Plaintiff's Objection and Response to Judge McAuliffe's "Order" When No Part of This Case Remains in District Court — Natasha Athens v. Bank of America, N.A., Case No. 21-cv-748-SM

Summary

Filing by plaintiff Natasha Athens, d/b/a Favorite Things, in Natasha Athens v. Bank of America, N.A. and Megan Scholz, Case No. 21-cv-748-SM, U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, headed “Plaintiff's Objection and Response to Judge McAuliffe's 'Order' When No Part of This Case Remains in District Court.” Athens argues that the entire case was appealed by Thomas Pappas, even though it was defaulted upon, so no part of it remains in the District Court and the order is moot. She says there can be no response or new appeal over a case that is on appeal, and prays that the court's actions get 2 judges removed who she says are unfit to serve. The filing, Document 103, is signed /s/ Natasha Athens and dated February 27, 2022.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Issuer: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Document type: Order
Date: 2022-02-27
Case: Plaintiff v. Case No. 21-cv-748-SM
Case number: 21-cv-748-SM

Cite this document

“Plaintiff'S Objection And Response To Judge Mcauliffe'S ‘Order’ When.” UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, No. 21-cv-748-SM, dated 2022-02-27. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2022-02-27-plaintiff-v-case-no-21-cv-748-sm-f7c75b73-1/, SHA-256 f7c75b73166277bc5bd2eb6f59a684c397fc44a39c7f68b0994315c765216721.

Full text

        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 103 Filed 02/27/22 Page 1 of 2




                         UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
                                 Natasha Athens,
                              d/b/a Favorite Things,
                                     Plaintiff
                            v. Case No. 21-cv-748-SM

                            Bank of America, N.A. and
                                 Megan Scholz,
                                   Defendants

PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO JUDGE MCAULIFFE'S "ORDER" WHEN
NO PART OF THIS CASE REMAINS IN DISTRICT COURT

The entire case was appealed (even though it was defaulted upon) by Thomas
Pappas. There is no part of this case remaining in the District Court. This order is
moot, it's like writing on thin air and quite delusional.

WHEREFORE, there can be no response or new fake appeal over an entire case
that is on appeal. She left nothing in this court.

As a sidebar, if the Plaintiff had ever made the mistake of marrying a deranged
tryant of a man, she would easily go on a one way space ride, to never return, and
if she ever did survive, she would use the Witness Protection Program to obtain
another identity and go live a life that never let someone with so much evil have
access to her ever again, and for some people that's a better option than to
remain with any one so full of abuse of power that they cannot ever escape.
Imagine the life with anyone that is as abusive as a sitting judge that targets
lawful citizens and deprives them of a right to use the legal system.

She prays that the actions of this court get 2 judges removed that are unfit to
serve, and have destroyed lives in New Hampshire for decades, rotting corruption
to the core.

/s/ Natasha Athens
       Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 103 Filed 02/27/22 Page 2 of 2




February 27, 2022

File and source

File: athens_bank_of_america__docket-60366607__doc-103__id-194140355__Response_-_not_to_Motion.pdf
Size: 1,545,425 bytes
SHA-256: f7c75b73166277bc5bd2eb6f59a684c397fc44a39c7f68b0994315c765216721
Our copy: athens_bank_of_america__docket-60366607__doc-103__id-194140355__Response_-_not_to_Motion.pdf
Original: storage.courtlistener.com