Then why is Apuzzo threatened with sanctions too?
Then why is Apuzzo threatened with sanctions too?”
Well, first I need to address that “too.” Because Apuzzo should be treated as an isolated incident for a very simple reason.
Taitz has no idea what she is doing and she blatantly insulted the court. I don't care what case you are trying—that will get you a sanction every single time. There's nothing unusual, suspicious, or controversial about Taitz’s sanction. If you don't get that, then you're simply operating from a nonfactual premise that must lead you to erroneous conclusions.
As far as Apuzzo goes, attorneys are officers of the court. They have obligations to the court. One of those obligations is to not waste the Court's time with frivolous filings. It doesn't matter whether you or I think we have a case. Once we lose, appeals are obligated to provide meaningful information, perspective, precedent, etc. that could lead a court to question the original judgment. Simply restating the same arguments in a case the Court, rightly or wrongly, thinks wasn't even close can be deemed frivolous. That apparently has happened to Mr. Apuzzo. I hope he makes a better showing in his response than Orly did.