Page 1 of 2

Judicial Council of the _________________ Circuit

COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY

To begin the complaint process, complete this form and prepare the brief statement of factsdescribed in item 5 (below). The RULES FOR JUDICIAL-CONDUCT AND JUDICIAL-DISABILITYPROCEEDINGS, adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States, contain information on what to include in a complaint (Rule 6), where to file a complaint (Rule 7), and other importantmatters. The rules are available in federal court clerks offices, on individual federal courtsWeb sites, and on www.uscourts.gov.

Your complaint (this form and the statement of facts) should be typewritten and must be legible. For the number of copies to file, consult the local rules or clerks office of the court in whichyour complaint is required to be filed. Enclose each copy of the complaint in an envelopemarked COMPLAINT OF MISCONDUCT or COMPLAINT OF DISABILITY and submitit to the appropriate clerk of court. Do not put the name of any judge on the envelope.

1. Name of Complainant:

Contact Address:

Daytime telephone: ( )

2. Name(s) of Judge(s):

Court:

3. Does this complaint concern the behavior of the judge(s) in a particular lawsuit orlawsuits?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, give the following information about each lawsuit:

Court:

Case Number:

Docket number of any appeal to the Circuit: ___________________

Are (were) you a party or lawyer in the lawsuit?

[ ] Party [ ] Lawyer [ ] Neither

DeniseText BoxSomething is wrong with your form when you fill in the Case number it overwrites the court with the case number, if you correct the court then it overwrites the case number. The court is the Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville.

Page 2 of 2

If you are (were) a party and have (had) a lawyer, give the lawyers name, address, andtelephone number:

4. Have you filed any lawsuits against the judge?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, give the following information about each such lawsuit:

Court:

Case Number:

Present status of lawsuit:

Name, address, and telephone number of your lawyer for the lawsuit against the judge:

Court to which any appeal has been taken in the lawsuit against the judge:

Docket number of the appeal:

Present status of the appeal:

5. Brief Statement of Facts. Attach a brief statement of the specific facts on which theclaim of judicial misconduct or disability is based. Include what happened, when andwhere it happened, and any information that would help an investigator check the facts. If the complaint alleges judicial disability, also include any additional facts that form thebasis of that allegation.

6. Declaration and signature:

I declare under penalty of perjury that the statements made in this complaint are true andcorrect to the best of my knowledge.

(Signature)__________________________________ (Date)__________________

Page 1 of 4

STATEMENT OF FACTS

JUDICIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST JUDGES

THOMAS A. VARLAN & H. BRUCE GUYTON

Pertaining to judicial misconduct and fraud upon the court by the court conducted by Judge Thomas A. Varlan in the

Sixth Federal District specific to the case of LNV vs. Gebhardt, Case No: 3:12-CV-468-TAV-HBG.

In addition to judicial misconduct, fraud upon the court by the court and civil rights violations in the LNV vs.

Gebhardt case, a historic review of Judge Varlans decisions shows that he tends to be biased in general. I could only find nine other cases decided by Varlan originating from foreclosure fraud actions. He ruled against the homeowners

in every case. A review of other civil rights related decisions by Varlan and his court shows that he and other justices

in the Sixth Circuit are far from impartial and have a long history of violating the civil rights of the economically

disadvantaged and of minorities. I did a random review of 24 out of 200 plus employment discrimination cases

decided by Varlan and/or Judge H. Bruce Guyton. Varlan and/or Guyton decided in favor of the corporate employers

and against the employee claiming discrimination in all by two cases; and those decisions were only partially in favor

of the employee claiming discrimination. Cases decided by Varlan and/or Guyton where litigants were pro-se are

downright embarrassing to read. These litigants were humiliated and abused in Varlans court.

Under 28 USCS Sec. 455(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. And Under 28 USCS Sec. 455(b)(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding

Catherine Gebhardt motioned the court for Judges Varlan and Guyton to recuse. They refused to do so.

Judge Varlan worked six years with the law firm of Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan in Atlanta, Georgia, and has been a

partner at the Knoxville law firm of Bass, Berry & Sims, PLC since 1998; it appears that Varlan is still a partner in

this law firm. Both these law firms cater almost exclusively to the interests of banks and financial institutions.

Additionally Varlan has a significant financial investment in Fidelity mutual funds and other Fidelity stock. Although

the federal rules of civil procedure exclude this type of investment as grounds for recusal based on financial conflict

of interest; in the case of LNV vs. Gebhardt the implication of bias goes beyond just financial interest.

The attorneys representing LNV Corporation (LNV) in this case are affiliated with Lender Processing Services (LPS), a Fidelity subsidiary identified by the United States in their criminal conviction of Lorraine Brown. LPS as a

vehicle used by Brown and her unnamed co-conspirators in the commission of their crimes in a fraud conspiracy that

included the transmission by mail and wire of fraudulently fabricated mortgage documents that contain forged and

falsified signatures and other false statements; and which Brown and her co-conspirators knew would be relied on by

the courts and others. (Gebhardt has presented Varlans court with significant evidence that her mortgage related documents are in fact fabricated and contain forged and falsified signatures and false statements specific to the

identities of the grantors and grantees stated on these false documents.)

The attorneys representing LVN in the Gebhardt case, and in many other cases across the country, are on a list of LPS

service providers. (http://interchange.lendingsvcs.com/providers.html) These LPS service providers all use the LPS

computer software system to produce mortgage related documents using the same manor and means as those

identified by the United States in their criminal conviction of Brown; i.e. these LPS service providers are in fact the

unnamed co-conspirators identified by the United States in Browns criminal conviction.

Judge Varlan made his summary ruling in favor of LNV against Gebhardt for nearly half a million dollars without

hearing testimony from even a single competent fact witness in violation of well established findings of law.

TRINSEY v. PAGLIARO Civ. A. No. 34873. 229 F.Supp. 647 (1964): Statements of counsel in their briefs or argument while enlightening to the Court are not sufficient for purposes of granting a motion to dismiss or summary

judgment.

Judge Varlan granted LNV summary judgment against the preponderance of the evidence and against legal

precedence. In Varlans Memorandum Opinion [Docket # 53] he states: Although the record is unclear as to the

Page 2 of 4

precise sequence of ownership, it appears that the Deed of Trust and Note were assigned to plaintiff in March 2008 by

Residential Funding Company, LLC [Doc. 48-15].

Language used by Judge Varlan in his Memorandum Opinion THE RECORD IS UNCLEAR and IT APPEARS shows that a genuine question of material fact does in fact exist. If it is UNCLEAR to him as an officer of the court as to whether or not assignment was legally made to the Plaintiff, LNV then a summary judgment in favor

of LNV is a miscarriage of justice. This is clearly a case in need of discovery and a hearing on the merits where both

sides can present evidence and testimony by credible witnesses to support their claims. Clarity pertaining to the precise sequence of ownership of deed of trust and the mortgage note is essential to determining if a party like LNV has standing to prevail in a breach of contract complaint.

As an experienced attorney and a judge Varlan would most certainly know this. Therefore, Judge Varlan appears here

to have knowingly facilitated fraud upon the court, and has committed fraud upon the court himself with intent to

further LNVs objective to seize real property belonging to Gebhardt in violation of her due process rights under the Constitution of the United States. A tremendous effort has been made by all the officers of the court in this case to

quash Gebhardts right to discovery. Blacks Law dictionary states that without discovery there is no due process.

Gebhardt is a single mother. As such she is a member of a group of American citizens long recognized as being

economically disadvantaged. Varlans court also denied Gebhradts motion to proceed in forma pauperis thus denying her access to appeal his grossly unjust and biased decision against her in favor of LNV. A review of similar denials

made by Varlans court of motions for in forma pauperis status by other pro-se litigants seeking appeal shows this is a tactic used by this court to deny economically disadvantaged pro-se litigants the right to due process and equal

protection of the law under our Constitution.

Judge Guyton worked for the law firm of Woolf, McClane, Bright, Allen & Carpenter, PLLC in Knoxville prior to

being appointed a judge. This law firm catered primarily to representing the interests of corporations and banks and

financial institutions. From their website (http://www.wmbac.com) the Sevierville office location for Woolf,

McClane, Bright, Allen & Carpenter, PLLC (Woolf McClane) is 248 Bruce Street, Sevierville, TN 37862, the same office address as Gebhardts former attorney Douglas E. Taylor, who she discovered in October 2013 was actually working against her interests in favor of LNV Corporation in this matter. In Gebhardts pleadings filed on October 2, 2013 she attempted to explain to the court how her attorney, Douglas E. Taylor, seemed to be sabotaging

her case in favor of LNVs interests. (Docket # 17) A week after this pleading was filed Taylors name came off the marquee in front of 248 Bruce Street, Sevierville, TN 37862 and Woolf McClane went up. Within another week Taylor moved his office furniture and files into the Law Offices of Andy Farmer who it now appears also sabotaged

Gebhardt in what Varlan called in his Memorandum Opinion Gebhardt I where she had brought a complaint against GMAC and MGC. Due to Farmers misconduct this case was dismissed with prejudice.

Fraud upon the court by the court erodes public confidence in the judiciary. Unfortunately this case is not an isolated

instance. Specific to LNV vs. Gebhardt a large group of Americans has become victims of the fraudulent activities of

LNV Corporation and the LPS affiliated attorneys that represent this sham company and its owner D. Andrew Andy Beal.

LNV Corporation exists only on paper. LNV was incorporated as a domestic corporation in Nevada on March 17,

2008. Its entity number is: E0169702008-8. You can see information about LNVs registration as a corporation in Nevada on the Nevada SOS website at:

https://nvsos.gov/sosentitysearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=Ljyliw%252bxIqnp3exaL0fiuw%253d%253d&nt7=0 (A

screen shot of this webpage from the Nevada SOS website is also attached to the last page this Statement of Facts

supporting this Judicial Complaint.)

As you can see the address for LNV in its incorporation records with Nevada is 7195 Dallas Parkway, Plano, Texas

75024. One of the many victims of LNVs fraud, JoAnn Breitling drove to Plano Texas with her husband to visit LNV and speak directly with an employee of LNV since no one has ever been able to reach one by phone. The first photo

below is of the empty lot located at 7195 Dallas Parkway, Plano, Texas 75024. The second photo shows a sign located on a side driveway to 6000 Legacy Drive, Plano, TX the address for Beal Bank.

Page 3 of 4

7195 Dallas Parkway, Plano, Texas 75024 is also the corporate address for LNVs alleged mortgage servicer MGC Mortgage Inc. which is also owned by and created for D. Andrew Beal. EVERY one of the LNV,

MGC Beal victims was put into a FALSE default by these entities or their predecessors. No American enters

into a 15 to 30 year contract thinking that a false claim of default will be made against them once theyve paid down their mortgage obligation and the party fabricating this false claim will then wrongfully and

illegally confiscate their property and that the U.S. judicial system will actually facilitate this horrific crime

against them.

As a group the victims of LNV, MGC, D. Andrew Beal and his thousands of other sham companies, are

each and every one directly harmed by the judicial misconduct and fraud upon the court by the court in the

LNV vs. Gebhardt case because each time Beal and one of his sham companies win a summary judgment or

a dismissal with prejudice when the homeowner was denied discovery and without any hearing being held

based on the merits of the case or any without any testimony by a competent witness and the ability to

confront that witness; then it sets a legal precedence that further favors Beal, his sham companies and other

financial institutions and banks that commit the same frauds and fraud upon the courts and further denies

wronged and defrauded homeowners like Gebhardt and the other victims their rights to due process and

equal protection of the law.

Some of the Beal victims filed a motion to intervene under federal rule 24 and a motion for relief under

federal rule 60(b)(4) in behalf of Gebhardt and the rest of us. Varlan denied these motions, as well. We

object to this denial and demand a full investigation into Constitutional violations committed by the Sixth

Federal Circuit as well as the misconduct of Judge Thomas A. Varlan.

We are demanding a Congressional investigation into judicial misconduct and Constitutional violations by

Judge Varlan and other judges in the Sixth Federal Circuit and the impeachment of such judges who fail to

sign and/or produce their oaths of office and fail to honor and uphold our Constitution.

Sincerely,

Denise Subramaniam

503-764-5300 ext# 1

Page 4 of 4

Text1: SixthText2: Denise SubramaniamText3: 13865 SW Walker Rd.Text4: Beaverton, OR 97005Text5: 971Text6: 275-7618 Text7: Thomas A. Varlan & H. Bruce GuytonText8: Eastern District of Tennessee at KnoxvilleCheck Box2: YesCheck Box3: Text9: 3:12-CV-468-TAV-HBG

Text11: Text12: Check Box11: Check Box12: Check Box13: YesText13: Text14: Text15: Check Box14: Check Box15: YesText16: Text17: Text18: Text19: Text20: Text21: Text22: Text23: Text24: Text25: Text26: June 18, 2014