No summons, invalid Assignment Order for US Judge Thomas Griesa, and no authentication records... in a court that is notorious for fraud in banking matters... Conduct of the US courts over the past decade should be deemed an unannounced regime change in the US, central to abuse of the people and failing banking regulation. In the case of NML v Republic of Argentina - fraud of medieval style and proportions.

::::::::

No summons, invalid Notice of Assignment for US Judge Thomas Griesa, and denial of public access to the authentication records in a court that is notorious for fraud in banking matters... Conduct of the US courts over the past decade should be deemed an unannounced regime change in the United States. It is also central to abuse of the people of the United States and failing banking regulation. In the case of NML v Republic of Argentina the US courts reach beyond the territorial US, to rob the people of Argentina through fraud of medieval style and proportions.

_____

OccupyTLV, September 6 - f or the second time in 15 years, the US is causing the collapse of the Argentinian economy, inflicting poverty and misery on millions. [ⁱ]

In 2001, Argentina showed "a decline without parallel". The economic collapse of Argentina wiped out the middle class and raised the level of poverty to 57.5%. Millions in Argentina were thrown into unemployment, poverty and hunger. That, after being Latin America's star in the 1990s. [ⁱⁱ]

The collapse of the Argentinian economy puzzled many.... But others offered explanations: In his book "Globalization and Its Discontent", none other than Nobel prize winner Joseph Stieglitz raised the suspicion that the collapse of the Argentinian economy was the handiwork of Stanley Fischer in his capacity as a senior officer of the International Monetary Fund (later Governor of Bank of Israel, today No 2 in the US Federal Reserve), at the service of US agencies. [ ⁱⁱⁱ ]

Others state it more clearly: Central to the collapse was the implementation of neo-liberal policies which enabled the swindle of billions of dollars by foreign banks and corporations.

In 2014, the fraud is more brazen. In litigation in the US District Court, Southern District of New York, which is opined here as fraud, Judge Griesa issued rulings, orders, and judgments, which doom the Argentinian economy.

NML Capital, Ltd. v. The Republic of Argentina ( 1:08-cv-06978 ) in the US District Court, Southern District of New York

US Judge Thomas Griesa; Street scene from the Argentinian economic collapse of 2001.

_____

Law review summarized the case as follows: [^iv]

In 2001, Argentina defaulted on more than ninety-five billion dollars in external debt. At the time, this constituted the largest sovereign default in history. Argentina initiated two restructurings in 2005 and 2010, allowing holders of defaulted bonds to exchange their bonds for new debt at a rate of twenty-five to twenty-nine cents on the dollar, thus restructuring more than ninety-one percent of the foreign debt on which it had defaulted in 2001. Hedge funds specializing in trading distressed sovereign debt, such as Elliott Associates, purchased large amounts of Argentinian debt at a significant discount on the secondary market, and "held out"--they refused to join the restructurings and sought full collection of their debt.

In February 2012, Judge Griesa of the District Court for the Southern District of New York issued orders enjoining Argentina from making payments on its restructured 2005 and 2010 debt without making ratable payments to NML Capital, a distressed-debt hedge fund affiliated with Elliott Associates. In October 2012, a unanimous panel of the Second Circuit substantially affirmed the orders.6 Argentina was not to make full payment on its restructured debt without also making full payment to the holdout plaintiffs... The decision, therefore, would seem to doom consensual sovereign debt restructuring.

______

In plain language, a single hold-out debt holder, NML Capital, can undermine the consensual agreement of the Republic of Argentina and the majority of its debt holders, and extort favorable treatment through the ruling of a US judge in New York.

Beyond the commonsense absurdity of the situation, one must in such a case doubt the integrity of the US court and Judge Thomas Griesa... After all, US experts repeatedly pointed out the central role of the corrupt US courts and justice system in the ongoing financial crisis:

• Economics Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman wrote, " ... a system in which only the little people have to obey the law, while the rich, and bankers especially, can cheat and defraud without consequences." [ ^v ]

• Law Professor Raymond Brescia more specifically opined, "...it's difficult to find a fraud of this size on the US court system in US history... where you have literally tens of thousands of fraudulent documents filed in tens of thousands of cases." [ ^vi ]

Indeed, review of the court records in NML Capital, Ltd. v. The Republic of Argentina ( 1:08-cv-06978 ) in the US District Court, Southern District of New York, leads to the conclusion that the case should be deemed Simulated Litigation and Fraud upon the Court. Moreover, the same US Court should be considered central to failing banking regulation under the current crisis. [^vii,^viii]

Simulated Litigation and Fraud upon the Court - Organized State-corporate Crime [^ix]

Through the implementation and employment of invalid IT systems in the US courts (PACER and CM/ECF), the US courts today issue and publish judicial and clerical records that are invalid and void on their faces. In such sham records, US judges unlawfully deprive the Civil, Constitutional, and Human Rights of the people. Regardless of the invalidity of such records, the courts induce and/or extort compliance with such invalid, fraudulent judicial records.

The conduct of fraud in litigation, outlined above, is further detailed in the Texas Penal Code - 32.48 - Simulating Legal Process: [^x]

• Issue judicial and/or clerical records that are invalid, void on their faces.

• Sign, send, docket and/or publish such judicial and/or clerical records by unauthorized persons.

• Serve false records that induce their receiver to believe that they are valid and effectual summonses, complaints, orders, or judgments.

• Generate, send, and/or publish false authentication records for such judicial and/or clerical records.

• Sign, send, and/or publish judicial and/or clerical records of vague and ambiguous language, which the court may deem patently invalid, but the receiver is induced to believe are valid.

• Induce and/or extort submission to the false authority of such records.

In terms of US law, the conduct of Simulated Litigation, as defined in the Texas Penal Code - 32.48, should be deemed " Fraud upon the Court" . In Bulloch v. United States , 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the Court says:

Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.

The practice of Simulated Litigation should also be considered racketeering under the US Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ( USC -1961) - a conspiracy to conduct an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.

The notion of judges and courts acting as a racketeering enterprises is not new at all. In the most recent example, former Pennsylvania Judge Ciavarella was prosecuted and convicted on racketeering charges in the wake of the "Kids for Cash" corruption scandal. [^xi] Whereas the conviction of former judge Ciavarella was related to the prison industry, the case of NML Capital v Republic of Argentina and other cases in the US District Court, Southern District of New York, are related to the banking industry.

Furthermore, the conduct of the US courts and US justice system, seen in NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina, reaches beyond the territorial US. It is not the only case of this nature. Other notable examples include:

• Decriminalization of torture and the unlawful deprivation of Liberty in the Guantanamo Bay detention center and in a network of "black hole" prisons world-wide; [^xii]

• Decriminalization of the involvement of US agencies in trans-national drug and firearms trafficking, [^xiii,^xiv] and decriminalization of the involvement of US banks in trans-national money laundering for drug cartels. [^xv,^xvi,^xvii]

Therefore, conduct of the US courts should also be reviewed under the terms of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (2000). [^xviii]

Conditions, where a nation's justice system engages in such conspiracy is also referred to in criminology as "State Organized Crime", or "State-corporate Organized Crime".

NML Capital, Ltd. v. The Republic of Argentina - missing summons, invalid Notice of Assignment, denial of access to authentication records, other key records missing. [^xix]

Initial entries in the docket of NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina in the US District Court, Southern District of New York: [^xx] a) Summons as issued by the clerk was not docketed with the Complaint (Dkt #1), neither was it docketed with the Affidavit of Service (Dkt #4). b) Civil Cover Sheet, required by the Judicial Conference of the United States for the opening of the civil docket, was not docketed with the Complaint (Dkt #1) [^xxi]. c) Notice of Case Assignment (Dkt #5) is invalid - bear invalid signature of the Clerk of the Court. Combined, the initial records in the docket document the commencing of Simulated Litigation.

_____

• Missing Summons

The service of a summons is required for the court to establish its jurisdiction over the party, who is being summoned. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 4, prescribes that summons must be signed by the clerk and bear the court's seal. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 79 prescribes that the clerk docket the summons as issued, as well as proof of service.

In blatant disregard of the US law, the US courts today often fail to issue summonses that are signed by the clerk and bear the court's seal, and also fail to docket the summons, so that such fatal defects, which undermine the validity of the entire litigation, are not transparent to the public.

In the case of the US District Court, Southern District of New York, the failure to docket the summons also stands in disregard of the Local Rules of Court and the Electronic Case Filing Rules and Instructions of the US District Court, Southern District of New York. [^xxii]

United Nations reports on strengthening judicial integrity list missing court records as an indicator of judicial corruption. [^xxiii]

• Invalid Notice of Assignment

The Notice of Assignment to Judge Thomas Griesa (Dkt #5) bears no valid signature of the clerk, and is therefore invalid. The invalidity of the Notice of Assignment renders the conduct of Judge Griesa in the entire case of no authority at all, and further undermines the integrity and validity of the the entire litigation. The invalidity of the Notice of Assignment to Judge is also typical of the records employed for commencing Simulated Litigation in the US courts.

_____

It should be noted that the 2006 attempt to impeach US Judge Manuel Real of the US District Court, Central District of California, originated in his conduct in a case, where he acted with no lawful assignment. [^xxiv]

• Denial of public access to authentication records

The service of judicial and clerical records, as well as the documentation of the service are essential for their authentication and for rendering them of force and effect. Accordingly, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 5, prescribe that the Certificates of Service be filed and docketed.

As shown in the case of NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina , and in all cases under electronic filing in the US courts today, valid Certificates of Service are no longer docketed and are not accessible to the public as part of the courts' records in PACER. Therefore, the public and even parties to litigation cannot distinguish between valid and void court records.

Such profound changes in the fundamentals of Due Process render court records and the judicial process vague and ambiguous, and enable the routine conduct of Simulated Litigation. These profound changes in court procedures were implemented by the US judiciary with no lawful authority at all, concomitantly with the establishment of electronic filing.

Traditional paper Certificate of Service by the Clerk of the Court in Wright v Bank of America (10-cv-01723), US District Court, Northern District of California. The record included a certification statement, "I certify"", as well as the name and authority of the individual executing the certification - Deputy Clerk. However, the document shown here is invalid, since it is missing a valid signature of the Deputy Clerk. The certification records were an essential part of the public records in the paper court files. In contrast, under electronic filing, the US judiciary instituted Notices of Electronic Filing (NEFs) as the replacement of the Certificates of Service, and at the same time deny public access to the NEFs.

_____

Notice of Electronic Filing ["NEF"] in the US district courts are considered by the US courts the authentication instruments in the IT systems, established by the Administrative Office of the US Courts through the dual public access and case management/electronic filing systems (PACER & CM/ECF, respectively). The NEF replaced the traditional, paper Certificate of Service, or Proof of Service. Therefore, the NEF is of critical significance relative to the validity, force and effect of judicial minutes, orders and judgments.

Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF), pertaining to Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus - Dkt #1, in Richard Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County (2:09-cv-01914), US District Court, Central District of California. The NEF shown here includes an "Electronic Document Stamp" (an alpha-numeric checksum string), which pursuant to General Order 08-02 of that court, verifies the authenticity of the respective court record. [^xxv] With it, one should note that the NEF is invalid as a "Certificate of Service" on its face: The record fails to include: a) A certification statement, "I certify" , b) The name and authority of the individual who executed it, and c) A valid signature of such individual. Furthermore, in contrast with the paper Certificates of Service, which were part of the case docket, the NEFs are excluded from the PACER docket in disregard of US law, and public access to the NEFs is denied. The 70 year old former US prosecutor Richard Fine exposed and rebuked the taking by California judges of "not permitted payments", which were called by media "bribes". Fine was falsely imprisoned for 18 months in solitary confinement in 2009-10 by Sheriff Lee Baca of Los Angeles County, with no lawful records conforming with the fundamental requirements of law . [^xxvi] His Habeas Corpus petitions were subjected to simulated review by the US District Court, Central District of California, the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, and the US Supreme Court.

_____

Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF), pertaining to Mandate of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - Dkt #59, in Richard Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County (2:09-cv-01914), US District Court, Central District of California. The NEF in this case is i nvalid, missing the "Electronic Document Stamp". Numerous, similar, invalid NEFs, missing the "Electronic Document Stamp" were discovered in other US district courts. The detailed documentation of the cases, related to the Habeas Corpus actions of Richard Fine in the US courts provide unique demonstration of the abuse inherent in the design and operation of PACER and CM/ECF: 1. A simulated Habeas Corpus review was conducted in the US District Court, Central District of California, where judicial records were filed with NEFs missing the "Electronic Document Stamp". In such invalid, simulated litigation, Magistrate Carla Woehrle and Judge John Walter issued abusive judicial records, which did not comply with the US Constitution and the US law and unlawfully deprived the Liberty of Richard Fine. 2. When Fine filed his actions in the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, taken from such simulated litigation records in the US District Court, the US Court of Appeals responded by conducting a simulated review as well, and by issuing simulated orders and mandates, colluding in the abuse of rights. 3. When the US District Court received such simulated Mandates from the US Court of Appeals, the US District Court docketed them as invalid, simulated judicial records as well, with an invalid NEF, as shown here.

_____

Docket entry, Dkt #none, pertaining to Deletion of Order of Disbarment - Dkt #4, inIn RE: Ronald Gottschalk (2:11-mc-00284) in the US District Court, Central District of California. The text re-affirms that the January 11, 2012 Order of Disbarment/ Suspension by Chief Judge Audrey Collins (dispositive order, akin to judgment in such case) was issued with no NEF, and was therefore deleted. However, it should be noted that this docket entry is of the "Text only" type, entered by a person of unknown name and authority, is unsigned and unauthenticated. Ronald Gottschalk was a Los Angeles Attorney, who like Richard Fine protested judicial corruption. Like Richard Fine he was falsely arrested in 2009 (albeit for a few weeks only), and like Richard Fine he also was falsely hospitalized. However, whereas Richard Fine was kept in solitary confinement for 18 months in the hospital section of the jail, Gottschalk was kept in an outside psychiatric ward. Gottschalk reported that he was forced to take psychiatric medications, while being denied critical diabetes medication. Through communication with the author of this report, Gottschalk was educated regarding the significance of the NEF and its "Electronic Document Stamp". Therefore, when he received the Order of Disbarment with an invalid NEF, he filed the request to delete it from the docket. Chief Judge Audrey Collins apparently consented. [^xxvii] It is instructive that both Fine and Gottschalk, senior, experienced attorneys, who were authorized CM/ECF participants and passed the mandatory instruction, were entirely unaware of the significance of the NEF and the "Electronic Document Stamp" for validity, force and effect of judicial records. Such conditions reflect the lack of authority and ambiguous records, pertaining to the definition of fundamental court procedures in PACER and CM/ECF - the fraudulent IT systems of the US courts.

_____

Today the NEFs are considered by the US courts today the Certificates of Service, Notice of Entry of Judgment. However, public access to the NEFs is denied, since they are not included in the PACER dockets in disregard of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. With it, the US district courts often issue and docket orders and judgments with no NEFs or with invalid NEFs. Under such conditions, the public, and at times even experienced attorneys are unable to distinguish between valid judicial records of full force and effect, and invalid, void judicial records.

The US District Court, Southern District of New York, universally denies public access to the NEFs of records in its PACER dockets, including the records in NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina. Therefore, there is no way for the public to ascertain, whether any of Judge Griesa's rulings, orders, and judgments were authenticated, entered, and certified - and therefore of any force and effect.

Such serious ambiguity regarding the validity and effect of court records in NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina, should not doubt be considered a serious violation of Due Process rights.

It should be noted that United Nations reports on strengthening judicial integrity list denial of access an indicator of judicial corruption.

• Other key records missing

Other key records, which are missing in the docket of NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina include, but are not limited to: Initial Conference (prescribed by Rule 26, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure), and Notice of Entry of Judgment (prescribed by Rule 36, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure).

Fraud in banking matters is common in the US District Court, Southern District of New York, and other US courts

Summons as issued by the Clerk of the Court and as executed in SEC v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829) in the US District Court, Southern District of New York. The PACER docket in SEC v Bank of America Corporation included no copy of the summons in disregard of US law, as is the case in NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina. The summons in SEC v Bank of America Corporation was eventually discovered through a Freedom of Information request on SEC. As seen here, the summons is unsigned, and fails to bear the seal of the court, i.e., invalid summons. SEC v Bank of America Corporation was a landmark court case, relative to banking supervision under the current financial crisis. It originated in the unlawful taking of $5.8 billions by banking executives. US Judge Jed Rakoff colluded with Clerk of the Court Ruby Krajick and attorneys for SEC and Bank of America Corporation and conducted Simulated Litigation in the US District Court, Southern District of New York, which ended with no executive being held accountable and none of the ill-gotten funds returned by the offending executives.

_____

As documented in detail in other cases in the US District Court, Southern District of New York, conduct of Simulated Litigation in banking matters is a common practice by US judges in that court and in other US courts today. [ ^xxviii]

A notable example is SEC v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829) and the related case of SEC v BAC (1:10-cv --00215) , which originated in the u nlawful taking of $5.8 billions by banking executives during the merger of Bank of America and Merrill Lynch in late 2008. [^xxix] The litigation, under US Judge Jed Rakoff, who was hailed by the Wall Street Journal as "tough" in this case, ended with a payment of $133 millions by the victims - the shareholders - to themselves being imposed by the Court. No executive was held accountable, and no executive returned to the shareholders any of the ill-gotten funds.

As is the case in NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina, the summons i n SEC v Bank of America Corporation was not docketed, in disregard of US law. Judge Jed Rakoff held no lawful assignment in the case, and access to the NEFs was denied. The summons record i n SEC v Bank of America Corporation was eventually discovered through a Freedom of Information request on SEC. As shown here it was invalid on its face - bearing no signature of the Clerk of the Court and no Seal of the Court. The case documents collusion of attorneys acting on behalf of the US government and SEC, attorneys for Bank of America Corporation, Judge Jed Rakoff and Clerk of the Court Ruby Krajick in the conduct of Simulated Litigation.

Media reports cheered along...

Requests for Impeachment of Judge Jed Rakoff and Clerk of the Court Ruby Krajick, which were filed with the US Congress, document the failure of US Congress to perform its duties. [^xxx,^xxxi, ^xxxii,^xxxiii,^xxxiv]

Fraud of medieval style and proportions

Fraud in the courts was notorious during the middle ages, particularly through the issuance of fraudulent records by judges. The office of the Clerk of the Court was instituted in the late middle ages and court procedures involving authentication and certification of judicial records by the Clerk of the Court have evolved over centuries to safeguard the integrity of the courts and the judicial process. [^xxxv]

In contrast, conditions, which have been established in the US courts with the implementation of their IT systems - PACER and CM/ECF - undermine all such safeguards. [ ^xxxvi ]

Fraud in the middle ages was largely facilitated through the illiteracy of the vast majority of the people. Fraud in our times is facilitated through the illiteracy of the vast majority of the people regarding electronic records.

US Congress, experts, media betray the trust of the people

As repeatedly shown, US Congress refuses to acknowledge or act on requests for impeachment of US judges, who conduct Simulated Litigation and abuse the rights of the people of the United States. US media, which report on landmark cases that are obvious Fraud upon the Courts, fail to disclose such facts to the public, even after getting notices, alerting them to the true facts in the matters being reports.

Likewise, US law professors routinely refuse to opine on the unprecedented fraud in the IT systems of the US courts, PACER and CM/ECF, and US law journals refuse to accept for review papers, which discuss such fraud. [^xxxvii]

Regarding the case of NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina, a request for comments was forwarded to Romain Zamour, currently Assistant Legal Counsel in t he Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague, Netherlands, who published the scholarly law article, cited above, in The Yale Journal of International Law Online.

Notice opining fraud was filed with the government of the Republic of Argentina and others

Given the overarching international significance of the case of NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina, notice was filed with the government of the Republic of Argentina.

The notice in part says:

...fraud is being committed on the people and the Republic of Argentina by the US government and its agencies, the US District Court, Southern District of New York, the US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, and the US Supreme Court, relative to the litigation of NML Capital v The Republic of Argentina (1:08-cv-06978) in the US District Court, Southern District of New York. US Judge Thomas Griesa, Clerk of the Court Ruby Krajick, and all attorneys, who filed papers in the case, including the law-firms who filed on behalf of the Republic of Argentina, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, LLP, should be deemed part of the conspiracy to defraud.

Copies of the notice were filed with the governments of the German Federal Republic, People's Republic of China, Russian Federation, and the United States.

What could the Republic of Argentina do next?

The Republic of Argentina could directly (not through the law-firm of Cleary et al) address Clerk of the Court Ruby Krajick of the US District Court, Southern District of New York, and demand:

1. An affidavit stating that the PACER docket in NML Capital v Republic of Argentina is a valid and effectual docket of the Court, which was constructed under the authority of the Clerk of the Court and in compliance with the law of the United States;

2. A copy of the Summons, certified "True Copy of the Original" by the Clerk of the Court, and

3. Copies of the Notice of Assignment and all Orders, Judgments and Mandates, which appear in the PACER docket, together with the respective NEFs, certified "True Copy of the Original" by the Clerk of the Court.

Based on experience with several clerks of the US courts, including Clerk Ruby Krajick, it is unlikely that such demands by the Republic of Argentina would be honestly addressed.

Failure to address such demands should be considered additional evidence of the fraud being committed in this case.

In case any of the above referenced records are obtained from Clerk Ruby Krajick, they are likely to provide additional evidence of the fraud in conduct of the case.

Additionally, in case any such records are obtained from Clerk Ruby Krajick, they should be further forwarded to the Office of Authentications, US Department of State, with a request for Apostille Certificates, pursuant to the Hague Apostille Convention (1961).

It is unlikely that the US Department of State would provide such Apostille Certificates for the above referenced records. If it does, it would provide additional evidence of criminality by the US government.

END NOTES

Authors Website: https://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

Authors Bio:

Dr Zernik's core research pertains to e-government and its significance for Human Rights and Civil Society.

His work won appreciation in Israel and abroad:
* Prof Uzzi Ornan - "All power to you! I hope that you see your tremendous efforts reach fruition!"
* Attorney Avigdor Feldman - "In my opinion you are doing very important work" thank you for your thorough and persistent work".
* Prof Amnon Shashua, Mobileye Co-founder - "" very important work".
* International experts, as part of anonymous peer-review - "" challenges current concepts in the field".
Four submissions, which he authored on behalf of Human Rights Alert - NGO, were incorporated into UN Human Rights Council Periodic Reports regarding the US or Israel (2010, 2013, 2015, 2018). His research has been presented and published in international academic conferences, including Data Mining (2010), Criminology (2012), E-government (2015, 2017), and were also cited in a textbook on "Machine Learning".
Online updated version: http://www.scribd.com/doc/46421113/