Professional Documents
Culture Documents
However referenced Lenders and their attorneys stand alone in their opinion. Their views apparently
are not shared by the ten (10) other listed Defendants; nor are they supported by the Department of
Justice, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Federal Bank Regulators, or a Nationally recognized Fraud
expert.
Harihars complaint, which continues to gain national and worldwide attention, provides details of
evidenced misconduct which connects: identified Lenders associated with the US Foreclosure/
Financial Crisis; Violations of the RICO Act including evidenced Collusion between the Defendant
Attorney(s)/ retained law firms, the MA Attorney Generals office, the US Attorneys Office and the
Boston BAR Association; multiple abuses of judicial discretion; failures by the Commonwealth to
prosecute criminal complaints; and the alignment of Defendant Real Estate Brokers/homebuyers who
have made the decision to sell/purchase an identified illegal foreclosure.
Harihar has maintained that the objective is to reach a mutual agreement with ALL parties, while
paving the way for an economic framework which will realistically lead to historic economic growth in
2
the US. However, Defendant decisions to decline or ignore these opportunities will continue to expose
the depth of related misconduct as the legal process moves forward.
Scroll down to view a copy of Harihars filed Opposition, in its entirety.
Defendant Lenders Wells Fargo NA and US Bank NA; Defendant Attorneys David E.
Fialkow and Jeffrey S. Patterson of K&L Gates, LLP.
2
The economic framework is reference to Harihars Intellectual Property, known as the Harihar FCS
Model
MOHAN A. HARIHAR
11880
Plaintiff
v.
US BANK NA, et al.
Defendants
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS US BANK NA and WELLS FARGO NAs
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO FED.R.CIV.P 12(b)(6) AND
SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM
10
11
12
12.
13
14.
CONCLUSION
The efforts made here by Defendants US Bank NA and Wells Fargo
NA to dismiss, are viewed as clear acts of desperation to avoid
accountability. Their gross mischaracterizations of historical
events have been made abundantly clear and should no longer be
tolerated by this Court. Furthermore, with the exception of
their retained counsel, their views are supported by NO ONE.
These Defendants will have their opportunity to argue their
position before a jury trial, and only after the Plaintiff has
aligned with counsel and Federal prosecutors. A premature
decision to dismiss here would irreparably harm not only this
Plaintiff as an individual, but this Nation as a whole. For the
reasons stated within, and in the Plaintiffs second amended
14
Respectfully submitted,
Mohan A. Harihar
Plaintiff
15