Pleading Wizard

NOTICE TO PRICIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT AND NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL.

Special Appearance: Diane Brown, Penname

c/o 1767 Fernwood Road

Chula Vista, California

650-479-4750

In Propria PersonaPresentingUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

333 WEST BROADWAY, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101

Civil UnlimitedAutochthon--Nata Kentake Candace Dey being sued as; Diane Brown(Penname),

Claimant/Alleged Respondent in

Reconvention,

vs.

Deutsche Bank National Trust Company As Trustee For Morgan Stanley ABS CAPITAL I INC TRUST 2007-NC4 Alleged Respondent

Interested Parties: Federal Bureau of Investigations, Securities and Exchange Commission, Secretary of the State of California, The California Bar Association, San Diego County Assessor Recorder, San Diego Risk Management Department, California Bonding/Underwriters Association-Public Servants Division. Counter Claimant Does the Following: Reserve s All Inalienable Rights, Accepts the Oath of Office for EACH and EVERY Public Servant Participants associated with matter in any and all forms.Counter Claimant Requests the Following: Judgment Based on Fact and Law (per California civil code 632, 634), Written Record of Decisional Finding and Due Process.

FEDERAL

State case no. 37-2014-00035435-CL-UD-CTLPURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 62 STAY OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT OR ANY PROCEEDING TO ENFORCE IT, under rule(s): 50 - as a matter of law, rule 60 - relief from judgment or order. Cause: Fraud, Void Judgment, Lack of Standing, Lack personal, Subject Matter and specific subject matter jurisdiction, improper venue

NOTICE OF DEMAND FOR A NEW TRIAL;

POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION

Filed: March 2, 2015Hearing Date : Department:

Time:

Presiding Justice: [Filed Concurrently With: Objection to Proof of Claim [Propose] Order)]

ADVERSE POSSESSIONPlaintiff complains and for causes of action alleges as follows:1. Plaintiff __________ [name] is, and at all timesmentioned in this complaint was, a resident of __________County, California.2. Defendant __________ [name] is, and at all timesmentioned in this complaint was, a resident of __________County, California.3. Plaintiff does not know the true names of defendantsall persons unknown, claiming any legal or equitable right,title, estate, lien, or interest in the property described inthe complaint adverse to plaintiff's title or any cloud onplaintiff's title thereto and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, andtherefore sues them by those fictitious names. The names,capacities and relationships of DOES 1 through 10 will bealleged by amendment to this complaint when they are known.__________ [Optionally, in addition to language in chargingallegations that includes fictitiously named defendants:Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that basis allegesthat each of the DOE defendants claims, or may claim, someinterest in the real property described in paragraph 4 of thiscomplaint.]4. Plaintiff is the owner by adverse possession of realproperty located in __________ County, California and morespecifically described as: __________ [set forth legaldescription]. __________ [Add if applicable any streetaddress.]5. Plaintiff has possession of all real property describedin paragraph 4 of this complaint by actual, open, hostile,continuous, and exclusive possession.6. Plaintiff's possession has been actual, open, hostile,continuous, and exclusive since __________ [date], in excess ofthe 5-year period set forth in Code of Civil Procedure sections318, 319, 321-323.7. Plaintiff has been in possession of the real propertydescribed in paragraph 4 of this complaint by virtue of__________ [set forth the type of written instrument, judgment,or decree, such as: a tax deed executed on __________ (date),by __________ (name), and recorded on __________ (date).]8. Plaintiff has been in continuous possession during the5-year period described in paragraph 6 of this complaint,adverse to defendants and to all other persons, in support ofplaintiff's title to the real property and as curative of anydefects in the __________ [set forth type of document whetherwritten instrument, judgment, or decree, such as: tax deed], orother defects which might have existed with reference to it.9. Plaintiff has paid all taxes and assessments that havebeen levied or assessed against the real property described inparagraph 4 of this complaint during the 5-year period.10. Defendants claim an estate or interest in the realproperty described that is adverse to plaintiff.WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands judgment against defendants asfollows:1. For judgment that plaintiff is the fee simple owner ofall right, title, and interest in and to the described realproperty;2. For judgment that defendants do not have any right,title, estate, or interest in or lien on the described realproperty;3. For such further relief as the court may deem proper.DATED: _________________________________________________________

(Signature)

VERIFICATIONI, ___, am a ___in the above-entitled action. I have read the foregoing___and know the contents thereof. The same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe it to be true.I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed at Long Beach, California.

DATED: _________________ ___________________________________NOTICE OF STAY PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 62 PENDING THE DISPOSITION OF A MOTION TO EACH PARTY AND TO THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY:

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT at the above-captioned date and time and department in the courthouse located at 333 Broadway, San Diego, California that Claimant/ Alleged Respondent will move the court for an order requesting relief from judgment and a new trial based upon the following: Inadvertence, surprise, mistake, or excusable neglect

Service of the Summons did not result in actual notice, defective notice of

Hearing; Opposition to Diane Brown(Penname)s Demurrer and Motion To strike The judgment and/or default is void

Improper Venue

THIS MOTION IS TIMELY

Within 6 months after entry of default: A motion for discretionary relief from default under CCP) on grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. The motion for discretionary relief must be filed within 6 months after the clerks entry of default.

Within 6 months after entry of judgment: A motion for mandatory relief from default based upon an attorneys affidavit of fault is timely if filed within 6 months after entry of judgment.

Summons Too Late to Defend Action: A Motion to Set Aside Default under where the service of a summons / notice of motion, has not resulted in actual notice to a party in time to defend the action, the time to file and serve a Motion shall be made within a reasonable time, but in no event exceeding the earlier of: (i) two years after entry of a default judgment against him or her; or (ii) 180 days after service on him or her of a written notice that the default or default judgment has been entered.

Void Judgment: The time to file a Motion to Set Aside Default under is at any time after a void judgment is granted, if the motion is made within a reasonable time. For a default judgment, this may be a reasonable time after the discovery of the existence of the judgment or order.

Improper Court: A Motion to Set Aside Default under CCP 585.5(b) shall be served and filed within 60 days after the Diane Brown(Penname) first receives notice of levy under a writ of execution, or notice of any other procedure for enforcing the default judgment.

(f) Stay in Favor of a Judgment Debtor Under State Law. If a judgment is a lien on the judgment debtor's property under the law of the state where the court is located, the judgment debtor is entitled to the same stay of execution the state court would giveThe mandatory relief provision of section 473(b) provides, as pertinent, Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, the court shall, whenever an application for relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper form, and is accompanied by an attorneys /pro pers sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against his or her client / him or her, and which will result in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against his or her client / him or her.

This motion will be based upon this notice, the attached points and authorities and declaration of

Diane Brown(Penname), being sued as Diane Brown(penname) and the records, exhibits and files in this action.Date:

Diane Brown(Penname)In Propria Persona

c/o 1767 Fernwood Road, Chula Vista, California

Phone: 650-479-4750Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Set Aside

I. BackgroundOn October 17, 2014, Alleged Respondent filed a Complaint in this court, On November 14, 2014 Alleged Respondent received a default in error, as Diane Brown(Penname)s motion to quash hearing was filed and on calendar. On January 22, 2015, Alleged Respondent scheduled hearing; Opposition to Diane Brown(Penname)s Demurrer and Motion to quash was held, although Diane Brown(Penname) did not receive the mandatory 9(nine) days notice, Ithe notice via fed-ex was received at approximately 4:30pm on January 22, 2015. On same date, Diane Brown(Penname) spoke with opposing attorney and let him know her demurrer hearing scheduled for January 27, 2015, has been rescheduled to February 11, 2015, and that I would fax him a copy of the demurrer the eve of January 22, 2015. Mr. Hadi pleasantly said, great, I look forward to it, and then filed for a default on January 23, 2015. Extrinsic fraud? Diane Brown(Penname) filed demurrer for the 3rd time on January 30, 2015, same day, Alleged Respondents attorney filed for default. Diane Brown(Penname)s demurrer filing was rejected to Diane Brown(Penname)s surprise, for a claim of no fee waiver on file however Diane Brown(Penname), did file such with one legal along with other documents and had no idea, the waiver somehow got lost in the transference to The Superior court Clerk. (see Exhibit A). Alleged Respondent requested and received a default and judgment of default, on February 5th and 6th respectively, while Alleged Respondent was under the impression demurrer was filed, and planned on specially appearing at scheduled demurrer hearing on February 11, 2015, which was requested personally by Diane Brown(Penname) on 12/2/2014.Additionally, defaults entered:

1. were not in compliance with the Superior court of California Clerk Default judgment Guidelines. (see Exhibit B)

2. Alleged Respondents misrepresented the nature of the disputed debt/claim on the default judgment form (see Exhibit C)

3. The complaint was not amended to reflect the party of whom the default was granted.

The moving Diane Brown(Penname) is now asking this court in the interest of justice, to prevent irreparable damage to moving party and family members, to prevent unjust enrichment and as a matter right and law to set aside the clerks default and, clerks default judgments, under the mandatory provision of ccp 473(b) based Diane Brown(Penname)s declaration of mistake of facts, surprise, on Inadvertence and. as well as an motion to strike Alleged Respondents pleading in its entirety due to lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction.II. LEGAL ARGUMENT

(If checked paragraphs A D are argued) Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure 473(b), the Court Should Set Aside this Adverse Judgment or Ruling Based on Inadvertence, Surprise, or Excusable Neglect

Diane Brown(Penname)s, inadvertence and surprise, at the non- processed demurrers, which Diane Brown(Penname) filed on December 2, 2014 and December 12, 2014 via the subsequent filings drop box, located on the second floor of 330 west broadway, did result in the Alleged Respondents obtaining an erroneous default judgment, while Diane Brown(Penname) was secure in the fact that her pleading each instant was processed and the hearing she scheduled for the demurrer was to be attended as scheduled. Not until January 22, 2015, was Diane Brown(Penname) notified that neither of her filings were processed. The same date, Diane Brown(Penname) rescheduled her demurrer hearing with the court clerk for February 11, 2015 and Informed the opposing counsel. Out of nowhere, Diane Brown(Penname)s 3rd and finally processed submission of demurrer on January 30, 2015 ( this time, in addition to placing demurrer in the filing drop box, Diane Brown(Penname) personally delivered a copy to the court clerk in the department 7 which will be the practice hereforth as that was the only time the demurrer was noticed and filed.

Costs for processing the demurrer became an issue made known to Diane Brown(Penname) on 2/11/2015. A matter of which was not ever remotely conceived as Diane Brown(Penname)s prior filing of a motion to quash, supporting documents and hearing were all performed without issue, based upon Diane Brown(Penname)s, believed processed fee waiver. Diane Brown(Penname) received notice on Febraury 7, 2015, that 3rd demurrer was rejected due to absence of filing fee. A blow of complete and utter surprise. This is a fact that if could not possible have determined unless and untiled formerly noticed. Complaints submitted with NSF matters, are given notice and 15 calendar days to submit funds to cover filing, individuals like myself, whom complete fee waivers, waivers of which are not determined for a week or two after submission are filed. If I had not appeared in court on the 11th of February I would have never known why a default was entered against me as I believed I was moving in complete accordance with the file requirements of the court. If my motion to quash for months earlier had been rejected due to lack of payment and notice thereof sent, there would not be this issue, hence there would be no defaults. I cannot correct what I do not know about. Upon notice I immediately, acted in accordance.It is apparent by my(the Diane Brown(Penname)s) the multiple efforts of filings and court appearances that it is my intention to have this case ruled according to the merits. And I know given the right of due process, I will prevail in this case. I am the lawful owner of the subject property. The Alleged Respondents are intentionally verifying information of which they have obviously not applied a minimal of verification there of, or they are intentionally placing fraud upon the court or deutsche bank is truly not the Alleged Respondent and the debt collection law firm is fraudulently using the name of the alleged Alleged Respondent, for a debt they may have themselves purchased, cause of action for penal prosecution and civil suit for Diane Brown(Penname),A. Grounds for Relief. On application, the court shall, on any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect ( Code Civ. Proc. 473(b)). This motion is filed within a reasonable period of time, not exceeding six months after entry of the default.

B. Policy of Law Favors Trial on Merits. The policy of the law is that controversies should be heard and disposed of on their merits (Fasuyi v. Permatex, Inc. (2008) 167 Cal. App. 4th 681, 694703, 84 Cal. Rptr. 3d 351; Berman v. Klassman (1971) 17 Cal. App. 3d 900, 909, 95 Cal. Rptr. 417).

(If checked paragraphs E H are argued) The Court should grant Diane Brown(Penname)s motion for relief pursuant to CCP 473.5 because he/she received no actual notice of the action in time to defend, he/she has filed a timely motion for relief, and the default and default judgment was not caused by the Alleged Respondents avoidance of service or inexcusable neglect.

E. Motion for Relief From Default for Lack of Actual Notice. When service of a summons / notice of hearing has not resulted in actual notice to a party in time to defend the action and a default or default judgment has been entered against him or her in the action, the party may serve and file a notice of motion to set aside the default or default judgment and for leave to defend the action ( Code Civ. Proc. 473.5(a)).

Alleged Respondents declares that service of the summons was substituted and defective. The summons was not delivered to the Diane Brown(Penname) personally. (See Alleged Respondents proof of service of summons.) The summons was dropped off with an unidentified individual, not in the presence of Diane Brown(Penname). The Alleged Respondents F. Court May Grant Relief on Timely Motion if Diane Brown(Penname) Not at Fault. On a finding by the court that the motion was made within the two year time period permitted by Code of Civil Procedure Section 473.5(a) and that his or her lack of actual notice in time to defend the action was not caused by his or her avoidance of service or inexcusable neglect, it shall set aside the default and/ or default judgment on whatever terms as may be just and allow the party to defend the action ( Code Civ. Proc. 473.5(c); Goya v. P.E.R.U. Enterprises (1978) 87 Cal. App. 3d 886, 890891, 151 Cal. Rptr. 258).

H. Policy Favors Application for Relief. Unless inexcusable neglect is clear, the policy favoring trial on the merits prevails over the general rule of deference and doubts are resolved in favor of the application for relief from default (Tunis v. Barrow (1986) 184 Cal. App. 3d 1069, 1079, 229 Cal. Rptr. 389).

(If checked paragraphs I K are argued) THE COURT SHOULD GRANT DIANE BROWN(PENNAME)S MOTION TO SET ASIDE THE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT, IF ENTERED ON THE GROUND THAT IT IS VOID BECAUSE, ALTHOUGH ITS INVALIDITY MAY NOT APPEAR FROM AN EXAMINATION OF THE JUDGMENT ROLL, IT IS NONETHELESS VOID IN FACT IN THAT THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT WERE NEVER VALIDLY SERVED ON THE DIANE BROWN(PENNAME), AND THE DIANE BROWN(PENNAME) LACKED ACTUAL NOTICE OF THIS LAWSUIT AND THE ALLEGED ALLEGED RESPONDENTS HAVE NO STANDING. AS IT IS A LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY FOR THE ALLEGED RESPONDENT TO POSSESS ANY INTEREST IN SUBJECT PROPERTY (see exhibit D). THERE ARE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT NOT MET, ISSUES OF ESTOPPLE, FRAUD AND THE REPRESENTING ATTORNEYS HAVE KNOWINGLY FAILED TO ACT IN ACCORD WITH THE FAIR DEBT AND COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT OF 2006 AND IN ADHERENCE TO THE THEIR OATH OF OFFICES, AND IN COMPLETE DISREGARD OF THE BUSINESS AND PROFESSION CODE, AND ABA MODEL ACTS.I. Statutory Power to Set Aside Void Judgment. The court may, on motion of either party after notice to the other party, set aside any void judgment or order ( Code Civ. Proc. 473(d)).

J. Inherent Power to Set Aside Judgment Not Void on Its Face but Void in Fact. The law is settled that courts of record have inherent power to set aside a void judgment whether or not it is void on its face (Rogers v. Silverman (1989) 216 Cal. App. 3d 1114, 1122, 265 Cal. Rptr. 286). As described in the attached Declaration, the service of the Summons was improper, depriving the court of jurisdiction as to the Diane Brown(Penname). Furthermore, the Diane Brown(Penname) is filing this motion within a reasonable period of time within six months of learning of the existence of this lawsuit.

K. Court Has Duty to Set Aside Judgment. It is well settled that when an application to vacate and set aside a judgment that is not void on its face but void in fact is made within a reasonable time after its rendition and is based on a sufficient showing, it is within the power of the court, and its duty, to set it aside (Smith v. Bratman (1917) 174 Cal. 518, 520, 163 P. 892).

(If checked paragraphs L O are argued) THE COURT SHOULD SET ASIDE THE DEFAULT AND, IF ENTERED, DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN THIS ACTION AS VOID ON ITS FACE BECAUSE NO PROOF OF SERVICE WAS FILED THIS IS A CONSUMER CREDIT DEBT, HOWEVER NO DECLARATION OF VENUE HAS BEEN FILED AND THE COMPLAINT IS NOT VERIFIED.

L. Relief From Void Judgment or Order. The court may, on motion of either party after notice to the other party, set aside any void judgment or order ( Code Civ. Proc. 473(d)).

M. Inherent Power to Set Aside Judgment Void on Its Face. A court has inherent power, independent of statute, to set aside a judgment or order that is void on its face (People v. Greene (1887) 74 Cal. 400, 405406, 16 P. 197; Hendrix v. Hendrix (1955) 130 Cal. App. 2d 379, 383, 279 P.2d 58).

N. Test for Establishing That Judgment Is Void on Its Face. A judgment or order is void on its face when its invalidity appears from an examination of the judgment roll (People v. Davis (1904) 143 Cal. 673, 676, 77 P. 651; Carrasco v. Craft (1985) 164 Cal. App. 3d 796, 808, 210 Cal. Rptr. 599).

(If checked paragraphs P-S are argued) THE COURT SHOULD QUASH SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS DUE TO LACK OF JURISDICTION

P. Motion to Quash Service of Summons. On or before the last day of his or her time to plead, or within such further time as the court may for good cause allow, a Diane Brown(Penname) may serve and file a notice of motion to quash service of summons on the ground the court lacks jurisdiction over him or her ( Code Civ. Proc. 418.10(a)(1)).

Q. Compliance With Statutory Provisions Governing Service of Process Is Required. Service of summons in conformance with the mode prescribed by statute is deemed jurisdictional, and, absent such service, no jurisdiction is acquired by the court in the particular action (Renoir v. Redstar Corp. (2004) 123 Cal. App. 4th 1145, 1150, 20 Cal. Rptr. 3d 603; Schering Corp. v. Superior Court (1975) 52 Cal. App. 3d 737, 741, 125 Cal. Rptr. 337; Sternbeck v. Buck (1957) 148 Cal. App. 2d 829, 832, 307 P.2d 970).

R. Strict Compliance Necessary for Substituted or Constructive Service. A court has no authority to render judgment on the basis of substituted or constructive service of the summons when statutory requirements have not been strictly complied with (Summers v. McClanahan (2006) 140 Cal. App. 4th 403, 412, 44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 338 (improper service on personal manager); Zirbes v. Stratton (1986) 187 Cal. App. 3d 1407, 1416, 232 Cal. Rptr. 653 (substituted service); Eagle Electric Mfg. Co. v. Keener (1966) 247 Cal. App. 2d 246, 251, 55 Cal. Rptr. 444 (same); Bank of America v. Carr (1956) 138 Cal. App. 2d 727, 737, 292 P.2d 587 (constructive service)).

S. General Appearance After Default Judgment Does Not Validate Defective Service. The general appearance after entry of a default judgment by a Diane Brown(Penname) who was defectively served with summons does not make the defective service retroactively valid (In re Marriage of Smith (1982) 135 Cal. App. 3d 543, 545, 547552, 185 Cal. Rptr. 411).

THE DIANE BROWN(PENNAME) ADDITIONALLY ARGUES:

There is no evidence upon the court except that which the Diane Brown(Penname) has filed (Affidavit of Truth, Declaration, Verified Pleading(s), being of first-hand knowledge, and signed under the penalties and pains of perjury, under the California Republic. And wholly admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. The Alleged Respondents rebutted complaint is not verified nor can it be viewed as evidence as it was signed by an attorney on informed, information and belief, per Civil Code 446.

For the aforementioned reasons, Diane Brown(Penname) requests set aside of the default, and e, default judgment entered her and requests that the Service of the Summons be set aside for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Dated:

Diane Brown(Penname)c/o 1767 Fernwood Road

Chula Vista, California

Phone: 650-479-4750The mandatory relief provision of section 473(b) provides, as pertinent, Notwithstanding

any other requirements of this section, the court shall, whenever an application for relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper form, and is accompanied by an attorneys /pro pers sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against his or her client / him or her, and which will result in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against his or her client / him or her.DECLARATION

Affidavit of Truth

I, Diane Brown(Penname), am the Claimant in reconvention, in this matter, and I declare the following in support of my motion to set aside the defaults and default judgments in my case:1. That I do acknowledge the aforementioned surprises, inadvertent awareness, my mistake of facts, have contributed to the erroneous defaults and default judgments in conjunction with the opposing counsels improperly noticed hearings, substituted service of summons and misleading conversations with the opposing counsel.2. The defaults and default judgments entered were erroneous and correction there of is a matter of due process

3. The Alleged Respondents have no legal nor lawful interested in subject property.

4. It is and has alsway been my intent to prevail in this matter based upon the merits.

5. The Alleged Respondents have knowingly side stepped mandatory and procedural rules in order to obtain said defaults.

6. The request for entry of default are in compliance with the summons on file.

7. The summons on file has not been amended to correctly note the party as to which the Diane Brown(Penname)s through misrepresentation obtained defaults.

8. It is a legal impossibility that the alleged Alleged Respondent hold any legally recognized interest in subject property (see exhibit E)

9. The attorneys for the alleged Diane Brown(Penname)s are debt collectors and have placed nothing into evidence proving that they are not infact acting on their own behalf.

10. I have disputed the alleged debt and noticed the Alleged Respondents of such disputed since the first instance of communication with the Alleged Respondents attorneys.

11. Attorneys and public officers owe the public a duty of integrity, professionalism and adherence to their oath of office(s) which in and of itself would prevent most of the frivolous and fraudulent lawsuits of unjust enrichment.12. Alleged Respondents filed this suit with unclean hands and continue to act in such a manner.

13. The Alleged Respondents rebutted proof of claim also negates their claim. (see exhibit G)

14. The sale of the subject property was not duly perfected as the Alleged Respondents assert on their complaint. A minimal effort of checking the records at the San diego county recorders office will and would have quickly verified sale, assignment and substitution were no in strick adherence to 2924, which is mandatory. (see Exhibit H)

15. This complaint is not meant to harass, delay or mislead. I am the lawful owner of subject property.

16. I filed a quite title action of subject property in 2012, which I abandoned , due to health issues in the family.

17. Once a secured interest is pursued by a debt collector, the security is dissolved, and becomes an unsecured debt, where by which the debt collector may only pursue monetary judgment if alleged debt is not disputed and properly validated.18. Alleged Respondents have no legal possesionary right to subject property.

19. Alleged Respondent have no legal equitable interest in subject property.

20. Alleged Respondents are placing fraud upon the court , practicing extortion and are in sanctionable violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

21. Alleged Respondents have presented to the court as proof of claim, a counterfeit security according to the security and exchange commission.

22. Diane Brown(Penname) and Diane Browns (Penname)s family members will suffer irreparable harm if Alleged Respondents are allowed to commit grand larceny of Diane Brown(Penname)s home.

23. The best evidence of this case is presented by Diane Brown(Penname).

24. The Diane Brown(Penname)s would like the Alleged Respondents to show cause to the court, the Diane Brown(Penname) and the public at large: why they are attempting to collect a disputed debt, an alleged debt of which the statute has expired, an alleged debt of which they have not validated, an alleged debt more than a year and a half after claimed rights are due, an alleged debt that they have not taken a minimal amount of effort to confirm.

25. This court has not subject matter jurisdiction, as Alleged Respondents have no standing, have not suffered nor alleged injury and have not presented any evidence of contract with defent.Based on the Diane Brown(Penname)s honest mistake of facts, inadvertent surprises, misleading communications with the opposing counsel and Diane Brown(Penname)s earnest efforts and devout intention to address this case solely on the merits, and Diane Brown(Penname)s period of uninterrupted possession of subject property and as a matter of law, and evidence before court, I request this court in the interest of truth, justice, right, due process and as a matter of recognized law.Grant Diane Brown(Penname)s motions to set aside the defaults and default judgments and allow Diane Brown(Penname) to defend her real property and prevent the Alleged Respondents from a practice of greed, pursuit of unjust enrichment and causing unwarranted and the indifferent destruction of family lives.JURY TRIAL DEMANDED on EVERY CLAIM / ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Date:

Diane Brown(Penname)Diane Brown(Penname) in Propria Persona

c/o 1767 Fernwood Road, Chula Vista, California

Phone: 650-479-4750

Claimant in Reconvention, Diane Brown(Penname) Reserves the right to amend this complaint if /when needed correction is noted and or in a timely manner included material information as to express claim in most effective means.

VERIFICATIONI, Diane Brown(Penname), Diane Brown(Penname) in subject case being of sound mind, age of competence and having first hand knowleged of the facts and statements here in. Do declare I have scribed and read this complaint and affirm that all statements contained herein are the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and if asked as a witness will testify to the veracity thereof. This pleading is not meant to delay, harass or mislead, but is solely effected for the purpose of justice in accordance to law. I declare this statements to be true under the penalties and pains of perjury and under the laws of the California Republic.

Declared in honor This 2ND day of March, 2015.

Diane Brown

Claimant/Alleged Respondent in Propria Persona

c/o 1767 Fernwood Road, Chula Vista, California

Phone: 650-479-4750

NOTICE: AUTOMATIC STAY OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT

NOTICE

Adverse Possession Claim

Claim at Common Right By: Diane Brown(Penname), Notice of Stay of Execution for Enforcement of Judgment.Page 18 of 15