Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

Main

Date: 11 Jul 2008 15:51:45
From: samsloan
Subject: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

This might be a major development, or perhaps not.

Previously, the law firm of Cozen O'Conner entered an appearance
representing Joel Channing, Bill Goichberg and the USCF in the Gordon
Roy Parker case.

However, today, July 11, 2008, Cozen O'Conner withdrew as counsel for
Joel Channing, while continuing as counsel for William Goichberg and
the USCF. The new counsel for Joel Channing are Wendi Barish and
Jamie Samanns.

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/doc1/15314283126

I do not know what this means but it might mean that Joel Channing is
going to be in an adversary relationship with the USCF. Channing is
known to be prone to filing lawsuits such as the suit he filed when he
was running for the board in 2005. I cannot imagine what he might be
suing the USCF over now but I can think of no other reason why he
would have an attorney different from the USCF's attorney.

Sam Sloan

Date: 13 Jul 2008 18:15:07
From: Vance
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Jul 13, 3:22=A0pm, "Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\""
<[email protected] > wrote:
> >>His conduct certainly suggest more than a passing interest, and now so =
do
> >>his statements.
>
> > You owe me money\
>
> Says he.
>

Says a Court.

Date: 11 Jul 2008 19:38:38
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

I had asked Cozen to not represent more than one defendant, as they may have
to testify against each other, as it would create a conflict of interest.

Not sure if that's why this happened, but I was going to move the court if
it didn't.

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 12 Jul 2008 20:18:31
From: Thom E. Geiger
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:38:38 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>
>I had asked Cozen to not represent more than one defendant, as they may have
>to testify against each other, as it would create a conflict of interest.

How in hell can they be called to testify against fellow defendants?
Are you admitting some kind of ex parte contact with one or more of
the defendants about their testimony? Damned sure looks like it.

>Not sure if that's why this happened, but I was going to move the court if
>it didn't.

You're lucky if you can move your own bowels, Gordon Roy Parker. Now,
maybe, if the judge has a 7 year old child at home that you can
threaten, then you might be able to get them to agree to do something
you want done.

Now, you child obsessed, child stalking moron, where's the money the
US federal appeals court ordered you to pay me and the other
defendants from your miserably failed appeal of your last kooksoot
against us?

Thom E. Geiger, Domain Name Owner
Ray-Gordon.com
Ray-Gordon.net
Newsloon.com

Legal exhibit submitted by Gordon Roy Parker into the public record in PAED case #03-cv-6396
http://www.HeavyData.net/exhibit-c-parker-v-LTSC-03-cv-6396-EDPA--rayFAQ.zip
Don't buy anything from any business trying to use SLAPP lawsuits to
stop criticism of the company, owners, officers or products.

Guido Gump Parker blames a baseball bat death threat on his own mother, Penny "Skull Crusher" Parker:
>The "baseball bat" remark was made by my mom in response to a gymnastics
>groupie who harassed half of the national team, with help from several chat
>hosts and gymnastics coaches and hackers.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 12:34:38
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

> How in hell can they be called to testify against fellow defendants?

Quite easily, as it's a conspiracy allegation. I notice the firm withdrew
without my having to move the court.

The previous postger's role in this lawsuit is....oh yeah, nothing. Just
another USENET cockroach making irrelevant noise.

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 14 Jul 2008 14:26:44
From: Vance
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Jul 14, 7:26=A0am, "Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\""
<[email protected] > wrote:
> >>What business is this of yours anyway? =A0Are you an attorney?
>
> > =A0 =A0No,
>
> Exactly. =A0Yet you are engaging in UPL, very incorrectly.
>
> Rule 4 does allow for recovery of service costs if the defendant ignores =
a
> waiver of service. =A0That was more than fine for the other two attorneys=
in
> the case this applied to.
>
> Unless you want to be sued for negligence, please stay out of my legal
> business.
>

Gordon, you continue to have problems with understanding words. To be
able to sue for negligence, the other person has to be able to be held
to some standard of care recognized at law and that standard of care
must apply in the context and circumstances of the claim such that you
would have put reliance on them.

In several areas, I would be held to a higher standard of care than
the average person because of knowledge and training. If a person
knows of that knowledge and training and I represent myself as
posessing that knowledge and training, then, in light of that, I could
be sued for negligence for not exercising due care because it would
have been expected and relied on that I would.

There are other things and a lawyer could explain it more accurately.
There are claims that can arise even if the person didn't know of any
special knowledge, but the person acted negligently in light of
posessing that knowledge.

Doesn't matter, it's another case of you can't sue for shit.

Vance

Date: 13 Jul 2008 13:30:22
From: Thom E. Geiger
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 12:34:38 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>The previous postger's role in this lawsuit is....oh yeah, nothing. Just
>another USENET cockroach making irrelevant noise.

No role that YOU know of, Gordon Roy Parker. Eh Em Eye, dumbass.

You can't call a defendant to testify against another defendant. You
can only call a witness to answer questions truthfully to the best of
their knowledge and ability, moron. Whether their answers will impeach
the testimony of any other defendants doesn't mean they are testifying
against those other defendants.

That's your problem, gorgon, everything is adversarial with you. Every
living person in the entire world is either for you or against you. If
they're for you, they will kill, attack, harass, threaten, endanger,
isolate and intimidate other humans, lie, steal, misrepresent,
defraud, obfuscate and perjure for you. If anybody is not willing to
do any of those things, and more, then they are then against you and
deserving of having each and every one of those things done to them.

BTW, as the working class guy you made fun of in your kooksoots, the
one with no legal training and no idea about how to navigate the US
civil legal system, I wiped the floor with your worthless ass in
court, twice.

The US Third Circuit Court of Appeals ordered you to pay me and the
other defendants our costs, which you have refused to do for the past
year. You're a child stalking, child obsessed deadbeat, Gordon Roy
Parker, and you have no idea where my involvement, if and when it
comes, will occur in any of your serial frivolous litigation scams.

Now, where's my money?

Thom E. Geiger, Domain Name Owner
Ray-Gordon.com
Ray-Gordon.net
Newsloon.com

Legal exhibit submitted by Gordon Roy Parker into the public record in PAED case #03-cv-6396
http://www.HeavyData.net/exhibit-c-parker-v-LTSC-03-cv-6396-EDPA--rayFAQ.zip
Don't buy anything from any business trying to use SLAPP lawsuits to
stop criticism of the company, owners, officers or products.

Guido Gump Parker blames a baseball bat death threat on his own mother, Penny "Skull Crusher" Parker:
>The "baseball bat" remark was made by my mom in response to a gymnastics
>groupie who harassed half of the national team, with help from several chat
>hosts and gymnastics coaches and hackers.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 15:22:40
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

> No role that YOU know of,

\And now we get grounds for discovery. Very, very extensive discovery.

The previous poster is not only weak and cowardly, but stupid.

It's all talk; I'm not. I'm just methodical and patient. Sooner or later
it was bound to say something like that.

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 13 Jul 2008 17:17:04
From: Thom E. Geiger
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:22:40 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>\And now we get grounds for discovery. Very, very extensive discovery.

Oh hell, I damn sure hope you try, shithead. Go ahead, give me
something. Ring that bell, open that door, dickead. You never learn,
do you?

>The previous poster is not only weak and cowardly, but stupid.

Weak...cowardly...there's that Gordon Roy Parker bizarro shit talk
again. I'm so weak and cowardly, its you who has called law
enforcement numerous times over the years (according to you) and filed
complaints against ME because I supposedly put you in fear for your
life. Because you pissed your pants about something I posted to usenet
that you didn't like.
Hell, you've even called LE for some guy inviting you out for coffee.
You're the pathetic, weak, cowardly idiot who tries to terrorize
single mothers by threatening their small children. YOU admitted that,
remember?

>It's all talk; I'm not. I'm just methodical and patient. Sooner or later
>it was bound to say something like that.

Oh, I've learned to be very, very, very methodical, moron. I told you
the next time we file in the same case would be your last.

Count on it.

Thom E. Geiger, Domain Name Owner
Ray-Gordon.com
Ray-Gordon.net
Newsloon.com

Legal exhibit submitted by Gordon Roy Parker into the public record in PAED case #03-cv-6396
http://www.HeavyData.net/exhibit-c-parker-v-LTSC-03-cv-6396-EDPA--rayFAQ.zip
Don't buy anything from any business trying to use SLAPP lawsuits to
stop criticism of the company, owners, officers or products.

Guido Gump Parker blames a baseball bat death threat on his own mother, Penny "Skull Crusher" Parker:
>The "baseball bat" remark was made by my mom in response to a gymnastics
>groupie who harassed half of the national team, with help from several chat
>hosts and gymnastics coaches and hackers.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 14:50:51
From: Kent Wills
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:22:40 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>> No role that YOU know of,
>
>\And now we get grounds for discovery. Very, very extensive discovery.

Okkkaaaaaayyyyy...

>
>The previous poster is not only weak and cowardly, but stupid.

Thom did beat you in court. Twice.
He may or may not be Mensa material. Regardless, he's managed to
win where you have not.

>
>It's all talk; I'm not. I'm just methodical and patient. Sooner or later
>it was bound to say something like that.
>

And what good will it do you? Really?

--
A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Date: 13 Jul 2008 15:54:52
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

>>> No role that YOU know of,
>>
>>\And now we get grounds for discovery. Very, very extensive discovery.
>
> Okkkaaaaaayyyyy...
>
>>
>>The previous poster is not only weak and cowardly, but stupid.
> did beat you in court. Twice.
> He may or may not be Mensa material. Regardless, he's managed to
> win where you have not.

Actually I sued him once, and he "won" primarily for jurisdictional reasons.

He's the one who said "not that I know of" at my remark about his having no
role in this lawsuit. Given his self-injection into this legal business,
combined with a statement like that, I definitely can explore what this
"role" is that I do not know.

His conduct certainly suggest more than a passing interest, and now so do
his statements.

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 13 Jul 2008 20:49:21
From: Kent Wills
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:54:52 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>>>> No role that YOU know of,
>>>
>>>\And now we get grounds for discovery. Very, very extensive discovery.
>>
>> Okkkaaaaaayyyyy...
>>
>>>
>>>The previous poster is not only weak and cowardly, but stupid.
>> did beat you in court. Twice.
>> He may or may not be Mensa material. Regardless, he's managed to
>> win where you have not.
>
>Actually I sued him once, and he "won" primarily for jurisdictional reasons.

Even if this is the case, he still won where you lost.

>
>He's the one who said "not that I know of" at my remark about his having no
>role in this lawsuit. Given his self-injection into this legal business,
>combined with a statement like that, I definitely can explore what this
>"role" is that I do not know.

When you post to Usenet, you invite anyone who reads to
participate in the discussion. As such, you can't claim Thom is
self-injected into this legal business.

>
>His conduct certainly suggest more than a passing interest, and now so do
>his statements.
>

What if I wrote, "I've been in direct contact with the defendants
nearly every day about your case." Would you think you could do
anything against me?
For the record, I've had no contact with anyone involved with your
numerous suits, outside of brief discussions on Usenet.

--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 22:18:03
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

> When you post to Usenet, you invite anyone who reads to
> participate in the discussion.

That's not participating in the case. I said he plays no (legitimate) role
in my CASES. And he doesn't.

He makes noise out here as if the world is supposed to bend to his words,
which of course it never does.

I'll be filing a few more lawsuis in the next few months which will make my
position much clearer. A number of folks who have commandeered these groups
as if attacking me were somehow on-topic or legal will get a chance to
defend themselves, where it counts.

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 15 Jul 2008 10:07:32
From:
Subject: Re: More Threats from Gordon, Ho Hum.....

On 13-Jul-2008, "Ray Gordon, Court Jester" <[email protected] > wrote:

> I'll be filing a few more lawsuis in the next few months which will make
> my position much clearer. A number of folks who have commandeered these
> groups as if attacking me were somehow on-topic or legal will get a chance
> to
> defend themselves, where it counts.

The WORLD TREMBLES at the mere THOUGHT that you might file another meritless
lawsuit. The fact is, I have not seen much in the way of actionable
conduct, mostly just people laughing at your stupidity. The First Amendment
allows us to call you names, if you don't like it, stop posting.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Date: 14 Jul 2008 06:07:37
From: Kent Wills
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:18:03 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>> When you post to Usenet, you invite anyone who reads to
>> participate in the discussion.
>
>That's not participating in the case. I said he plays no (legitimate) role
>in my CASES. And he doesn't.

Since Thom is simply posting to Usenet, you've just ruined any hope
you had of discovery.
You just stated he plays no legitimate role. Since, by your
claim, he doesn't, you can't go after him in discovery.
Way to blow your own case, Gordon.

>
>He makes noise out here as if the world is supposed to bend to his words,
>which of course it never does.
>
>I'll be filing a few more lawsuis in the next few months which will make my
>position much clearer. A number of folks who have commandeered these groups
>as if attacking me were somehow on-topic or legal will get a chance to
>defend themselves, where it counts.
>

And they will likely win, based on your legal history.

--

Bless me, Father, for I have committed an original sin.
I poked a badger with a spoon.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 17:20:35
From: Thom E. Geiger
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:54:52 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>>>> No role that YOU know of,
>>>
>>>\And now we get grounds for discovery. Very, very extensive discovery.
>>
>> Okkkaaaaaayyyyy...
>>
>>>
>>>The previous poster is not only weak and cowardly, but stupid.
>> did beat you in court. Twice.
>> He may or may not be Mensa material. Regardless, he's managed to
>> win where you have not.
>
>Actually I sued him once, and he "won" primarily for jurisdictional reasons.
>
>He's the one who said "not that I know of" at my remark about his having no
>role in this lawsuit. Given his self-injection into this legal business,
>combined with a statement like that, I definitely can explore what this
>"role" is that I do not know.
>
>His conduct certainly suggest more than a passing interest, and now so do
>his statements.

You owe me money, money the US court of appeals ordered you to pay me
and you have had a year to do it, but you willfully refuse the court's
order. Try me, asshole. What's stopping you but your wet diaper?

Thom E. Geiger, Domain Name Owner
Ray-Gordon.com
Ray-Gordon.net
Newsloon.com

Legal exhibit submitted by Gordon Roy Parker into the public record in PAED case #03-cv-6396
http://www.HeavyData.net/exhibit-c-parker-v-LTSC-03-cv-6396-EDPA--rayFAQ.zip
Don't buy anything from any business trying to use SLAPP lawsuits to
stop criticism of the company, owners, officers or products.

Guido Gump Parker blames a baseball bat death threat on his own mother, Penny "Skull Crusher" Parker:
>The "baseball bat" remark was made by my mom in response to a gymnastics
>groupie who harassed half of the national team, with help from several chat
>hosts and gymnastics coaches and hackers.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 18:22:03
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

>>
>>His conduct certainly suggest more than a passing interest, and now so do
>>his statements.
>
>
> You owe me money\

Says he.

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 13 Jul 2008 20:54:43
From: Kent Wills
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:22:03 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>>>
>>>His conduct certainly suggest more than a passing interest, and now so do
>>>his statements.
>>
>>
>> You owe me money\
>
>Says he.
>

Thom claims the courts ordered you to pay. Is he lying?
I would presume he would have a copy of the order.

--

Bless me, Father, for I have committed an original sin.
I poked a badger with a spoon.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 22:15:04
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

>>> You owe me money\
>>
>>Says he.
>>
>
>the courts ordered you to pay. Is he lying?
> I would presume he would have a copy of the order.

The other defendants in the case never enforced their similar judgments
because I had pointed out that my costs after the service waaivers were
ignored more or less offset them.

Of course if I HAVE to, I can still file the Rule 4 motion that would
clarify this a bit more. My last calculation had him owing me $0.22.

He likes to think he plays some role in my life, as if forcing himself on
the newsgroups I frequent and going on and on like a rabid dog somehow
constituted that.

Where it counts, he's nonexistent, and can't stand it. No one would give a
single shit about him if he weren't so fixated on me. That type is well
known.

What business is this of yours anyway? Are you an attorney?

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 14 Jul 2008 06:07:39
From: Kent Wills
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:15:04 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>>>> You owe me money\
>>>
>>>Says he.
>>>
>>
>>the courts ordered you to pay. Is he lying?
>> I would presume he would have a copy of the order.
>
>The other defendants in the case never enforced their similar judgments

If so, that's their choice.

>because I had pointed out that my costs after the service waaivers were
>ignored more or less offset them.

I'm not sure I follow.
Are you claiming that because you had to pay someone to serve the
defendants notice, you aren't required to pay what the court ordered?
If this is your position, you'll find your argument will fail.

>
>Of course if I HAVE to, I can still file the Rule 4 motion that would
>clarify this a bit more. My last calculation had him owing me $0.22.

The court didn't, and probably doesn't, agree with you. There's
no reason to think the court will agree with you in the future.

>
>He likes to think he plays some role in my life, as if forcing himself on
>the newsgroups I frequent and going on and on like a rabid dog somehow
>constituted that.

How is he forcing anything? You are free to ignore his posts.

>
>Where it counts, he's nonexistent, and can't stand it. No one would give a
>single shit about him if he weren't so fixated on me. That type is well
>known.
>
>What business is this of yours anyway? Are you an attorney?
>

No, but you chose to post in a group I read. As such, you invited
me, and everyone else reading, to participate in the discussion. I
accepted the invitation.

--
Aspire to inspire before you expire.

Date: 14 Jul 2008 10:26:42
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

>>What business is this of yours anyway? Are you an attorney?
>>
>
> No,

Exactly. Yet you are engaging in UPL, very incorrectly.

Rule 4 does allow for recovery of service costs if the defendant ignores a
waiver of service. That was more than fine for the other two attorneys in
the case this applied to.

Unless you want to be sued for negligence, please stay out of my legal
business.

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?

Date: 14 Jul 2008 17:00:40
From: Kent Wills
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:26:42 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>
>>>What business is this of yours anyway? Are you an attorney?
>>>
>>
>> No,
>
>Exactly. Yet you are engaging in UPL,

No I'm not.
How is pointing out that Thom won where you lost practicing law?
How is pointing out that he claims you were ordered by the court
to pay him for his expenses (something you don't deny), practicing
law?
How is stating Thom likely has a copy of the order practicing
law?
Do be specific.

>very incorrectly.
>
>Rule 4 does allow for recovery of service costs if the defendant ignores a
>waiver of service. That was more than fine for the other two attorneys in
>the case this applied to.

If I understand your claim correctly, you think Thom ignored the
service. Yet he was able to answer your charge.

>
>Unless you want to be sued for negligence,

I await your process server... Do you know when s/he will likely
get here? I'll have refreshments waiting. I'm thinking lemonade and
cucumber sandwiches.

>please stay out of my legal
>business.
>

If you don't want me to comment about your case, don't invite me
to participate in the discussion. By posting to a group I read, you
are inviting me, and anyone else reading, to take part in the
discussion.

--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

Date: 14 Jul 2008 15:19:20
From: foad
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

"Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot"" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Fucking Usenet Buffoon

I changed the above lest you were forced to file suit against yourself under
various state and federal consumer protection statutes.

Date: 13 Jul 2008 22:01:31
From: Frisco Del Rosario
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

In article <[email protected] >,
"Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Where it counts, he's nonexistent, and can't stand it.

For the life of me, I cannot think of one sufficiently exaggerated form
of the phrase "that was the sound of an irony meter blowing up".

Date: 13 Jul 2008 23:34:56
From: Thom E. Geiger
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:15:04 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:

>The other defendants in the case never enforced their similar judgments
>because I had pointed out that my costs after the service waaivers were
>ignored more or less offset them.
>
>Of course if I HAVE to, I can still file the Rule 4 motion that would
>clarify this a bit more. My last calculation had him owing me $0.22.

Stupid dipshit, you keep on harping your crap to the uninformed.

1. The CA3 ordered you to pay the costs of the appeal, not the PAED
kooksoots.
2. The service you rant about was;
a. for one of your PAED kooksoots
b. your own idea, I have never refused service
3. My combined costs for the PAED kooksoots, all of them, total $2K
plus.
4. If you want to play that card (and you'll lose), then that opens
the door for me to recover my costs for your PAED district court
kooksoot bullshit.

Roll the dice, asshole. We'll see who has the better idea of what will
be owed when this crap is over.

>From http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/062246np.pdf
>3/2/2007
>
> 3/2/07 NOT PRECEDENTIAL PER CURIAM OPINION (McKee, Ambro, and
>Stapleton, Circuit Judges), filed. *Total Pages: 5. (clc)
>[06-2246 06-4166]
>
> 3/2/07 JUDGMENT affirmed. Costs taxed against the Appellant,
>filed. (clc) [06-2246 06-4166]
>
>
>UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
>FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
>NOS. 06-2246 & 06-4166 (Consolidated)
>________________
>GORDON ROY PARKER, doing business as SNODGRASS
>PUBLISHING GROUP also known as RAY GORDON
>v.
>LEARN THE SKILLS CORP.; [email protected];
>THOM E. GEIGER; PAUL ROSS also known as ROSS JEFFRIES
>also known as [email protected]; TRUSTEES OF
>UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA; MATTHEW S. WOLF, ESQ.
>Gordon Roy Parker,
>Appellant
>____________________________________
>On Appeal From the United States District Court
>For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
>(D.C. Civ. No. 05-cv-02752)
>Chief District Judge: Honorable Harvey Bartle III
>_______________________________________
>Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
>February 26, 2007
>BEFORE: McKEE, AMBRO and STAPLETON, CIRCUIT JUDGES
>(Filed March 2, 2007)
>_______________________
>OPINION
>_______________________
>2
>PER CURIAM
>Gordon Roy Parker, acting pro se, appeals an order of the United
>States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
>dismissing his complaint for failing
>to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against two
>defendants and for lack of personal jurisdiction over the remaining
>defendants. In a separately filed appeal, he seeks review of the
>District Court's denial of his motion for reconsideration and motion
>to vacate judgment. These appeals have been consolidated for all
>purposes.
>Parker's complaint alleges that defendants belong to a criminal
>enterprise designed to control the market for online advice about how
>to seduce women. As described more fully in the District Court's
>opinion and in painstaking detail in Parker's amended complaint,
>defendants allegedly diverted traffic from a public online "USENET"
>group to a private online discussion forum that they controlled,
>harassed plaintiff and attempted to undermine his reputation, and
>hindered his attempts to defend himself against these attacks. Parker
>alleges that these actions violated, inter alia, the Racketeer
>Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), federal antitrust
>statutes, and state common law prohibitions on civil conspiracy, abuse
>of process, and fraudulent misrepresentation.
>
>We exercise jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. � 1291. We undertake
>plenary review of the District Court's dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6),
>accepting as true all factual allegations in the complaint and viewing
>them in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See AT&T
>Corp. v. JMC Telecom, LLC, 470 F.3d 525, 529 (3d Cir. 3 2006). Our
>review of the District Court's rulings on personal jurisdiction is
>likewise plenary, except to the extent that they involved factual
>findings, which are reviewed for clear error. See Pennzoil Prods. Co.
>v. Colelli & Assocs., Inc. 149 F.3d 197, 200 (3d Cir. 1998). We review
>the District Court's denial of reconsideration for abuse of
>discretion.
>See Alston v. Parker, 363 F.3d 229, 233 (3d Cir. 2004).
>
>The amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
>granted against defendant Matthew Wolf. The RICO, civil conspiracy,
>and abuse of process claims against him all rely on allegations that
>Wolf improperly moved to dismiss an earlier complaint filed in the
>Eastern District of Pennsylvania against many of the defendants
>involved in this case. Civ. No. 03-cv-06936. We agree with the
>District Court's conclusion that the challenged behavior was properly
>within the scope of Wolf's representation of his clients, and that it
>fails to support either the federal statutory or state law tort claims
>against him. See Gen. Refractories Co. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 337
>F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2003).
>The District Court also properly dismissed the claims that the
>Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania violated RICO and engaged
>in a civil conspiracy and fraudulent misrepresentation. These claims
>arise from the University's alleged refusal to disclose the identity
>of a student who Parker claims was involved in the plots against
>plaintiff. We essentially agree with the reasoning of the District
>Court. The conspiracy claim fails because the only alleged
>participants are the University and one of its employees, and absent
>narrow exceptions not present here, agents of an entity cannot
>conspire with their employer. See Gen. Refractories Co., 337 F.3d at
>313-14. Even if the fraudulent misrepresentation claim survived
>scrutiny under Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b), the complaint fails to allege all
>the elements of the claim, notably justifiable reliance. See, Porreco
>v. Porreco, 811 A.2d 566, 570-71 (Pa. 2002). As the District Court
>described, Parker's RICO claim against the University is also fatally
>flawed.
>The District Court lacked personal jurisdiction over the remaining
>defendants. None of these defendants resides in Pennsylvania or has a
>"continuous and substantial" connection to the state, and none has
>sufficient minimum contacts with Pennsylvania to "reasonably
>anticipate[] being haled into court there." Pennzoil, 149 F.3d at
>200-201 (citations omitted). As explained by the District Court, the
>generalized allegations of defendants' contact with Pennsylvania
>contained in Parker's amended complaint and pleadings are insufficient
>to meet his burden of proof on the jurisdictional issue. See Time
>Share Vacation Club v. Atlantic Resorts, Ltd., 735 F.2d 61, 66-67 (3d
>Cir. 1984). Nor are they sufficient to make out a prima facie case
>that could justify jurisdictional discovery. See Mass. Sch. of Law at
>Andover, Inc. v. Am. Bar Ass'n, 107 F.3d 1026, 1042 (3d Cir. 1997).
>Finally, we find no abuse of discretion in the District Court's denial
>of Parker's motions for reconsideration and to vacate, which
>identified neither errors in the
>District Court's order nor any other basis to justify revisiting that
>order. Accordingly, we will affirm the order of the District Court.

Thom E. Geiger, Domain Name Owner
Ray-Gordon.com
Ray-Gordon.net
Newsloon.com

Legal exhibit submitted by Gordon Roy Parker into the public record in PAED case #03-cv-6396
http://www.HeavyData.net/exhibit-c-parker-v-LTSC-03-cv-6396-EDPA--rayFAQ.zip
Don't buy anything from any business trying to use SLAPP lawsuits to
stop criticism of the company, owners, officers or products.

Guido Gump Parker blames a baseball bat death threat on his own mother, Penny "Skull Crusher" Parker:
>The "baseball bat" remark was made by my mom in response to a gymnastics
>groupie who harassed half of the national team, with help from several chat
>hosts and gymnastics coaches and hackers.

Date: 11 Jul 2008 16:36:11
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

The new law firm representing Joel Channing is
Weber Gallagher Simpson Stapleton Fires & Newby LLP

This is a large law firm but is much smaller than Cozen O'Connor, the
previous law firm representing Joel Channing.

http://www.cozen.com/firm.asp?d=1&fpid=2

http://www.wglaw.com/

Almost without doubt, both law firms are being paid for by the
insurance policy.

Sam Sloan

Date: 11 Jul 2008 19:39:15
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Substitution of Attorneys for Joel Channing in Parker vs. USCF

> This is a large law firm but is much smaller than Cozen O'Connor,

Their name alone is a big firm!

--
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

Finding Your A-Game:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy (FREE!)
The book Neil Strauss and VH-1 STOLE The Pivot From

Click HERE: for the ORIGINAL pivot chapter:
http://www.cybersheet.com/pivot.pdf

Here's my Myspace Page: And Pickup Blog (FREE advice)
http://www.myspace.com/snodgrasspublishing

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
no longer work. Learn the methods the gurus USE with the money they make
from what they teach.

Thinking of taking a seduction "workshiop?" Read THIS:
http://www.dirtyscottsdale.com/?p=1187

Beware! VH-1's "The Pickup Artst" was FRAUDULENT. Six of the eight
contestants were actors, and they used PAID TARGETS in the club. The paid
targets got mad when VH-1 said "there are no actors in this club" and ruined
their prromised acting credit. What else has Mystery lied about?