Plaintiff's Brief on Appeal — Athens v. Bank of America (D.N.H.)

Summary

A brief on appeal filed by plaintiff Natasha Athens, pro se, in Athens d/b/a Favorite Things v. Bank of America and Megan Scholz, Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-00748-SM, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, on December 23, 2021 as Document 68. The brief argues that the Favorite Things PPP loan, funded May 14, 2020, was lawfully approved and cannot be pulled out of forgiveness, and it accuses the judges, defense counsel and Scholz of corruption and fraud. It quotes Bank of America emails, including a May 2020 message about a new loan amount of $18625 and a later message stating that the loan does not appear eligible for forgiveness. The 9-page brief is signed /s/ by Athens.

Summary drafted by a model from the text of the original file linked on this page 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

Full text

        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 1 of 9




                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                         DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

                                Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-00748-SM

NATASHA ATHENS d/b/a Favorite Things,
Plaintiff,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA and MEGAN SCHOLZ,
Defendants.

PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF ON APPEAL

There are no constitutional judges in New Hampshire. All of them are
compromised, and in this particular case, the shock was they have become "Bank
Robbers" with the Defendants and their "Lawyer" who has acted as a Defendant
with the judges. Sadly the corrupt judges tried to be the jury of their own crimes.

The Plaintiff SHOWED exhibits of an approved loan, a VP email approving the
loan, and they know this. Lies only work when there is anyone to lie to.

Since all parties / combined Defendants have no one to lie to, there is no one that
believes any of them. The saddest thing that the Plaintiff learned in this court
journey is that lawyers can lie in open court, and they do.

This sham of an attorney has lied in court and his pleadings, and so has the
Defendant Megan.

The Plaintiff and every single applicant for the federal funds, went through a
grueling process to get approved and HAD to prove payroll to the bank and in this
case a different VP, than the drunken Megan Scholz, and SHE tallied what the
Plaintiff submitted and approved the loan based on those numbers.

NO ONE can change a loan upon forgivness, unless they file charges against the
party for abusing the funds. Of course this is not the case, and despite the court
trying to BLOCK discovery and proof of the other businesses that this was done to,
         Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 2 of 9




to even validate further what happened to the Plaintiff, the liars on board here
will do anything with their sold out souls to try to cheat their own customers that
caught them in the act of this bank fraud crime.

Despite Partisan Hack Magistrate Judge revealing in her case review that she saw
bank fraud, she chose to engage in it and also allow for stolen tax records to be
put into evidence and not even stop it, or seal it. She let it go, as if that thrill of
trying to show someone illegal records just lit up her twisted sold out soul.

While the Plaintiff DID lawfully obtain her loan, and it was deposited into her
account and used for her business to save it after lockdowns from the Governor,
BOA the Defendant's plotted for 9 months to STEAL back partial funding, and they
did it do many customers, so much so, that the SBA had to offer a direct
forgiveness portal, to which Bank of America refused to allow their customers to
utlilize.

FAVORITE THINGS - PPP escalation
Zahid, Naushaba <naushaba.zahid@bofa.com>
Tue 5/12/2020 4:25 PM
To: zipidedooda07@hotmail.com <zipidedooda07@hotmail.com>
Good afternoon Ms. Athens,

It was a pleasure to speak with you today and to discuss your escalation for the
PPP calculations.

I just wanted to let you know I have advanced your escalation to our SBA team to
work on getting you a new loan amount of $18625 based on your 2020 941 for
1st qtr and the 2019 Schedule C based on one month of business.

Thank you for being a valued Bank of America client

Naushaba Zahid,

Vice President | Preferred and Small Business Banking

Bank of America | Baltimore Area
        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 3 of 9




344 Montrose Ave Laurel MD 20707

Priority Service Line: 1-888-287-4637

Defendant, criminal Thomas Pappas, who was supposed to be the attorney copied
from Megan's emails a false rule on the COVID loans that Does NOT entitle them
to changed a loan amount after it's been given based on earnings.

Sadly for drunken Megan Scholz, who can only explain herself, why she changed
the loan amount, and wrote subsequent confliciting emails and then pulled an
approved for forgiveness loan by Bank of America, out of forgiveness.

This court, Bank of America, compromised judges, and an complicit attorney do
not get to make a single dent in the federal rules for banking and laws on loans.
All of them combined do not get to change a signed loan, on a single customer.

Truly partisan Judge McAuliffe who strikes out on Plaintiff's and gets personal
with his abuses, does not override the laws on bank loans and bank fraud. Both
Megan and Thomas Pappas are in big trouble.
Nothing they try to do in this case will negate their crimes, which they continue
to further as it goes along.

Neither district court, nor appeals court can absolve their actions and nothing
any judge does will cancel the loan forgiveness. They hate that, they AIMED to
saddle the Plaintiff out of hatred, contempt, and jealousy that he was even
given the money from her sales and earnings and payroll.

They don't care that they destroyed that business and she lost it all, their AIM is
to collectively take away her right to forgiveness and with their sold out souls -
go celebrate.

But it does not work that way. Anyone with an ounce of working brain cells,
knows that the window of forgiveness ends. When it's never utlizlied and is
closed, the bank is on the hook for the total and interest.

They would have to come back and sue the Plaintiff, who gets to countersue
and get discovery and get due process and get RECORDS. Of all of it, every
        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 4 of 9




changed loan, every reduced amount, every business they did this to, she gets
to subpoena the SBA, and receive the unforgiven totals. She gets to call in the
Comptroller, and the DOJ and the Bar, and more.

Megan's mulitple emails did her in, and whatever possessed her to become so
evil - she only knows. She does not have any legal right to pull any loan out of
forgiveness, it's a crime by itself.

So it's unclear who she is in bed with, and what they get out of it, She's costing
them too much.

Banks are about numbers, when the Plaintiff was younger, a new teller was
FIRED for being off $100 in her drawer at the window. Just $100. Megan so far
has cost her employer almost $20K - And according the the SBA, there were
more. So the question judges should be asking and are not, is how much money
does Megan LOSE for BOA before she's a liability?

1.

PPP Inquiry Outreach <pppinquiryoutreach@bofa.com>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 3:47 PM
To: zipidedooda07@hotmail.com <zipidedooda07@hotmail.com>
Subject: [] You’ll soon receive a new PPP loan forgiveness application with the
Correct Maximum Forgivable Loan amount

LOAN in process of being forgiven IN FULL

2.
Favorite Things
PPP loan funded on: May 14, 2020
PPP loan ending in: 7304
Bank of America has submitted a decision to the Small Business Administration
(SBA) that the full forgiveness amount you requested on your Paycheck
Protection Program (PPP) loan should be forgiven. The SBA will make the final
decision on your forgiveness application.

Megan Scholz pulled it out of forgivness and cannot do that, no one can.
        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 5 of 9




And the SBA was forgiving all of the loans that were lawfully used and
approved.

The ONLY way Megan could have denied my loan or anyone's loan to be denied
forgivness was if the funds were abused and they were not.

Megan is a hysterical unglued vicious fraud, that drinks and loves attention and
is a "big donor" to charities. However, she has abused her title and power and
was upset that the Plaintiff would not go along with only 75% forgiven. In fact,
oddly that "offer" alone just shows not only the fraud going on, the SBA stated
that many were only being offered 50% forgiveness, but that her later offers of
"O" were based on her emotions, not law. She has committed so many crimes,
it's hard to fathom, and whatever MONEY or "favors" are being paid to Thomas
Pappas, who is engaging in crimes with her, virtual bed or not, most people who
get paid to do a job, don't then become the criminals. So it's hard to know what
gives here, but Thomas has repeated bank clients during bankruptcy's so
perhaps he's even doing this one for free.

Regardless, emails from Megan do her in, and have been sent in to multiple
organizations covering this case. The court has 0 power here to do a thing, The
Plaintiff gets the loan forgiven. All judges that try to rewrite the rules for
banking and loans are either paid, evil or getting a chunk of the pie. There is not
a Constititutional judge on the planet that would rule for the Defendant.

3. Megan email
Per your request, a new PPP forgiveness application invitation will be provided
to you. As communicated previously, your PPP loan does not appear eligible for
forgiveness. The PPP forgiveness application invitation you receive will reflect a
maximum forgivable loan amount of $1. Once this application is processed, you
will have an automatic right to an appeal as outlined below.

Email from Megan

4. July 2021
Thank you for reaching out with your concerns related to the Small Business
Administration (“SBA”) Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) loan received by
Favorite Things, LLC (“Favorite Things”) through Bank of America (the “Bank.”)
        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 6 of 9




The Bank disagrees with your assertions regarding Favorite Things PPP loan and
categorically denies any wrongdoing related to the loan, including in the review
and approval of the initial application, funding, and processing of the
forgiveness application.

 5.
The Bank has a responsibility pursuant to the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§
3729-3733, to accurately inform the SBA regarding loans issued by the Bank as
part of the PPP. The Bank has reason to believe Favorite Things received a PPP
loan in excess of what it was entitled to receive under the PPP. The Bank
cannot submit a forgiveness application to the SBA for the full loan amount if
the Bank has reason to believe the application is unsupported.


6.
Eligibility for forgiveness is also governed by the SBA requirements. In response
to your repeated requests for a recalculation, the Bank has reviewed the
documents submitted by Favorite Things and determined there was an error in
the Bank’s prior calculation of maximum forgivable loan amount. Upon closer
review of the documents provided, the wage information provided is conflicting
and the correct maximum forgivable loan amount is $0.

When you call it a BANK error, the bank would have to absorb the loss in the
best of conditions.

The Problem when someone drinks or is not coherent, does not reread their
emails or actually know what they are doing, they self incriminate.

The judges in this case are under investigation on this case and for Magistrate
Judge Johnstone, 2 additional cases, and despite their bias, complicity, their
hatred overrides it all and they have left their bias mark on this case and
ignored the crimes and the new crimes of posting stolen records.

The PLAINTIFF did prove her own loan that was approved by a Bank of America
VP that does not drink but did add up her earnings and approve the loan, the
next phase of that was the SBA to approve it.
        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 7 of 9




Oddly enough, when the Plaintiff applied for the second tier of the CARES act
PPP loans, they used the same strategy, and on the first pass offered her double
what they did in the previous first pass, indicating that after a longer time in
business she was entitled to a larger loan. She was in fact entitled to the exact
same payroll since her payroll did not change, but she saw what they were
doing, and said she was not going to trust the bank and get set up for 2 sets of
loans.

In order for any of these lies to wash out the rest of the lies, the bank could not
have offered her double for her 2nd pass at the loan, but they did.

In a case had this gone forward to trial, that was going to be brought up, and it's
the banks crimes and fraud that told the Plaintiff NOT to let them set her up.

They tried to trip up all small businesses by making the money harder to access,
and making for specific title names on the exhibits, it was grueling and took so
long. The Plaintiff suffered 2 years worth of unrecoverable losses, but the bank
was ruthless and trying to keep the unused money and bill themselves HOURS
in labor but make sure the 2nd tier loans were less obtained, and that turned
out to be the case for many business owners, they gave up, and turned it down.

The Plaintiff was offered a grant, and many emails to fill out the 2nd tier of the
loan, and she turned it all down. The grant loan officer called her, trying to
plead with her to take the money, saying it was forgiven and did not have to be
paid back and they had so much money but businesses were not taking the free
grants.

There is NOTHING that anyone can do to offset forgiveness and the harder all
parties try, the more they show their cards.

On top of every piece of this corrupt case, the fact remains that this bias court
does not get to attack Plaintiff's and display their contempt. They have truly
exposed who they are and how corrupt.

Thomas Pappas defaulted, and never served the Plaintiff. The fact that this
court has rusty unused gavels for whatever they have traded them for, is not
relevant. It does not change the law, nor the default. His insanity, stupidy and
        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 8 of 9




begging from his sippy cup for the court to endulge him turns stomaches of
normal people that wonder what favors are exchanged from sippy cup to sippy
cup.

The reason the Plaintiff took it to interlocatory appeal is not from any piece of
this case being frivilous, but it's from the crowded bed of all parties being
"Defendant's and erasing their duties and job titles.

In conclusion Thomas Pappas and Megan are in trouble, What happens to
judges is unclear, but they have been turned in.

The Plaintiff had a right to expect this court to behave at an advanced adult
level but only found spilled juice cups in a sand box and a bunch of bullies that
engage like a lynch mob on law abiding civilians that just want to earn enough
to keep lights on in the state of live free or die.

Shame on all of you and your resumes, and the Plaintiff is one of over 1/2 of the
state residents and citizens that know how insane and corrupt this government
is, and are trying to restore freedom and save the reason that anyone travels to
this state.


/s/ Natasha Athens

Filed with the court on 12/23/2021

All of you compromised cruel evil people deserve coal in your stockings
and I hope no one has to suffer in your homes with all of your dysfunctional evil
presence. I would never want to have a holiday with any of you. Most people
would not.
Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 68 Filed 12/23/21 Page 9 of 9


File and source

File

68-stricken-see-endorsed-order-dated-1-25-2022-brief-memorandum.pdf

Size

1,586,046 bytes

SHA-256

785ca3febb755674f6a1ea6083c760b9a921052509e0734eeffe07c5fe7946a2

Our copy

68-stricken-see-endorsed-order-dated-1-25-2022-brief-memorandum.pdf

Original

archive.org