my florida driver's license and and and a carton to judge as rock and i'll go straight to her order she said if referent to my driver's license my florida driver's license and couric if if true would would complete diversity in this case that is to say if my driver's license is a genuine driver's license which is a florida driver's license i would have that diversity jurisdiction to go hand in this case and i put to the court today that my wife and i were aboard florida citizens were you honor and where do you live i live in florida we're going to turn a tree rumble who drive palm coast florida from around over over seventy years here on with my kids also in new york so i'd do get income from that property may i go on ok so so so what what's judge as rock is saying you know i would be muddying the water at this point because you don't believe my driver's license is is is valid reference to demotion to dismiss i submit exhibit from one to thirty thirty nine i believe in which there was a number of exhibit with my with my with my florida address on it and even the application for filing this complaint was filed with a bank check state in my address on the bank check your honor and also even for this court application the we are the lower court just decided to say i do not have jurisdiction you know in in the eastern district also within that case your honor i also signed a notice of voluntary dismissal with one of the defendant in which in which judge as rock signed off on and my address was on the dismissal my florida address was also on that dismissal of settlement so just to get to the underlying merits so that i understand much of what happened much of what you claim happened happened in two thousand and six is that right no you're on a it continue to happen in it started in two thousand and six and  then your complaint that's correct here are merely clear the you are not just a resident but a citizen of florida based on all of the on your driver's license your spouse's driver's license and so on case is still going on and i made a reference to it to your honor the lower court and the lower court refused to look at the case she said you don't have any time to look to the records and the record  record i'm sorry the record itself will show that i rented out before park avenue and the person didn't pin a rant and damage the property and it's in fair federal court at this moment and again i should point it out to to your honor there was another case before that we were i was terminated which is the same judge who dismissed the konica maitland konica case and which when i was moving from new york to florida i roll i'm sorry i wrote a letter to the court to say i was movin so he is out is a letter in the record to say i'm moving to florida and this is my new address and this  court finding that diversity jurisdiction had not been sufficiently pled here we believe that finding was correct based upon the record that was before the district court at the time they made that ruling  well you know i don't know whether in what he what he's saying here is accurate but i know he contends strongly he's a he's a foreigner resident but in the amended complaint he stated in a single sentence i'm a resident of florida in opposition to the motions to dismiss he submitted a number of documents that showed he had a new york address at that the correspond anything other than him know the the correspondence he put in showed the address of the homestead property the new york property which is the property in question with respect to my client chase what's the basis for pro se you still you still have to meet a certain requirements and our position is that he fell short he also fell short of pleading the citizenship of chase and the other defendants the fish binds because again as to chase he says the principal place of before her at the time she made that decision the documents before her i know he's talking about the license and other documents those may have been submitted after the the motions i know he had objected but based on what the judge had before her the the ruling was correct agreed with him one time we permitted him to two and then one time i believe the parties had done a stipulation and he had amended warrants to my knowledge he he did not make another application seeking to amend again and within that his papers were submitted in opposition to our motions to dismiss i do not believe an application for and two and that was on the  table i i was going to address the rico claim but but mr maitland not just i think our position as to why that claim fails us to chase it is clear from our papers but if your honour's you know have any inquiries in that regard morning may it please the court and from the firm platts or small gold representing robert fishbein and lisa fishbein this is one of those cases where the perspective of both defendants is really very similarly aligned i'm not sure that i can add any more to the position that's any different relative to the fishponds as opposed to chase with respect to the diversity issue once the magistrate issued her report recommendation and stated in there in that references to the parties residency are different then references to citizenship which are required to show diversity of citizenship the maitland's were informed of that distinction and they in fact were also notified of the opportunity what's the difference between citizenship is where you live in my mind as and it would be a component of demonstrating citizenship because in addition to being where that you live  is the maitland's mentioned there with their children there should be an indication of perhaps not only from a tax return where you declare your residence to be but enrollment in schools intent to remain and intend to remain you have to be physically present and intend to remain and have it demonstrated and i think in this case it's more important because the events that were at issue concerning the mortgage loans relative to the new york property from that point in time until the date that this action was started the maitland's maintain that they changed the location of where they live where they reside and in fact where they are a citizen and before the record at the time the amended complaint was considered there was insufficient material in order to make an assessment that indeed the citizenship had changed from new york to florida opportunities there were several opportunities after the fact because you know we're discussing the consideration of an amended complaint which meant that there was an original complaint i don't know whether and there were any revisions relative to the residency citizenship issue when the complaint was amended to become an amended complaint there was then the objections to the motion to dismiss where that issue was raised there was the issuance of the magistrate judges report and recommendation as well as notice of the opportunity to file opposition and also an indication that this was a point that should have been addressed and even now in the brief there's just not enough well tiriel just markers earlier question so there was some indication or some explanation of the difference between residency  i'm sorry was there some explanation provided to the maitland's of the difference between citizenship and residency i believe in the report recommendation there was because it was particularly highlighted that i'm having difficulty because it may be an issue of splitting hairs but the point is that with what was present at the time there was an insufficient showing thank you and what i understand about it is what was the reason why is submits my driver's license on my passport you know so if i submit my passport i'm looking at that look i'm looking at the as citizen citizen of a country and so and so and so that's my understanding from from a layman prospect and so on that's why i sent my passport to the court in your complaint you refer to the new york property as your your home back in november two thousand and six that's that's where the narrative start and that's why i said said  honor was that in the before the same judge mr maitland you may have already told us and i'm not clear on yes yes what it was before the discovery judge was judge tomlinson and she did board case the konic case and also their head case and just as rock did to conduct a case which i send a letter to say i am moved within that period of time so there is a record of