Garner Says D.C. Court Has No Jurisdiction Over Him In RICO Case; Claims Bowdoin Solely Responsible For AdSurfDaily

Filing as a pro se litigant even though he is an attorney, Robert Garner argued in court filings today that he should be dismissed as a RICO defendant in a complaint brought by members of AdSurfDaily because U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has no jurisdiction over him.

In the motion, Garner argued that he has no ties to Washington, D.C., saying his only visit to the district in recent memory was to attend a dinner that had nothing to do with the ASD case. Garner disclosed no other details about the dinner, including a date or time.

Garner also argued that ASD President Andy Bowdoin is uniquely responsible for the company and that Garner ceased being a director of AdSurfDaily in May 2008, about three months prior to the seizure of ASD’s assets.

As part of his argument, Garner produced a document showing that Bowdoin had registered ASD as a Nevada “foreign corporation” in Florida on May 23, 2008. Bowdoin’s entire Florida filing is in longhand, signed by Bowdoin and listing Bowdoin as registered agent for ASD, secretary, chairman, president and the sole director of the company.

Bowdoin used the address of 13 S. Calhoun Street, Quincy, Fla. — an address federal prosecutors said was bogus — eight times in the Florida filing. The filing itself may explain in part why the plaintiffs in the RICO case have been unable to perfect service of the complaint on Bowdoin: Bowdoin listed himself as registered agent at an address that doesn’t exist.

Meanwhile, ASD’s corporate registration in Nevada is marked “default,” and ASD does not appear to have filed a new slate of officers or the identity of a registered agent who could accept process.

Bowdoin is the sole RICO defendant not to have responded to the complaint, which was filed Jan. 15 and amended in April. Although he has appeared in a video for a firm known as PaperlessAccess, filed multiple pro se pleadings in the ASD forfeiture case brought by the government and promised in March to hold a conference call to update ASD members on developments, Bowdoin has not held the conference call and never has explained why he has not answered the RICO complaint.

The RICO plaintiffs, all of whom are ASD members, accuse Bowdoin, Garner and Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby of engaging in racketeering with unnamed co-conspirators.

About the Author

31 Responses to “Garner Says D.C. Court Has No Jurisdiction Over Him In RICO Case; Claims Bowdoin Solely Responsible For AdSurfDaily”

  1. I bet that dinner was the RNC dinner where Bowdoin received his medal. Which does have something to do with ASD.

      (Quote)

  2. Robert Garner has become a rather enigmatic figure in the ASD affair since the day of the AG’s raid (figuratively speaking. lol).

    He had been understood to be the ASD attorney, but was silent (or absent) from the scenario in the days that followed and not a word has been heard from him since. The much acclaimed “SEC Attorney” was never mentioned from the day of the raid onwards by Andy Bowdoin on his live calls to members, nor in any other declarations by anyone from AdSurfDaily.

    He is rumoured to have associations with offshore funds. The RICO law suit accuses him of involvement in an “enterprise” beyond that of simply ASD Cash Generator, and its forunner AdSurfDaily. This declaration to the Court is the first we have heard of him since last summer.

    Whatever his arguments, he certainly has had continuous involvement with ASD in its various forms during the majority of its life. We have since discovered that he was not the head of a SEC Law Firm, but a sole practioner. His real association with Andy Bowdoin and ASD is unknown.

    He is certain demonstrating the desire to distance himself from any judicial proceedings, both the RICO action and the AG’s action.

    It leaves a big question mark. What was and is the role of Robert Garner in the ASD affair?

      (Quote)

  3. Wow, I almsot forgot about that Medal. LOL. I’ll never forget all the idiots standing by it and taking pictures. Just priceless.

      (Quote)

  4. I found his claims most interesting, especially in light of his video appearance with Andy declaring ASD was not a Ponzi and his legality statement he provided to the members. Seems Mr. Garner has had a lapse of memory of these two ties to ASD.

    Also, there was a video on youtube of him being introduced at the Miami rally in July as ASD’s legal counsel, and he did not correct the person doing the video he was no longer associated with ASD. So much for his nothing to do with ASD since May 08.

      (Quote)

  5. Great article as usual, Patrick, but I hope I don’t end up being disappointed in the guys who filed the RICO suit. I’d like to see them get really aggressive.

    ++Address for ASD: The address l3 S. Calhoun St, Quincy, Florida doesn’t exist, but ll S. Calhoun St., does. That’s the former home of Faye’s Florist, as so many of the federal forfeiture filings pointed out. Heck, there’s a picture of the house several websites, including The Joy Luck Club site. I don’t think much of the persistence of the guys who filed the RICO lawsuit if that’s why Bowdoin hasn’t been served.

    ++The guys who filed the RICO lawsuit should depose Gerald Nehra NOW about what Garner told him (Nehra) about ASD, just before the apocalypse. It would be inadmissible as hearsay unless Garner makes statements to the Judge under oath that the plaintiffs are allowed to attempt to impeach. For the purpose of impeaching Garner’s testimony, they can probably get Nehra’s testimony before the Judge. It’s clear that as late as of July 30, 2008, Garner had an official association with ASD and Bowdoin, and that Nehra, after speaking with Andy for 6 hours, considered Garner to be legal counsel for ASD/Bowdoin. Nehra says: “….he (Bowdoin) ALLOWED me to work with Garner.” That phrasing applies to releasing legal counsel from attorney/client privilege. At the evidentiary hearing in DC, the JLC says these remarks were made: Cowden: You spoke with Andy for 6 hours? Nehra: Yes Cowden: You determined ASD had no legal issues? Nehra: I looked at the terms and service, the ASD video from Mr. Garner, and the legality statement. Cowden shows up on the screen for the entire courtroom The ASD legality statement on the ASD website. Declaration is given to the government defense and the Judge. * Exhibit a. Legality Statement; Cowden cross examines Nehra: Did you review Mr. Garner’s legality statement? Nehra: I reviewed it yes. —-AND: Cowden: Did he [Bowdoin] tell you how he started the company? “I do not recall specifically everything Andy Bowdoin told me. He was asking me more questions. He told me about his relationship with Robert Garner adding him to his team.” AND: “Cowden: Did he tell you about the relationship with Robert Garner? Nehra: He showed me the video, and allowed me to work with Mr. Garner, call him, email him, etc.” —-THEN: Goodman’s Attorney Michael Fayad asks Nehra questions now. Michael Fayad: Tell us the length of time spent on ASD Nehra: In addition to the 6 hours, I read materials. I worked the next day with Mr. Garner. Probably on Thursday another 4 hours. Michael Fayad: 2 days? 3 days? Nehra: Minimum 2 days, most 3 days; Nehra: Yes
    Michael Fayad: You reviewed the Terms of Service, Legality Statements, Video, and people?

    ++According to this site, Garner’s legality statement is dated on or around July 9, 2008. http://pay-2surf.blogspot.com/2008/07/asd-legality-statement.html In it Garner says: “In addition to myself, we have other attorneys in our offices who are dedicated to this work with Andy and his company, and who are available at any time to deal with issues as they arise. We are working daily to advance the business plans of Andy’s entire organization, and we are moving forward in a number of positive directions which will benefit everyone involved.” If Garner severed his relationship with and responsibility for ASD, can he prove he withdrew his legality statement and demanded that ASD take down both his statement and his video? No way.

    ++In this document: http://www.thejoyluckclub.com/ASD1-1.pdf (pages 6, 7, l4,l5,), which is the second forfeiture filing (l2/08) the DOJ has clearly gotten some ASD staff to flip on Andy & Co. According to the DOJ’s statement,which was made to Judge Collyer under penalty of perjury, Garner knowingly participated in an organized fraud, in furtherance of a felony, when he read the script for the video knowing it was not true. By appearing in the video, which was streamed online, Garner was clearly an ASD pitchman (and clearly a huge buffoon and liar, but that’s not necessarily a crime).

    ++ The fact that Garner says he was no longer a director of ASD after May of 2008 is immaterial. In July of 2008 he played a key role in organized, corrupt, and fraudulent actions (i.e. the video and legality statement) designed to staunch the flow of money out of ASD, as the Internet truth squad began to take it’s toll on ASD. The feds claim that an informal survey of ASD big-money insiders said the legality statement and video were needed to keep funds flowing into ASD, which led to Andy and Tari Steward (a self-proclaimed Internet marketing genius) writing a script they knew was totally false, after which Garner read it on a video, after declaring his qualifications as an SEC expert.

    Garner should plead guilty and threaten to throw himself (bodily) on top of the guys filing the RICO suit. Or on the mercy of the court. He is all over the Internet engaging in Racketeer Influenced, Corrupt, Organized activities, not to mention being a HUGE liar. Working with Andy easily constitutes working with a racketeering organization. With his 2 prior felony convictions for fraud, Andy easily meets the test of engaging in a pattern of illegal activity, carried out as part of an enterprise that is owned or controlled by those who are engaged in the illegal activity.

    I don’t know about the DC jurisdiction, but the fact that his video was streamed over the Internet may be sufficient. If not they should just file in NC and see what his next move might be.

      (Quote)

  6. Funny for him to say that Bowdoin is the only responsible party as the video he stared in gave ASD legitimacy from a so called Sec attorney. This guy is as guilty as Bowdoin, probably more so. Its like some guy comes out with a wonder drug without FDA approval, he was Bowdoins FDA giving it the ok to sell to the public.

      (Quote)

  7. Hi James b,

    James b: Its like some guy comes out with a wonder drug without FDA approval, he was Bowdoins FDA giving it the ok to sell to the public.

    This is an interesting, economical take. Thanks for sharing.

    Patrick

      (Quote)

  8. Hi Marci,

    Marci: the DOJ has clearly gotten some ASD staff to flip on Andy & Co.

    The December forfeiture complaint is a powerful document.

    And there is at least one proffer letter in the case. There could be more than one. It’s noteworthy, I believe, that the government revealed the existence of the Bowdoin proffer letter in its final filing in response to his pro se pleadings, after Bowdoin’s cheerleaders had about seven weeks to crusade for him again.

    Bowdoin’s PR machine went to work to get Andy back on the stage in March, after the second forfeiture complaint was filed in December (without an announcement), after Bowdoin surrendered the money in January (without an announcement), after Bowdoin went pro se in February after consulting with a “group,” and after he announced he had fired his attorneys and changed his mind about submitting to the forfeiture.

    The prosecution responded to three of Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings while all the new cheerleading was going on, not mentioning the proffer letter. Only in the fourth (final) government filing on April 24 in response to Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings was the existence of the proffer letter revealed.

    Prosecutors saved their best for last, if you will. Some of the cheerleaders recognized they’d been cheering for a man who didn’t bother to tell them:

    1.) about the December complaint.
    2.) about the January submission to forfeiture.
    3.) about the identity of the “group” that had influenced him to go pro se AFTER he submitted to the forfeiture and AFTER the December complaint was filed.
    4.) about the existence of a proffer letter he had signed, the contents of the proffer and whether he had given prosecutors information that could be helpful in the prosecution of others.

    One way to look at the cheerleaders is that they were cheering for somebody who didn’t bother telling them he might be inclined to rat them out or had already ratted them out and was trying desperately to put the genie back in the bottle.

    In some respects, the ASD case is an embarrassment of riches for the government — starting with the principals alone. Both Bowdoin and Busby had previous run-ins with the law over securities issues.

    And members of their families were involved in the ASD/Golden Panda businesses.

    The government had lots of leverage before it even began to assess the leverage it could apply to insiders.

    Have you EVER, in all your born days, seen people so willing to cheer for a felon who fleeced thousands of people, including senior citizens, members of the military and religious groups?

    And have you EVER, in all your born days, seen people so willing to cheer the tactics of Curtis Richmond and Patrick Moriarty, both of whom seem to believe they have a Constitutional right to enter into contracts with illegal businesses and that the government has a duty not to interfere with illegal commerce?

    Take the phrase “wire fraud” out of the equation and substitute “bank robbery.”

    Under Moriarty’s commerce theory, bank robbery would be legal as long as both parties to a contract agree that bank robbery is legal.

    It’s actually sillier than that. Bowdoin has acknowledged that ASD was operating illegally. Now, Moriarty’s argument can be reduced to, “It’s legal to commit bank robbery as long as ONE party holds that bank robbery is legal.”

    Patrick

      (Quote)

  9. Patrick, there would seem to be a get out clause for the ASD members/participants in there somewhere. It’s OK and legal to help finance a bank robbery as long as you think and say it is legal.

    Which is, of course, what anybody who was ever been in a ponzi always says. Including the numerous past and present “playas” who frequent this place.

    No matter what anyone likes to think, when one “invests” in a ponzi, one is helping to finance and perpetuate the fraud, robbery, whatever.

    It is simply not possible to climb out of a ponzi cess-pit smelling of roses, regardless of whether you were up to your neck in it or simply ankle deep.

    The stench permeates down to their very soul and will stay with them forever no matter how often they may bathe or visit an Internet confessional.

      (Quote)

  10. Pistol:
    No matter what anyone likes to think, when one “invests” in a ponzi, one is helping to finance and perpetuate the fraud, robbery, whatever.
    It is simply not possible to climb out of a ponzi cess-pit smelling of roses, regardless of whether you were up to your neck in it or simply ankle deep.
    The stench permeates down to their very soul and will stay with them forever no matter how often they may bathe or visit an Internet confessional.

    This sounds rather like the damnation of souls which have been sold to the devil and can never be redeemed.

    Forgive me Festa, for I have sinned. LOL

    If it wasnt for ex conned people, half of the knowledge about these schemes would never come to light. A lot of information comes from people who have been on the inside of these schemes and wish to warn others.

    Who on earth can judge the souls of anyone? It sounds like a very fundamentalist religious posture full of fire and brimstone and somewhat inconsistent coming from a self proclaimed atheist

      (Quote)

  11. Pistol/Festa said, “…The stench permeates down to their very soul…”

    ♦♦♦

    Alysica said, “…Who on earth can judge the souls of anyone? It sounds like a very fundamentalist religious posture full of fire and brimstone and somewhat inconsistent coming from a self proclaimed atheist.”

    ♦♦♦

    This is way off topic, but isn’t the concept of having a soul a religious one? If so, it’s amusing that an atheist (which I once was) would use such a reference.

      (Quote)

  12. Patrick:

    Actually I have seen it all before. The only difference here is the extreme to which the suppporters of ASD have taken their support. I almost hate to use this word, but they have become rabid and cult-like in their defense. It is just now that I am beginning to see the majority starting to back-off from this rabid, cult-like support to a mere handful.

    From all appearances, those who have now joined AVGA are exhibiting this type of behavior all over again. It remains to be seen as to whether or not it will rise to the level of support that Andy and ASD had. Yet, I am seeing these same type of statements coming from them, just as I have in past scams of this magnitude.

    I have always been fascinated at how they all become cultish in their behavior and rhetoric. That to me is the chilling aspect these scams all have in common.

      (Quote)

  13. Pat Dunn: Pistol/Festa said, “…The stench permeates down to their very soul…”♦♦♦Alysica said, “…Who on earth can judge the souls of anyone? It sounds like a very fundamentalist religious posture full of fire and brimstone and somewhat inconsistent coming from a self proclaimed atheist.”♦♦♦This is way off topic, but isn’t the concept of having a soul a religious one? If so, it’s amusing that an atheist (which I once was) would use such a reference.

    Maybe Festa got his soles mixed up with his souls?

    I have been witness to stench coming from a sole. 8>))

      (Quote)

  14. Poor fecal…still looking for much needed attention spouting the same old garbage. Go attack some pre-schoolers….you’d make out better.

      (Quote)

  15. Pat Dunn: If so, it’s amusing that an atheist (which I once was) would use such a reference.

    Amusing it may be but I was never one to balk at using a word or phrase simply because people may be amused. On the contrary I would be very pleased if someone found anything I had posted amusing. It means it has served it’s purpose. Nothing wrong with laughter.

    As I said to an obese forum moderator a while back, laugh and the world laughs with you. Cry and you cry alone. I am always more than willing to laugh at myself first, in fact, I often do.e.g for example I thought it was hilarious that someone went to the trouble of reporting me to Ning and having them shut my little forum down because of a couple of pics.

    This from someone who unashamedly supports and officiates at a ning forum where members are encouraged to post their pet scams in order to recruit fellow members, which is, of course, in blatant disregard of Ning’s TOS.

    What is the greater crime, manipulation of a pic or helping to steal from the needy, greedy, desperate and just plain stupid? You tell me.

      (Quote)

  16. Sounds like UncleFesta is going for the old “lesser of two evils” defense. Which is worse, to kill one or to kill 5? It’s still killing. To use ones likeness for degrading amusement is vile, to say the least. Do your grandchildren know the real you. Festa? Do you degrade everyone or just people online? Remember the old saying on glass houses and stone throwing?

      (Quote)

  17. Don: Sounds like UncleFesta is going for the old “lesser of two evils” defense. Which is worse, to kill one or to kill 5? It’s still killing.

    No, I disagree. Festa’s daft pictures were satire and therefore likely to be legal. Those who reported his silly little forum were likely to be promoting fraud, which is illegal. There is no “two evils”, but a large dose of hypocrisy on the part of the fraud promoters.

      (Quote)

  18. Tony,

    I’m with you on this one…..

    Tony H:

    Don: Sounds like UncleFesta is going for the old “lesser of two evils” defense. Which is worse, to kill one or to kill 5? It’s still killing.

    No, I disagree. Festa’s daft pictures were satire and therefore likely to be legal. Those who reported his silly little forum were likely to be promoting fraud, which is illegal. There is no “two evils”, but a large dose of hypocrisy on the part of the fraud promoters.

      (Quote)

  19. Don: Sounds like UncleFesta is going for the old “lesser of two evils” defense. Which is worse, to kill one or to kill 5? It’s still killing. To use ones likeness for degrading amusement is vile, to say the least. Do your grandchildren know the real you. Festa? Do you degrade everyone or just people online? Remember the old saying on glass houses and stone throwing?

    Now you are being even sillier than usual, Wizzy, Killing???.

    If a scammer i.e. someone who participates in, condones and/or encourages other people to participate, is daft enough to post their image on the Internet, then they are fair game.Get real, Wizzy, son. It all comes with the territory.

    I would never, repeat never, use pictures of the totally innocent e.g. scammers offspring.

    I can’t remember any howls of protest when “vile and degrading” pics of Guenther, Bowdoin, Garner and co. have been posted not only by me but by the likes of Jack Arons, but that is different, eh?

      (Quote)

  20. They very well may be legal, but they were not in accord with Ning terms and conditions.

      (Quote)

  21. Ning’s AUP is here: http://asd-biz.ning.com/main/authorization/termsOfService?previousUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fasd-biz.ning.com%2Fforum#14
    14. Acceptable Use and Conduct

    Which part did Festa’s silly pictures break? Was it the one that says:

    to engage in [snip] “pyramid schemes”, [snip], or other advertising or marketing activities that violate these Terms of Service, any applicable laws, regulations or generally-accepted advertising industry guidelines, [snip]

    Or was it:

    in a manner that is [snip] fraudulent or otherwise illegal or promotes illegal activities, [snip]

    Maybe it was:

    in a manner that constitutes or contains any form of advertising or solicitation if (1) posted in Your Content; or (2) emailed to Users who have requested not to be contacted about other services, products or commercial interests.

    No, I think I’m mistaken. These terms are what was broken by the ponzi promoters.

    Sorry for going off topic again.

      (Quote)

  22. Hopefully getting back on-topic, I found this is still available:
    http://asdprosystems.net/content/view/5/6/
    It’s Garner’s “everything is legal with ASD” statement. “Last Updated ( Thursday, 24 July 2008 ) “. Garner may not have been a director of ASD at that time, but he was still very much involved.

      (Quote)

  23. The thing that never fails to amaze me is to see people who participate, promote, condone or otherwise encourage others to participate in ponzies, declare how proud they are of their brave sons and daughters who are fighting for their country in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and yet they willingly send off money to organizations like ASD.

    Organizations who are known to launder the proceeds of drug and other crimes which in turn may very well be used to fund terrorists. Terrorists whose stated aim is to kill, maim and injure those very same brave sons and daughters.

    I don’t how these people can sleep at night.

      (Quote)

  24. Saint Michael: They very well may be legal, but they were not in accord with Ning terms and conditions.

    As has been pointed out by Tony, is the pimping of ponzies in accord with Ning terms and conditions? Indeed, one might ask is the pimping of ponzies legal?

      (Quote)

  25. I’m sure it’s not and neither did I do any of those things, nor did any of the mods at ASD-BIZ promote those things. It’s clear, festa, that you see everyone who was in ASD as having the same culpability as Andy Bowdoin, however logic proves otherwise.

    Whatever this bitterness in your heart, my friend, whatever this inability to see any goodness in another human being, it must be a dark and dreary place to be. It is unfortunate, maybe that you see only guilt and greed in me, and I admit among sinners I am chief, but the Good Lord died on the cross for you and me Festa, and you don’t need to live in darkness any longer. Whatever you think of me, bad as it is, I want you to know that your soul has inestimable worth and dignity and I will try to honor the light of God within you.

      (Quote)

  26. Stop feeding the troll please…..

      (Quote)

  27. Sorry Guys,

    We know Fester’s views on the subject by now and I personally dont see that lumping every ex member of a ponzi into the same category is particularly helpful to anyone.

    There are scammers who knew exactly what they were doing,and will continue with their next trick; there are people who dont care and have also moved on to the next thing; there are also people who hadnt a clue what they were doing and will never make the same mistake again; and a lot more in between. There are also people who feel terrible about having been involved in such a scheme and understand that they have to take the flack for having been involved.

    However, the important issue now for some of us is to use what we have learnt from having been stupid enough to get involved in ASD, to help educate people to avoid them in the future and to stop the new versions.

    If this insight has been gained by having been involved in a ponzi, so be it. But the continuous carping accusations with photos attached, from certain quarters, that tar us all with the same brush as the serial ponzi players, do get a bit wearing and I am not even sure that they serve a useful purpose.

      (Quote)

  28. alasycia:there are also people who hadnt a clue what they were doing

    Yes there were but you miss the point which is if they didn’t have a clue they should’ve made it their business to find one. There were plenty about particularly on an abundance of official websites.

    You might as well say that the getaway car driver in Patricks bank robbery didn’t have a clue about the reason he was sat outside the bank with the engine running whilst his friends went in with guns drawn. He could be excused if he said he thought they were there to deposit money. Yeah, right.

      (Quote)

  29. Pistol: You might as well say that the getaway car driver in Patricks bank robbery didn’t have a clue about the reason he was sat outside the bank with the engine running whilst his friends went in with guns drawn. He could be excused if he said he thought they were there to deposit money. Yeah, right.

    Nebraska Man Released, Didn’t Know He Was Getaway Driver http://www.officer.com/web/online/Top-News-Stories/Nebraska-Man-Released–Didnt-Know-He-Was-Getaway-Driver/1$26429

    Getaway driver sentenced
    The prosecution agreed that Ms. Gerdes didn’t know the true intention of the trip beforehand, but afterward she knew a crime had been committed. http://www.stjoenews.net/news/2009/may/28/getaway-driver-sentenced/

    Getaway driver gets death sentence lifted
    Foster’s lawyers argue that statements from the other two friends, both now serving life sentences, provide new evidence that supports Foster’s claim that he didn’t know Brown was going to shoot LaHood. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20514903/

    It happens,

      (Quote)

  30. littleroundman: It happens,
    </strong.

    Well, wouldn’t you just know it?

    “Mr. Holliday noted that Ms. Gerdes had been smoking crack the day of the robbery.
    Ms. Gerdes’ attorney, public defender Michelle Davidson, said Ms. Gerdes is in obvious need of drug treatment, and that she is deemed disabled due to a mental health diagnosis.”

    “Getaway driver gets death sentence lifted
    Texas governor commutes sentence to life in prison for 1996 murder
    Foster was convicted of murder and sentence to death under a Texas law that makes non-triggermen equally accountable for a crime.”

    Anyone know how many Bank robberies involving getaway cars there are where the driver gets away scot free compared to those that get convicted?

      (Quote)

  31. Back to topic, unless anyone objects.

    The RICO suit is going to be a very interesting one to watch for various aspects that have not been touched upon on the public AG prosecution documentation.

    Firstly the involvement and possible responsiblity of the BoA Quincy Branch, secondly to discover what is really known about the involvement of Robert Garner in this whole affair and thirdly, of course, to see what is raised on the topic of the suggested ASD Enterprise

    It is difficult to imagine that Robert Garners claim that the court has no jurisdiction over him will be granted. ASD was an internet business and crosses state lines and his video was, as already mentioned, broadcast to the four winds in many countries. Washington will have jurisdiction, if only for that reason.

    Like many, I am impatient for all the documents to be served and for a trial date to be set.

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply