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/04/2005) |
| 08/23/2005 | 45 | UNCONTESTED MOTION by defendant William J Benson to extend time to file response to motion for summary judgment. (cdy, ) (Entered: 08/25/2005) |
| 08/24/2005 | 44 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Defendant's uncontested motion to extend time to file response to Government's motion for summary judgment 37 is granted to and including 10/17/05. Government's reply extended to and including 11/17/05. Mailed notice (cdy, ) (Entered: 08/25/2005) |
| 10/14/2005 | 47 | MOTION by Defendant William J Benson to extend time to file response to motion for summary judgment. (cdy, ) (Entered: 10/21/2005) |
| 10/18/2005 | 46 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Defendant's contested motion to extend time to file response to motion for summary judgment is granted in part. Defendant is given an extension of time to file response to and including 12/1/05 only. The issue may be revisited then as conditions dictate. Mailed notice (cdy, ) (Entered: 10/19/2005) |
| 12/01/2005 | 48 | INCORRECT DOCUMENT LINKED. RULE 56 Local Rule 56.1 Statement of Material Facts (Dickstein, Jeffrey) Modified on 12/2/2005 (cem, ). Additional attachment(s) added on 12/2/2005 (cem, ). (Entered: 12/01/2005) |
| 12/01/2005 | 49 | DECLARATION of Jeffrey A. Dickstein by William J Benson (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 12/01/2005) |
| 12/01/2005 | 50 | MEMORANDUM by William J Benson in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 12/01/2005) |
| 12/01/2005 | 51 | CERTIFICATE by William J Benson Certificate of Service of Daniel Treuden (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 12/01/2005) |
| 12/02/2005 | 52 | NOTICE of Correction regarding Rule 56 statement 48. (The title of the document does not match the text of the entry. Entry and pdf will be replaced with a pdf stating "Incorrect Document Linked." Attorney to re-file document.) (cem, ) (Entered: 12/02/2005) |
| 12/02/2005 | 53 | RULE 56 Local Rule 56.1 Statement with corrected title (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 12/02/2005) |
| 12/19/2005 | 54 | RESPONSE by Plaintiff United States of America to Rule 56 statement 53 (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 12/19/2005) |
| 12/19/2005 | 55 | REPLY by Plaintiff United States of America (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 12/19/2005) |
| 12/20/2005 | 56 | MOTION to strike and MOTION to Have Facts Deemed Admitted (Attachments: # 1 Points and Authorities # 2 Certificate of Service)(Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 12/20/2005) |
| 01/17/2006 | 57 | MEMORANDUM by United States of America in Opposition to motion to strike 56 (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 01/17/2006) |
| 01/19/2006 | 58 | REPLY by William J Bensonin Support of MOTION to strike and MOTION to Have Facts Deemed Admitted 56 (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 01/19/2006) |
| 02/21/2006 | 59 | DESIGNATION of Samuel D Brooks as U.S. Attorney for Plaintiff United States of America (Brooks, Samuel) (Entered: 02/21/2006) |
| 08/15/2006 | 60 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip The United States brings this action under 26 U.S.C. 7408 and 26 U.S.C. 7402(a) to enjoin and restrain William J. Benson from engaging in activity subject to penalty under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 6700, namely promoting allegedly abusive tax shelters. (D.E.I) Plaintiff has filed a motion for summary judgment (D.E. 37), which Defendant opposes. (D.E. 50.) Defendant has filed a motion to strike a paragraphs 31-51 of the Government's "Response to Benson's Local Rule 56.1 Statement of material Facts" and to have paragraphs 31-51 of his statement of material facts (D.E. 53) deemed admitted. (D.E. 56-1.) For the reasons stated below the Court respectfully denies Mr. Benson's motion to strike and motion to have facts deemed admitted (D.E. 56-1.) Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 08/16/2006) |
| 08/28/2006 | 61 | MOTION by Defendant William J Benson for reconsideration regarding order on motion to strike, text entry, 60 (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 08/28/2006) |
| 08/28/2006 | 62 | MOTION by Defendant William J Benson for hearing Evidentiary Hearing (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 08/28/2006) |
| 08/29/2006 | 63 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: For the reasons stated below, the motion (D.E. 61) of defendant, William J. Benson, for reconsideration of the denial of his motion to strike 61 is denied. Defendants motion for a hearing (D.E. 62) 62 is denied without prejudice, as explained below. Mailed notice (rp, ) (Entered: 08/30/2006) |
| 04/10/2007 | 64 | MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America for hearing (Telephonic Status Hearing) (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 04/10/2007) |
| 04/10/2007 | 65 | NOTICE of Motion by Robert D. Metcalfe for presentment of motion for hearing64 before Honorable Mark Filip on 4/19/2007 at 09:30 AM. (Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 04/10/2007) |
| 04/14/2007 | 66 | REPLY by Defendant William J Benson to motion for hearing64 (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 04/14/2007) |
| 04/16/2007 | 67 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Motion for telephonic status hearing 64 is grantedStatus hearing set for 4/19/2007 at 11:00 AM. Mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 04/16/2007) |
| 04/19/2007 | 68 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Telephonic Status hearing held on 4/19/2007. Status hearing set for 5/10/2007 at 11:30 AM. Mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 04/19/2007) |
| 04/23/2007 | 69 | EXHIBIT Per Court's Authorization The Law That Never Was Book by Defendant William J Benson. (Document not scanned) (gej,) (Entered: 04/24/2007) |
| 05/04/2007 | 70 | STATUS Report Defendant's Memorandum re May 10, 2007 Status Conference by William J Benson (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 05/04/2007) |
| 05/10/2007 | 71 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Telephone Status hearing held on 5/10/2007. Telephone Status hearing set for 6/6/2007 at 11:30 AM. Mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 05/10/2007) |
| 06/06/2007 | 72 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Telephone Status hearing held on 6/6/2007. Telephone Status hearing set for 7/10/2007 at 11:00 AM. Mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 06/06/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 73 | ATTORNEY Appearance on Behalf of John Doe I, John Doe II and Jane Roe (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 74 | MOTION by Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe to intervene (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 75 | MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion of John Doe I, John Doe II, And Jane Roe for Permission to Intervene as Party Defendants. (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Text Modified By Clerks Office) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 76 | NOTICE of Motion by Jeffrey A. Dickstein for presentment of motion to intervene 74, motion to intervene 75 before Honorable Mark Filip on 7/10/2007 at 11:00 AM. (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 77 | MOTION by Defendant William J Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe for protective order (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 78 | MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Protective Order by Defendant Benson and Applicant Intervener Defendants .(Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Text Modified by Clerk's Office) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 79 | NOTICE of Motion by Jeffrey A. Dickstein for presentment of motion for protective order 78, motion for protective order 77 before Honorable Mark Filip on 7/10/2007 at 11:00 AM. (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 80 |
Memorandum of Point and Authorities in
Support of Motion for Protective order by Defendants Benson and
Applicant Intervener Defendants (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Text Modified by
Clerks's Offie) (Entered 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 81 | MOTION by Defendant William J Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe for leave to file excess pages (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/02/2007 | 82 | NOTICE of Motion by Jeffrey A. Dickstein for presentment of motion for leave to file excess pages 81 before Honorable Mark Filip on 7/10/2007 at 11:00 AM. (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/02/2007) |
| 07/06/2007 | 83 | MEMORANDUM by United States of America in Opposition to motion for protective order 77, motion to intervene 74, motion for protective order 78, motion for protective order 80, motion to intervene 75 (Curteman, Thomas) (Entered: 07/06/2007) |
| 07/08/2007 | 84 | REPLY by Defendant William J Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe to memorandum in opposition to motion 83 (Dickstein, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/08/2007) |
| 07/10/2007 | 85 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: MOTION by Defendant William J Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe for leave to file excess pages 81, granted.Mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 07/10/2007) |
| 07/10/2007 | 86 | MINUTE entry before Judge Mark Filip: Status hearing held on 7/10/2007. Motion by Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe, to intervene 74 and Motion by Defendant William J.Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, and Jane Roe for Protective Order 77 are taken under advisement. Mailed notice (tbk, ) (Entered: 07/10/2007) |
| 07/11/2007 | 87 |
NOTICE of Correction regarding MOTION by Defendant William J Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe for protective order Amending Doc. # 78, Memorandum of Points and Authorities, to add Exhibits A & B 80, MOTION by Defendant William J Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe for protective order Memorandum of Points and Authorities 78, MOTION by Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe to intervene Memorandum of Points and Authorities 75. (gej, ) (Entered: 07/11/2007) |
| 08/20/2007 |
88 |
MOTION by Plaintiff United States of
America Motion for Order of Immunity (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Metcalfe,
Robert) (Entered: 08/20/2007) |
| 08/20/2007 |
89 |
CERTIFICATE of Service by
Plaintiff United States of America re (Proposed) Order of Immunity
(Metcalfe, Robert) (Entered: 08/20/2007) |
| 08/21/2007 |
90 |
RESPONSE by William J Benson in
Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America Motion for
Order of Immunity[88] (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Dickstein, Jeffrey) |
| 08/22/2007 |
91 |
REPLY by United States of America to
response in opposition to motion[90] (Metcalfe, Robert) |
| 08/23/2007 |
92 |
STATEMENT by Defendant William J
Benson, Intervenor Defendants John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe in
Support of MOTION by Defendant William J Benson, Intervenor Defendants
John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Jane Roe for protective order[77]
(Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Dickstein, Jeffrey) |
| 08/27/2007 |
93 |
MOTION
by
Plaintiff United States of America for order of Immunity as to William
Benson (Attachments: # (1) Letter
Granting Immunity as to William Benson)(Metcalfe, Robert) |
| 08/27/2007 |
94 |
NOTICE
of
Motion by Robert D. Metcalfe for presentment of before Honorable Mark
Filip on 8/30/2007 at 09:30 AM. (Metcalfe, Robert) |
| 08/28/2007 |
95 |
RESPONSE
by William J Benson in Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff United States
of America Motion for Order of Immunity[88], MOTION by Plaintiff United
States of America for order of Immunity as to William Benson[93]
(Dickstein, Jeffrey) |
| 08/28/2007 |
96 |
MINUTE
entry before Judge Mark Filip :MOTION by Plaintiff United States of
America Motion for Order of Immunity [88] is stricken as moot as being
duplicative of Doc. [93].Mailed notice (tbk, ) |
|
|
|
|
|