Motion to Dismiss — Gordon Hunter Pedersen, Case number 2:20-cr-00216-DBB (Dkt. 22, D. Utah)

Summary

A motion to dismiss filed by Gordon Hunter Pedersen, styled Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen, in Case number 2:20-cr-00216-DBB in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah. It names as respondents John W. Huber, a former United States Attorney, former Assistant United States Attorneys Jacob J. Strain and Joel A. Ferre, and judges Clark Waddoups and Jared C. Bennett. The filing demands a written answer within 72 hours, asserts that its author is a private living natural man and not the corporate entity GORDON HUNTER PEDERSEN, and invokes the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and other constitutional claims. It asks for a permanent injunction to stop the proceedings, discharge of all warrants of arrest, and an evidentiary hearing in the nature of a forensic audit. A declaration of service states that it was served by email on the respondents and District Judge David Barlow.

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

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH F1LE.U US J)i:drid Co1Jrt··UT
MAY 81 '!22 PM04: 09

GORDON HUNTER PEDERSEN ) Motion To Dismiss
Petitioner/ Declarant
)
Case number 2:20-cr-00216-DBB, DBB-1
-against- )

John W.Huber, Jacob J. Strain, Joel E Ferre, ) District judge David Barlow
Clark Waddoups, Jared C. Bennett
John Doe and Jane Doe (1-12) )
Respondent(s)

Motion To Dismiss

I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen© demand that this court document, 'Motion to Dismiss' is filed into
the court record and into the Docket for adjudication by the clerk of the court of this court (it is
NOT merely a document lodged for reference purposes only with no response required); and by
law and my constitutional guarantees (Bill of Rights) it must be ANSWERED in writing by this
court; this court's failure to do so within 72 hours (3 days) will be deemed as 'No Response' and as
'Admittance' and 'Acquiensence' to all that is contained in this document as superior prima fade
fact and law. I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen© OBJECT in advance to anything to the contrary by
this court and hold all the involved parties accountable, culpable and liable without immunity.

There is NO statute of limitations on fraud.

For the court record: I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen© non-corporate, private living natural man,
am NOT the federal juristic artificial corporate entity GORDON HUNTER PEDERSEN / Gordon
Hunter Pedersen. GORDON HUNTER PEDERSEN, ET ALIA, was surrendered to the Depart-
ment of the Treasury by an address change. The documentation was already filed in this court
and is included herein by reference. The court and respondent(s) were served in advance that
Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen© is a Washingtonian, adopted Utahan, non-coporate living man.

Utah Case: 2:20-cr-00216, 2:20-cr-00216 DBB, DBB-1

INDIVIDUAL/ Franchisee: GORDON HUNTER PEDERSEN/ Gordon Hunter Pedersen, et alia

Debtor: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA/ United States of America

Attorney(s): JOHN W. HUBER/ John W. Huber; JACOB J. STRAIN/ Jacob J. Strain
JOEL A. FERRE / Joel A. Ferre

CUSIP / TIN#: G53577794

Re: PLAINTIFF/ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V. GORDON HUNTER PEDERSEN
Plaintiff/ United States of America v. Gordon Hunter Pedersen

1
PARTIES

Applicant: Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©% P.O. Box 152, Utah County, Utah State
[near Pleasant Grove]

Respondent 1: John W. Huber
Doing Business As: Former United States Attorney District of Utah
In care of: Judiciary Courts of The State of Utah
450 S State St Salt Lake City, UT, 84111-3101 United States

Respondent 2: Jacob J. Strain
Doing Business As: Former Assistant United States Attorney District of Utah
In care of: Judiciary Courts of The State of Utah
450 S State St Salt Lake City, UT, 84111-3101 United States

Respondent 3: Joel A. Ferre
Doing Business As: Former Assistant United States Attorney District of Utah
In care of: Judiciary Courts of The State of Utah
450 S State St Salt Lake City, UT, 84111-3101 United States

Respondent 4: Clark Waddoups
Doing Business As: Clark Waddoups, Waddoups, Clark; Judge of the United
States District Court District of Utah In care of: Judiciary Courts of The State of Utah
450 S State St Salt Lake City, UT, 84111-3101 United States

Respondent 5: Jared C. Bennett
Doing Business As: Jared C. Bennett, Judge of the United States District Court District of Utah
In care of: Judiciary Courts of The State of Utah
450 S State St Salt Lake City, UT, 84111-3101 United States

JURISDICTION

The jurisdiction of this court is invoked pursuant to The Constitution of the United States of
America which states unequivocally:
No (natural) person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ...
-Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment (1791).
Violation of Article IV of all four Federal Constitutions - Americans are exempt from Bills of
Attainder
Violation of Amendment V (1791) - Denial of Substantive Due Process
Violation of Amendment V (1791) - Double Jeopardy via Dispositive Motions
Violation of Amendment XI - Americans are not subject to any foreign laws.
Violation of Federal Law, PL 73-10 and 12 USC 411 - Mutual Offset Credit Exchange Exemption
from all Public Debts

Memorandum and Facts in Support of Motion to Dismiss, Failure to State a Claim upon which
Relief can be Granted and alleged criminal Equivalent, Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©, Washingtonian, adopted Utahan, a living man, having attained
the age of majority; of my free will act and deed, publicly declare the following to be true: "My
intellectual property (IP) and my private, personal and physical (real) properties are neither
abandoned nor unclaimed", and any derivative rights being alleged by the State(s) of Utah,
Washington, or the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (bankrupt and permanently dissolved since
January 2021) have been terminated.

2
I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©, Washintonian, adopted Utahan (hereinafter, I, me, my)(petitioner/
declarant); 1) Demanded an Emergency Injunction and Permanent Injunctive Relief due
to: NOTICE OF CONSPIRACY AND CRIMINAL TRESPASS and injurious physical harm by
orders of Clark Waddoups and Jared C. Bennet~ including but not limited to enclosures,
extensions and statements of fact and law, included herein by reference: and filed into this
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH; April 14, 2022, under my
constitutional guarantees (Bill of Rights) for substantive due process of law, to be adjudicated.

Additionally, I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©; 2} Demanded an Emergency Injunction/ and
Permanent Injunctive Relief Order, Demand for Response, Demand for Due Process of Law
Constitutional Enforcement and Correction of the Falsified Public Record; Lex Justice
Initiated and Demanded; included herein by reference and filed into this UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH; May 12, 2022, under my constitutional guarantees (Bill of
Rights) for substantive due process of law; to be adjudicated.

Instead, one of the respondents; Clark Waddoups, doing business as [jJdge] of the United
States District Court District of Utah ordered the court to:

"lodge the documents for reference purposes only, no response required, unless
specifically ordered by the court", included herein by reference.

Violating my constitutional guarantees, amendments 4, 5, 8, 9 & 11; and violating Article
4 section 1; and Article VI the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (1791).

I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©; hereby, order the court and district Oudge] David Barlow, to file
my 2 court documents summarized above into the court record and docket for due process of
law and for adjudication; failure to ANSWER to the documents within 72 hours (3 days) will be
deemed as 'No Response' and as 'Admittance' and 'Acquiesence', to all that is contained in
these 2 documents, as superior prima facie fact and law; I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©
OBJECT in advance to anything to the contrary by this court and hold all the involved parties
accountable, culpable and liable without immunity.

And NOT merely to "lodge the documents for reference purposes only with no response
required" - Maxim of Law is that; "as a thing is done it can be undone".

I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©; also hereby terminate any/all public defenders assigned to me in
this case, and any/all of their answers or determinations to the court are Void, having no force or
effect in this case; as I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen© did NOT consent to their services, ever!

For and on the official public record, the Constitutions do NOT govern the people. The
Constitutions are instituted to protect and guarantee the God given unalienable rights from
government and judicial overreach and applicable to all officials and employees thereof.

In compliance with Federal Rules of Civil procedure 12(b)(1); 12(b)(6); Criminal 12(b)(3)
(B)(v); and all concurrent State rules as well as the Jurisdiction outlined above:

On April 28th , 2020 by the orders and actions of the respondent(s); a militarized 'swat' team
consisting of FDA, FBI, Homeland Security and others in a forced hostile home invasion under
threat and duress and armed abuse of power, breaking and entering into the home of Gordon-
Hunter: Pedersen© against my will and protests and without my consent, committing Criminal
Trespass, Domestic Terrorism, Treason and other crimes; threatening me, my wife and my life
at gunpoint, without any substantive due process of law; and violating my constitutional (Bill of

3
Right) guarantees; The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects against unreasonable searches and seizues, shall not be violated ..... nor be deprived of
life, liberty or property without due process of law ... and other crimes established on the court
record; terrorizing an American non-combatant, American without disabilities, a Utahan, private
living man, living on the land and soil jurisdiction of Utah; (which all of the Respondent(s) have
been duly apprised of these facts), who committed NO crime and NO harm or injury to anyone;
and stealing my bank account, property and possessions.

I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©, Washintonian, adopted Utahan (petitioner/declarant), upon
inspection of the charging document "Indictment" allegedly issued by a Grand Jury have
discovered severe and fatal flaws to the information relied upon to justify the abusive, domestic
terrorism activities, referenced above.

This action was based on misstatements and misrepresentations of facts and by all appear-
ances, presented to a Grand Jury as such. Every action that is/was based on these charging
documents is unenforceable, including court subject matter jurisdiction, which this court
never had. (emphasis added). This action has rendered every activity for case number
' 2:20-cr-00216, 2:20-cr-00216 DBB, DBB-1 from the 28th of April 2020 to the present to be
unenforceable and a deprivation of rights under color of law.

It is unmistakably apparent that the United States of America, through former us Attorney John
Huber has made blatant misstatements, misrepresented facts, instituted deceptive tactics and
concealment in order to procure assets and property belonging to I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©,
for financial gain. For and on the record that is the very definition of FRAUD.

According to Findlaw is the following definition of Fraud:
Fraud is a broad term that refers to acts intended to swindle someone. In essence, it's the use
of intentional deception for monetary or personal gain.

Thousands of people each year fall victim to it. Fraud always includes a false statement, misrep-
resentation or deceitful conduct. The purpose is to gain something of value, usually money, by
misleading or deceiving someone into believing something that the perpetrator knows to be
false.

https ://www. find law. com/Qriminal/crirninal-charges/fraud. html

fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments" (United. States v.
Throckmorton, 98 us 61(1878).

According to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6(b)(1) and (b)(2) the defense may
issue a Challenge or Motion to Dismiss an Indictment upon the grounds stated and the
qualifications of jurors, if any exist.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_6
(b) Objection to the Grand Jury or to a Grand Juror.

(1) Challenges. Either the government or a defendant may challenge the grand jury on the
ground that it was not lawfully drawn, summoned, or selected, and may challenge an individual
juror on the ground that the juror is not legally qualified.

(2) Motion to Dismiss an Indictment A party may move to dismiss the indictment based on an

4
objection to the grand jury or on an individual juror's lack of legal qualification, unless the court
has previously ruled 011 the same objection under Rule 6(b}(l). The motion to dismiss is
governed by 28 u.s.c. §1867 (e). The court must not dismiss the indictment on the ground that
a grand juror was not legally qualified if the record shows that at least 12 qualified jurors
concurred in the indictment.

From the moment of inception to this present moment I have not received any information
regarding the Grand Jury, the information presented to them, or their qualifications. I hereby
Demand all information regarding the Grand Jury proceedings, as well as an unredacted version
of the Indictment to verify foreperson signature, be provided as soon as possible so that I
and my team can make these determinations.

Further, I demand a listing of all of the expert witnesses presented to the Grand Jury as well as
all of the information used by the Grand Jury as grounds for their decision, within 7 days. It is
apparent by the information contained in the "Indictment" that there may have been numerous
lies and misstatements presented by Plaintiff's counsel.

The definition in paragraph 6 of the "Indictment" clearly states what a drug is according to the
statute, however the items in question from My Doctor Suggests and the label thereon clearly
states the EXACT OPPOSITE. Since the item(s) referenced do NOT qualify as a drug,
paragraphs 7-10 are without merit and should be stricken from any court record.

False Statements in "MANNER AND MEANS OF THE SCHEME AND ARTIFICE TO DEFRAUD

The product(s) referenced in paragraph 15 specifically state the OPPOSITE of what is alleged.
The label clearly states that the product does not treat or cure any ailment or disease. If I have
specific first hand knowledge through written or oral testimonials (testimony) that a particular
product has helped in a certain way, it is NOT a violation or any offense to re-state those
experiences to others. In no way is that considered a Scheme and Artifice to Defraud and to
suggest otherwise is frivolous and false.

The 'FELONY INDICTMENT'; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff vs. GORDON HUNTER
PEDERSEN, defendant; Case 2:20-cr-00216 aka DBB, DBB-1; filed into the UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, court record on July 23, 2020; listed as a 'TRUE BILL'
unsigned by the FOREPERSON OF THE GRAND JURY; Signed on behalf of JOHN W. HUBER,
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY by, JACOB J. STRAIN, ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY;
is included as an "enclosure" into this document herein by reference.

Again, paragraph 17 is a misstatement and patently false. It does not qualify as a drug if one
actually reads the statute as it is written. The fact is that nowhere does the label reference that
the product(s) are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of
disease in man or other animals; and as a supplement is cross referenced with the following;

21 U.S. Code § 343 (r)(1)(b)

.b1tQs://www .law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/343#r 1 _e
(r) Nutrition levels and health-related claims

(1) Except as provided in clauses (A) through (C) of subparagraph (5), if it is a food intended for
human consumption which is offered for sale and for which a claim is made in the label or
labeling of the food ,Which expressly or by implication-

5
(A)
characterizes the level of any nutrient which is of the type required by paragraph (q)(l) or (q)(2)
to be in the label or labeling of the food unless the claim is made in accordance with
subparagraph (2), or

(B)
characterizes the relationship of any nutrient which is of the type required by paragraph (q)(l) or
(q)(2) to be in the label or labeling of the food to a disease or a health-related condition unless
the claim is made in accordance with subparagraph (3) or (5)(D).

So again, as you can clearly see, the prosecution's claim is false and without merit.

The allegations in paragraph 18 are so ludicrous it is hard to fathom these statements actually
appear in an alleged federal indictment. There is no "guise of medical licensing or authority" I
have made NO statements that are untrue. The FACT is I do have a PhD in Toxicology and also
in many other areas as well, and as such may refer to myself as a doctor. I have never refer-
enced myself as being a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) or having a medical license or practice.
contrary to the allegations of the prosecution, I have a Certificate of Naturopathic Medicine and
therefore am "certified". Again that does not reference me as a Doctor of Medicine and I have
never alluded to myself as such. To the best of my knowledge and understanding, wearing a lab
coat and a stethoscope is not a criminal offense and the allegation that this activity is in some
manner a "scheme to defraud" is preposterous and does NOT substantiate the false allegations.

For and on the record, the allegations of Mail Fraud and Wire Fraud are false, fraudulent and
without merit. For any offense of mail fraud or wire fraud, the underlying activity that those
alleged offenses are based upon MUST be a convicted offense and not simply allegations.
The United States of America, through District Attorney John Huber, has vastly overstepped
their perceived authority. There has been NO substantive due process to determine whether
any of my activities are a criminal offense. This right of due process is protected and guaranteed
by the United States of America Constitution (1791) and the unlawful and illegal search and
seizure based on no due process is a direct violation of Amendment IV and other Amendments,
(and other potential crimes).

https:l/www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

Amendment IV (1791)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but
upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to
be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V (1791)
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a
presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces,
or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be
subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in
any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation.

6
The information contained in paragraphs 25-27 are patently false and can easily be proven to
the contrary. The fact is that corona virus is not Covid 19, but Covid 19 (Sars CoV-2) is a
coronavirus, and can easily be proven with a simple internet search.

Human Corona virus name Illness

SARS-CoV-2 Covid 19
SARS-CoV Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)
MERS-CoV Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS)
HCoV-NL63 Usually mild respiratory illness
HcoV-229E
HcoV-OC43
HKU1

There is a substantial amount of information relative to the health benefits of silver that can
easily be proven. Nothing in paragraph 27 or any of the subsections state anything fraudulent or
false by the prosecutors own reference. In subsection (b) a quote from a second hand party
(Silver Health Institute) is hearsay and cannot be used in determining a truth. The prosecution
has provided no veracity to that statement. There is not one statement in any of the subsections
that is not true and it is the burden of the Prosecution/Plaintiff to prove that they are NOT true.
Generalized statements from the prosecution have proven themselves to be false and
misleading. The Prosecution/Plaintiff did NOT prove or deliver any evidence to it's allegation.

Again, there are volumes of information and studies throughout modern medicine and even
ancient medicines of the benefits of silver nanoparticles and its antimicrobial action against
various bacteria, fungi and viruses. I have referenced some, but not all of this information in
previous submissions. I repeat to this court that I never claimed that any product of "My Doctor
Suggests" was a cure or treatment of the SARS-CoV-2 virus but that it MAY be beneficial based
on efficacy with other viruses, bacteria and fungi, and more specifically the numerous corona-
viruses (as illustrated above).

It is further proven that the product(s) referenced is/are NOT a drug and does not qualify as a
drug, but is a food grade supplement. With all of that said, and the proven facts provided that
refute completely the baseless claims of the United States of America, the following is a
scientific study from the National Library of Medicine and The National Institute of Health (NIH)
and appearing on the nih,gov website. This scientific study was completed by expert
microbiologists and corroborates my position, knowledge and understanding in the fields of
biology and toxicology. It is precisely this area where the PhD is relevant. This expert scientific
study was completed only a few months after the baseless and unproven (without any evidence
to substantiate) allegations of the United States of America.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7486059/

Potent antiviral effect of silver nanoparticles on SARS-CoV-2

Abstract

The pandemic of COVID-19 is spreading unchecked due to the lack of effective antiviral
measures. Silver nanoparticles (AgNP) have been studied to possess antiviral properties and
are presumed to inhibit SARS-CoV-2. Due to the need for an effective agent against SARS-
CoV-2, we evaluated the antiviral effect of AgNPs. We evaluated a plethora of AgNPs of
different sizes and concentration and observed that particles of diameter around 10 nm were

7
effective in inhibiting extracellular SARS-CoV-2 at concentrations ranging between 1 and 10
ppm while cytotoxic effect was observed at concentrations of 20 ppm and above. Luciferase-
based pseudovirus entry assay revealed that AgNPs potently inhibited viral entry step via
disrupting viral integrity. These results indicate that AgNPs are highly potent microbicides
against SARS-CoV-2 but should be used with caution due to their cytotoxic effects and their
potential to derange environmental ecosystems when improperly disposed of.

Section 1 Introduction

The elemental metal, Silver (Ag) has broad spectrum antimicrobial action against various
bacteria, fungi and viruses. Due to their versatility, Ag nanoparticles (AgNP) have currently
found their way as a microbicide for biological surfaces in various forms such as wound
dressings, medical devices, deodorant sprays and fabrics. Several studies have demonstrated
the potent antiviral action of AgNPs against various human pathogenic viruses such as
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), Influenza virus, Norovirus, Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) [)J. In addition to these viruses, since Ag has been
demonstrated to kill SARS-CoV, we hypothesized the strong possibility of AgNPs to inhibit
SARS-CoV-2 [2.,;r].

As you can clearly see, ALL information in the alleged "Indictment" is fabricated, and is baseless
and without any merit (not based on any law fraudulently using the "color of law") and without
anything at all to substantiate the (now bankrupt, dissolved) United States of America, lnc.'s
alleged "Indictment": and their basis to committ domestic terrorism under armed abuse of
power, and by "home invasion" and seizing "pirating" real and personal property and other
assets (that did NOT belong to them), for their own unjust enrichment; without any valid
conviction or due process of law; violating the Federal Constitution and the Constitution of the
United States; and violating the constitutional guarantees (Bill of Rights) of I, Gordon-Hunter:
Pedersen©, wherein all rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice.

Concurrently, all of the statements in paragraph 28 are true and can easily be proven. There is
no proof to the contrary.

John W. Huber and Jacob J. Strain have demonstrated and presented some of the most
egregious misrepresentations I have ever witnessed. To my knowledge, neither have any
expertise or credentials to make the determinations outlined in the "Indictment", and appear to
be outside of their purview; overstepping government jurisdiction; not in their official capacity,
but in their commerical capacities, being fully culpable and liable without any immunity.

If the statements and information from the "Indictment" were used to present to the Grand Jury
as fact, when it is easily proven they are false and fraudulent then both John W. Huber and
Jacob J.Strain and any others that may have contributed, by all appearances, have committed
prosecutorial misconduct (and other potential egregious crimes) and are in violation of:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1623

18 U.S. Code§ 1623 - False declarations before grand jury or court

a) Whoever under oath (or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty
of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title Zfi, United States Code) in any proceeding
before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States, knowingly makes any false
material declaration or makes or uses any other information, including any book, paper,

8
document, record, recording, or other material, knowing the same to contain any false material
declaration, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(b) This section is applicable whether the conduct occurred within or without the United States.

(c) An indictment or information for violation of this section alleging that, in any proceedings
before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States, the defendant under oath has
knowingly made two or more declarations, which are inconsistent to the degree that one of them
is necessarily false, need not specify which declaration is false if-

(1) each declaration was material to the point in question, and (2) each declaration was made
within the period of the statute of limitations for the offense charged under this section.

In any prosecution under this section, the falsity of a declaration set forth in the indictment or
information shall be established sufficient for conviction by proof that the defendant while under
oath made irreconcilably contradictory declarations material to the point in question in any
proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury. It shall be a defense to an indictment
or information made pursuant to the first sentence of this subsection that the defendant at the
time he made each declaration believed the declaration was true.

(d) Where, in the same continuous court or grand jury proceeding in which a declaration is
made, the person making the declaration admits such declaration to be false, such admission
shall bar prosecution under this section if, at the time the admission is made, the declaration
has not substantially affected the proceeding, or it has not become manifest that such falsity has
been or will be exposed.

(e) Proof beyond a reasonable doubt under this section is sufficient for conviction. It shall not be
necessary that such proof be made by any particular number of witnesses or by documentary or
other type of evidence.

(Added Pub. L. 91-452, title IV, §~0l(a), Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 932; amended Pub. L. 94-550,
.§fil, Oct. 18, 1976, 90 Stat. 2535; Pub. L. 103-322, title XXXIII, §1330016(1)(L). Sept. 13, 1994,
108 Stat. 2147.)

For this reason it is incumbent / imperative that I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen© receive ALL
information presented to the Grand Jury that initiated this action and immediately sent to the
mailing location herein.

The alleged "Indictment" that was issued upon such information, and everything contained
therein are unenforceable. Furthermore, the alleged "Indictment" by its very definition is a "true
bill", or a Bill of Attainder. I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©, Washingtonian, adopted Utahan, as an
American, am exempt from Bills of Attainder: a legislative act that imposes punishment
without a trial.

Also, a "true bill" (the "Indictment" from a Grand Jury) would suggest that the entire process is
nothing more than Accounting. It is incumbent upon those responsible for the Accounting to
fulfill their requisite duties and correct the accounting of the case when demanded to do so.
Judge David Barlow, I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©, am demanding you do so and apply the
Mutual Offset Credit Exchange Exemption to this case.

9
All information presented by FDA special agent Virginia Keys is False, fraudulent and without
merit. The fraudulent methods used to procure the information presented by Virginia Keys are
abhorrent I heinous, and MUST be stricken from the court record. Virginia Keys will be
commercially liable for her actions. Criminal complaints may be pending.

All parties involved with this action are jointly and severally commercially liable for their
action(s). Upon further research, and by all appearances as of this present time, the plenary
license and subsequently plenary immunity has expired, thus rendering each official liable in his/
her/their personal capacity.

As stated previously, this action is baseless and without merit, based on fraud and mis-
representations. All respondents that have participated in this action, by all appearances, have
committed the following offense (but not their only offenses):

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any
person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any
rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United
States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being alien,
or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results
from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use
or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in
violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated
sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be
fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced
to death.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 696; Pub. L. 90-284, title I. §Dl03(b), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat.
75; Pub. L. 100-690. title VII. §[]019, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103-322, title VI,
§l60006(b), title XXXII, §§1320103(b), 320201(b), title XXXIII, §1330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994,
108 Stat. 1970, 2109, 2113, 2147; Pub. L. 104-294, title VI, §§l604(b)(14)(B), 607(a), Oct. 11,
1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3511.)

For and on the official record, arresting an American is Kidnapping. Notice to Principal is
notice to Agent, Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal

Unlawful Seizure of real Property
I hereby demand ALL property and possessions be returned that was unlawfully and illegally
seized per The United States of America own indictment section: Notice of Intent to Seek
Forfeiture where it plainly states: upon conviction of any offense in violation of 18 USC §
1343 as set forth in this Indictment The seizure of property happened prior to any conviction,
which is yet another violation of substantive due process. The Demand for ALL property
returned includes but is not limited to any treble damages, penalties and interest.

Judicial Notice and request for Military Intervention

10
Petitioner hereby gives Notice to all courts in regard to this matter. This case has been
forwarded to the military for military investigation along with all respondents involved in this
case/claim. Petitioner seeks remedy and Restitution. Petitioner hereby requests Military
intervention from the branch that is responsible for overseeing the District Court

Conclusion
DEMAND FOR RELIEF NO ONE CAN PROFIT FROM A CRIME.

For and on the record the United States of America has no claim, has failed to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, and the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. As required by
operation of law, cases 2:20-cr-00216, 2:30-cr-00216 DBB, DBB-1 The United States District
Court, District of Utah must be terminated.

Pursuant to the foregoing information, I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©, do hereby move the court
and request that the Motion to Dismiss be honored and the case be dismissed and terminated
with prejudice, and all records corrected, and a return of all property and possessions, including
but not limited to ALL damages. I hereby request that this Motion be decided solely "on the
"papers" without an oral hearing with the parties.

WHEREFORE, petitioner/declarant demands: The remedy provided pursuant to Federal Law,
PL 73-10 (12 USC 411): Mutual Offset Credit Exchange Exemption, be honored, along with
recognition of my Exemption from all " state and federal taxes", as well as, all state and federal
citizenship obligations, including all mortgages, and all Territorial and Municipal Codes and
Statutes.

To issue a permanent injunction to STOP all summary process proceedings in UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH/ United States District Court District of Utah
for case numbers 2:20-cr-00216, 2:30-cr-00216 DBB, DBB-1 and immediate discharge of all
warrant(s) of arrest. They violate both the United States Constitution and Utah State laws.

To conduct an evidentiary hearing in the nature of a forensic audit, to determine the degree of
damages caused by the malicious negligence of the defendants/respondents against, and
return of, my private and real property, along with any securities created from this case both
known and unknown. Explicitly reserving all rights without prejudice.

I, Gordon-Hunter: Pedersen©, am a Washingtonian, adopted Utahan; an American without
Disability, who is not subject to "the Americans With Disability Act ("ADA"). Explicitly reserving
all rights without prejudice.

"This is my free-will choice and I herein invoke Lex Justice"

Lex semper dabit remedium: "The law always gives a remedy."
'J

In care of P.O. Box 152 Utah County, Utah State [near Pleasa
forensicinvestigator@protonmail.com

11
Declaration [Certificate] of Service

I declare this 'Motion to Dismiss' is served via email specifically to all of respondent(s) identified
in this document and directly to District Court [Judge] David Barlow at the court at the time of filing.

*************Nothing below this line, No changes permitted************

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.utd.120963.22.0.pdf
Size: 761,420 bytes
SHA-256: c35513e2d3b3fb06db64e9700b747c3e8ab93d1c314357725a575feeb580ab53
Our copy: gov.uscourts.utd.120963.22.0.pdf
Original: archive.org