On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( hereinafter referred to as " Plaintiff '' ) acknowledged receipt of my communication submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I am a victim of identity theft. I do not owe any debt alleged by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. A settlement demand was made on XX/XX/XXXX ( see enclosed attachments ) .On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX accepted the settlement offer. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX failed to prepare and forward the necessary settlement documents as stated in their letter. Phone calls were made to McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce , LLC the office representing XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX regarding the XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX violations of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, Florida Consumer Collections Practices Act, FACT ACT, FAIR HOUSING ACT, 42 U.S.C. 3601 and EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY ACT, 15 U.S.C. 1691. The indebtedness incorporated into the Final Judgment for Foreclosure in XXXX XXXX, Florida case number XXXX is incorrect in respect to the following : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. was not the owner and holder of the original promissory note at the inception of this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. did not have standing at time of inception of this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. never filed a valid Certification of Note Possession or affidavit of record indicating it was in continuous possession of the original promissory note at the time suit was filed. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. was not the owner and holder of the original promissory note at the time to foreclose. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. did not have standing at the hearing/trial on XX/XX/XXXX. The original promissory note was surrendered and cancelled by the Court. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. had to have continuous possession of the original promissory note prior to hearing/trial and prior to filing of Lis Pendens. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. did not have the original promissory note when it went to file this case. There is a genuine issue of material fact in this case in that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. lacked standing to file suit against me. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. was not in continuous possession of the required documents to bring suit against me. I informed and disputed XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. regarding the amount in controversy in this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. is not entitled to Final Judgment for Foreclosure because the original promissory note did have endorsement. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Certification of Note Possession attached as Exhibit A in its Verified Complaint to Foreclose Mortgage ( filed XX/XX/XXXX ) is inadmissible. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. was never in continuous possession of the original promissory note in this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. can not prove it had endorsed original promissory note the whole time in this case. I disputed Verification of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. complaint in this case. I did not default in this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. chose not to amend its Certification of Note Possession in this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. chose not to amend its Verified Complaint to Foreclose Mortgage in this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Complaint has failed to cure this Courts lack of subject matter jurisdiction. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. can not establish it had continuous possession or is entitled to enforce the original promissory note in this case. I am not incumbent to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Executive Office confirmed on XX/XX/XXXX via written correspondence that I, ( non-borrower ( s ) /non-customer ( s ) /non-tenant ( s ) ), have no personal obligation to make payment. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. can not prove it had the endorsed original promissory note at the time of the inception of this case and at the time to foreclose. Countervailing facts and evidence in favor of me are demonstrated in this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. failed to meet its burden in this case. I was granted permission from the Court on XX/XX/XXXX to further file and prosecute this case against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. As pled in Court, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. responses in opposition to my motions itself doesnt demonstrate a colorable entitlement to relief. I raised defense at the first opportunity. My pleadings and/or appropriate motions were timely raised. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. has failed to comply with, and demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Florida Statues. Compliance is clearly a condition precedent to maintaining a suit and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. must allege compliance in its Complaint. XXXX XXXX XXXX, v XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ). XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. has failed to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. has failed to plead that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case as required by Rule 1.110 ( b ) ( 1 ) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 1.110 ( b ) requires XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. to plead a short and plain statement of the ultimate facts showing that the pleader is entitled to relief As the Complaint does not comply with minimum pleading requirements and in doing so, fails to state a cause of action and/or presents fatal defects and/or flaws, dismissal with prejudice is warranted. The Complaint states, Plaintiff has and hereby declares the full amount payable under the Note and Mortgage to be due and payable. 7. This vague declaration is insufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court, and fails to put me on notice as to the amount in controversy. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Complaint made the bare allegation that All conditions precedent to the filing of this action have been performed or have occurred. 8.  This bare allegation is legally insufficient to meet the requirements of Florida Statues. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. has failed to provide any facts to support its bare allegation. If a complaint is so vague, indefinite, and ambiguous as to wholly fail to state a cause of action, it is subject to dismissal. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). In considering the validity of the Complaint upon filing of a motion to dismiss, the Court must confine strictly to the allegations within the four corners of the complaint. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX ). Looking to the four corners of the Complaint, it is clear that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. has failed to plead any allegations which would support a recognized cause of action under Florida law against the me. Pursuant to Court rulings in the State of Florida, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. can not apply or seek issuance of a Writ of Possession in this case. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. sued me using unfair tactics and bad faith inconsistent with Government/Federal laws and lending guidelines, including violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) regulations. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. responses in opposition to my motions are sham pleadings, as defined under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.150.  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. pleadings are inherently false and clearly known to be false at the time the pleading was made. The Court should warrant the rejection of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. pleadings as a sham, a mere pretense, set up in bad faith and without color of fact. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. pleadings should be stricken, as the issues raised therein are a sham, knowingly false and without any justiciable standing and have been raised by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. for the sole purpose of delay. As set forth hereinabove, the allegations made in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. responses in opposition to my Motions are known by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. to be false, filed solely for the purpose of delay and to frustrate the judicial process, and thus, constitute sham pleading.