Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Steel; pissant

No, Kreep responded to the motion to stay discovery. No one has responded to the motion to dismiss yet. (They still have time, though.)


128 posted on 09/16/2009 12:24:55 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: Red Steel; pissant

I have now read Kreep’s response to the discovery stay motion and I see that he also addresses the issues raised by the U.S. Attorney in the motion to dismiss. He and/or Orly will still need to file a separate document formally responding to the motion to dismiss, but at least Kreep has done the work needed to state an argument.


131 posted on 09/16/2009 12:28:59 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies ]

To: Lurking Libertarian
No, Kreep responded to the motion to stay discovery. No one has responded to the motion to dismiss yet. (They still have time, though.)

But, Kreep specifically addresses and mentions the Governments 'Motion to Dismiss' issues of "Standing" and counters them in the Application. The Governments Motion to Dismiss is all about Standing or Jurisdiction. This is a response no matter what the title says. And you wouldn't oppose the Government's opposition to Standing unless you thought the case would go forward.

138 posted on 09/16/2009 12:44:53 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson