Motion to Strike 93 Miscellaneous Filing, 20 Disclosure Statement, 47 — No. 1:21-cv-00748 (Dkt. 94)

Summary

Plaintiff's request and motion to strike the objection and response of Thomas Pappas and all of his other pleadings, filed January 31, 2022 as Document 94 by Natasha Athens d/b/a Favorite Things in Athens 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. The motion asserts that defense counsel, whom it calls a non-party, failed to serve the plaintiff with any pleading and has defaulted. Citing Rule 5, it asks the court to strike all of his pleadings, including a response it says exposes the plaintiff's taxes. It also objects that the court has stricken the plaintiff's own pleadings, and it is signed /s/ Natasha 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 94 Filed 01/31/22 Page 1 of 2




                         UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                         DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

                    NATASHA ATHENS d/b/a Favorite Things,

                                     Plaintiff,

                                         v.

                    BANK OF AMERICA and MEGAN SCHOLZ,

                                   Defendants.

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

Ex Party PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO STRIKE OBJECTION AND RESPONSE OF NON-
PARTY THOMAS PAPPAS & ALL OF HIS OTHER PLEADINGS
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE NON PARTY PLEADING EXPOSING HER TAXES
The Plaintiff seeks that this response is stricken and that the court lacks the
power to alter the rules of civil proceedure without legislation
The court has "stricken" every pleading of the Plaintiff, which contains the
evidence of the nefarious actions of all parties and their compromise but the
fact remains that the court cannot alter the 2 party service and filing required by
law in order to not issue a default.
The court has only used the Constitution for their own use, but failed to use it in
any form for the Plaintiff and the law.
Their PRETEND playschool stance that a defaulted party can continue to file
pleadings is NOT correct, and it's only due to compromise that they continue to
treat him as a party, when the docket sheet and every pleading shows he has
indeed defaulted and cannot file pleadings
The Plaintiff is taking this case all of the way to Supreme court and exposing the
crimes contained here in.
        Case 1:21-cv-00748-SM Document 94 Filed 01/31/22 Page 2 of 2




Parties should be careful for what they wish for, as they continue to inflict their
own war wounds
WHEREFORE UNDER RULE 5, since the imbeccilic actions of a Thomas Pappas
since the onset have failed to serve the Plaintiff a single pleading, ALL of his
pleadings must therefore be stricken, including this one.
The court issued MULTIPLE pleadings be stricken simply for non like the
Plaintiff's ability to expose the crimes contained in this case, and call them out.
The Court FAILED to STRIKE a pleading containing a felony
The Plaintiff seeks that this pleading be stricken as a matter of law
and all Pleadings from a non-party must be stricken as a party that failes to
serve pleadings under Rule 5, defaults and cannot consider themselves a party.


Filed on January 31, 2022
/s/ Natasha Athens


Both parties defaulted by hiring the same attorney who failed to serve his
notice of appearance on their behalf and has defaulted.


File and source

File

94-motion-to-strike-93-miscellaneous-filing-20-disclosure-state.pdf

Size

1,540,885 bytes

SHA-256

7509bbf40c705a5c888858d6358fce67844dc988f28ad6d52d8fc4dc5b04b05f

Our copy

94-motion-to-strike-93-miscellaneous-filing-20-disclosure-state.pdf

Original

archive.org