and thank you for the opportunity for the oral argument you're welcome and i'd like to begin just by stating that it is a complete discrepancy and a difference of opinion between the defendants who are not here and they're basically sole claim that this is an action that i filed in federal court to avoid or circumvent what they call quote a valid and necessary state foreclosure auction which those claims have already been proven is completely false and untrue and i filed this lawsuit not for anything that they're raising but for the the reasons that as stated in my complaint in the twenty one count complaint and in my objection to the motion to dismiss in my appellant brief and my reply to their reply for four for the filing and knowing in purposeful filing a false documents manufacturing and filing a false documents with both state and federal courts and their claims and my claim of these manufacturing and usage of these fake documents a fake note and mortgage assignments of mortgage and other documents or a promotion and an extension of what i call the original frauds that were perpetrated by countrywide home loans inc who is still to this day an act of new york corporation and i want to st go towards their the defendant's argument that this case does not belong st in a federal court and does not belong in the southern district of new york is is silly i study the law very hard and it at long at length and long hours and i have every right to file this lawsuit which is pending john jake dissidence nation star mortgage a tall and the other defendants in the southern district of new york  st because there's diversity jurisdiction i live in connecticut all the defendants except one the president of a nation star mortgage our corporate defendants one of the primary  numerous years and decades was a new york corporation still is a new york corporation and supreme court case law is very clear and instructs district court judges in district courts to follow  their opinions in rulings that when there's a question of jurisdiction and diversity that the district courts should lean towards where and find where is the nerve center and where is the control center of  and i'm sorry your diversity that induced sense paul and to dismiss the facts and it was because there was another state court action with the same parties going on at the same time because of parallel proceedings right there there their claims are twofold one is is jurisdiction one jurisdiction this blog's in connecticut because the property lies in connecticut i have no business coming to new york or to any federal court for that matter is what they're saying and number two you're correct in what their their other part of their argument is that i don't belong in any federal court because there's there's a pending valid foreclosure auction that's that's completely false alleged and documents that were attached as explicit exhibits to my complaint from day one were judge the john jay crime just notice of recession which was served upon the alleged original lender which is goes back to the subject matter of this case the alleged note and mortgage by america's wholesale lender was that also a document that was valuable to you to file and state court proceeding mortgage foreclosure proceedings and the defense to the foreclosure that's a good question but no because for the simple reason that i went to the city of stanford law and records where i live and i work in law i work for other law firms actually claimed to be the alleged lender this goes back to an alleged two thousand and three contract the alleged lender was america's wholesale lender i later discovered to my investigations that that's a fake entity that's the named note and mortgage was america's wholesale lender who purported to be a new york corporation i investigated all those claims the new york state division division of state division of corporations provided lawsuits have you done it no could you have done it not not to this day not to tell that you just found out about it today no i found out about it before is the state foreclosure proceedings still going on it is but that case was filed more than two years after i served the alleged longer with a notice of recession and i didn't even have to do this but served every alleged creditor that participated in the  two prior cases which were dismissed through foreclosures because they were joined in because they had liens correct it was the same basically the same plaintiffs so that they're trying to attempt to get three bites at the up making the same false claims that i jon cruddas promise to pay america's wholesale lender one hundred and sixty two thousand dollars the st two cases were dismissed i didn't know about this until after those cases were dismissed but those cases were dismissed and they're raising st of all issues that protect me by race judicata number one they're suing me for the rd time on a contract in the alleged contract which is void by reasons of fraud secondly it was rescinded and by judge scalia's last supreme court case which was the just a nasty decision made it very clear cut that upon operation of law by the mailing of that notice of rescission to the lender the note mortgage or cancel the lender didn't exist they couldn't reply in two thousand and fifteen to my notice of rescission that process was complete pursuant to judge schoolies decision these parties and i serve nation star mortgage who is really behind this and the president who is a defendant multiple times by certified mail fed ex and regular mail demand letters to cease and desist communicating with me that this alleged mortgage that they're trying to collect on an invalid expunged debt which without the rescission was void by reasons of fraud because of a void fraudulent contract by a party that doesn't between jon cruddas or your honor or if your wife had thought she purchased a property and entered into a contract with america as wholesale lender in two thousand and three if your if your wife or yourself did that that party did not and they're claiming connecticut case that this belongs in connecticut but connecticut itself in two thousand and four issued a ruling in two thousand and five but got over says america's wholesale lender and silverstein versus america wholesale lender there were a few appellate court and supreme court cases which basically said well i'm saying that that's not possible that americans hold so lender is not and was never and is not today a proper contracting party they don't exist they don't have their own legal existence they don't they don't have rights they were not they is there a case going on in connecticut now there is a case going on in connecticut what is the reason is that case it's the same as the  st two cases of the title of the case is bank of new york mellon as trustee for a sea wasp's inc asset backed certificates trust two thousand and three dash two and i've later discovered which is all in my complaint and in my brief in my reply brief which the defendant don't address those issues they only bring to this court and to the appellate court the fact that i'm filing this action because it's an well they could be brought in the state court however that's a violation by federal rights i i'm just asking you as matter of law as you understand you could be making all of these same arguments this to a single judge or a panel of three or the kinetic supreme court i understand that but but that there was no reason you agree with that proposition i agree with that could be made in connecticut and connecticut federal court any court i disagree holy st of all that i should my case should have been dismissed when the defendants filed no document had no oral argument not one objection valid objection to that to the they've been s absolutely just i'm just making sure i understood well there's a lot of facts here but they were served in two thousand and seventeen by me with this lawsuit i in fact was near dead with the lethal bloodstream infection heart failure endocarditis and was never served with a complaint in three lawsuits i was never served with a complaint the st two were dismissed in the connecticut court correct there was there was no there was fraudulent service  process by the same entities in the prior to lawsuits and there's no there's no valid reason for that state lawsuit so that's the other big problem that i have with this i served all of them each one of those creditors which i didn't have to do that by law and what judge bilious and only i had to notice and serve the lender the lender is fictitious but i served nation star mortgage bank of new york mellon who's headquartered in new york i served countrywide home loans who is still an active shell corporation who is a new york corporation bank of america and a bank of america corp i serve all of them include the president of nations start and communicated with him for now right and if i could just in closing and i think you state that the documents speak for themselves the i worked in the securities industry for almost fourteen years i investigated these claims with the f c c they're all in the record for you to review the f c c provided not one but two negative registration certificates confirming my claims that both of these alleged securitize trust don't exist so bank of new york mellon is and nation star mortgage who really filed the action not bank of new york mellon are committing a major major fraud so there's many reasons why this state case needs to be dismissed with prejudice there's there's no valid claim you have nothing to do it  you understand that however judge i think judge pauley did not have all the facts and relied on false statements by the defendants at a worse case this case should not have been dismissed he could have transferred it to some other jurisdiction but i disagree that it should be in another jurisdiction it should be here because the original frauds in the fraud that are being furthered and promoted today are being perpetrated in the state of new york not only the state of new york right around the corner in the headquarters a nerve center of the bank of new york mellon countrywide home loans bank of america who has many operational centers right here in manhattan they all conduct not regular and normal business but a tremendous amount of business and the frauds that i'm complaining of are all coming out of this state this city of new york i have every right according to federal law in my understanding of supreme court cases in the supreme court which says that that supreme that the district courts in the appellate courts should look towards where is the nerve center that's where these fraudulent documents are being manufactured and distributed from right here in new york city thank you all of you thank you very much