Sue District Judge

ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’;
CO-PLAINTIFF
THIS CASE WAS TRANSFERRED TO U. S. DISTRICT COURT IN

NEVADA, SINCE 9TH CIRCUIT DID NOT FIND A DECENT, NOBLE,
AND HONEST JUDGE IN THE ENTIRE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
TO HEAR THE MATTER!
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
) CASE NO.:
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY; )
)
Plaintiffs, ) PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED
) COMPLAINT FOR TEMPORARY
vs. ) RESTRAINING ORDER,
) DECLARATORY JUDGMENT, AND
UNITED STATES DISRTICT COURT, ) PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT
)
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA; ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND
S. JAMES OTERO, individually and in ) MONETARY CIVIL PENALTIES
his official capacity; )
PHILIP S. GUTIERREZ, individually and) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
in his official capacity; )
)
ARGENT MORTGAGE COMPANY, LLC; )
AMC MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC.; )
SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING, LLC; )
CAL-WESTERN RECONVEYANCE )
CORPORATION; and DOES 1 TO 10, )
)
inclusive, )
)
Defendants. )
Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, and co-plaintiff and collectively referred to as (“Injured Parties”)
acting in Pro Se, requesting a Noble Court without bias and with authority to issue
a Temporary Restraining Order, Declaratory Judgment, and Preliminary and
Permanent Injunctive Relief and Damages against each defendants, individually
and collectively. In support thereof, the Injured Parties show unto the Court as
follows:
1. This is a civil rights action seeking restraining order; monetary and other
equitable relief brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown
Narcotics Agents 403 U.S. 388 (1971); 28 U.S.C. §§1331; 1343; and
42 U.S.C. 1985(2), and (3); for civil conspiracy committed by the
federal actors in the course of their official duties.
equitable relief brought pursuant to §§1985(2), and (3); and 28
U.S.C. § 1343 for civil conspiracy to commit fraud by the federal
actors in the course of their official duties.
equitable relief brought pursuant to First Amendment to the United
States Constitution, Freedom of Speech; committed by the federal
actors in the course of their official duties.
equitable relief brought pursuant to Fifth; Sixth; and Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, Due Process of Law;
committed by the federal actors in the course of their official duties.
equitable relief brought pursuant to Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution, Equal Protection of Law; committed by
the federal actors in the course of their official duties.
Page 2
equitable relief brought pursuant to Eighth Amendment to the
United States Constitution, PROHIBITION AGAINST CRUEL AND
UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT committed by the federal actors in the
course of their official duties.
7. This is an action seeking restraining order, declaratory relief, monetary
damages, and other equitable relief brought pursuant to Real
Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) and acts and practices
in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”).
8. This is an action in violation of §§§2603 (b)(1-2); 2604 (b)91-5); 2604 (d);
and 2607(a) and (b), of Chapter 27 of RESPA, to secure permanent
injunctive relief and other equitable relief, including rescission,
reformation, redress and disgorgement, against defendants for
engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in violation of 12
U.S.C. §§§(b)(1-2); 2604 (b)(1-5); 2604(d); and 2607 (a) and (b), of
RESPA and acts and practices in violation of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C.
§1692, violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C.
§1681; to obtain a monetary civil penalty for violation of RESPA and
FDCPA, and FCRA.
9. This is an action under Section 6 and 16 of the RESPA of 1974, 12 U.S.C.
§§and 2614, to secure statutory remedies, permanent injunctive
relief, and other equitable relief against Argent Mortgage Company,
LLC (hereinafter “Argent”); AMC Mortgage Services, LLC
(hereinafter “AMC”); and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC
(hereinafter “SLS”) for engaging in violations of Section 6 of RESPA,
12 U.S.C. §2605, and Section 3500.21 of the Department of Housing
and Urban Development’s Regulation X (“Regulation X”), 24 C.F.R.
§3500.21.
Page 3
10. Argent; AMC; and SLS are “debt collectors” as defined in Section 803(6)
of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692 (a)(6).
I. PARTIES
II. Plaintiff
11. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY is an individual and a resident of State
of Arizona. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY is a Real Estate
Investor who buys, renovates, remodels, repairs and sells all types
of real estate properties including single family homes in several
states within the United States including California.
12. Coplaintiff is an individual and a resident of State of California.
b. Defendants
13. There are two sets of defendants in this action; (1) federal-defendants
and (2) non-federal defendants. For the ease of this action, United
States District Court, Central District of California; (“USDC”); S.
James Otero, (“Otero”); and Philip S. Gutierrez (“Gutierrez”) are
collectively referred to as federal-defendants; and Argent; AMC; SLS
and Cal-WRC; are collectively referred to as non-federal defendants.
14. Federal-defendants who are employees of United States of America are
sued individually and in their official capacities.
15. Defendant USDC is a federal incorporated entity and governed by the
laws and treaties of the United State of America.
16. Defendant Otero was and is at all time relevant to this amended
complaint a judge presiding over the federal action which violated
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s civil rights. Otero is being sued
as an individual and in his official capacity.
17. Defendant Gutierrez was and is at all time relevant to this amended
complaint a judge presiding over the federal action which violated
Page 4
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s civil rights. Gutierrez is being
sued as an individual and in his official capacity.
18. Argent is a wholly owned subsidiary of Argent Mortgage Corporation, and
is based in California. Argent transacts or has transacted business
in this District.
19. AMC is a Delaware Corporation registered with the California Secretary of
State with a license number C2469970. AMC Transact or has
transacted in this District with a principal place of business in
Orange, California.
20. SLS is a Delaware Limited Liability Company registered with California
Secretary of State under the license number 200334710106. SLS
transacts or has transacted business in this District.
21. CAL-WRC is a California Corporation registered with California Secretary
of State under license number C1066842. CAL-WRC transacts or has
transacted in this District with a place of business if El Cajon, California.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
22. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY and coplaintiff bring this action
pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Narcotics Agents 403 U.S. 388
(1971); 42 U.S.C. §1985(2), (3); First; Fifth; Sixth; Eights; and
Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; 12 U.S.C. §§§§
2603, 2604, 2605, 2614; and 15 U.S.C. §1692.
23. This court has jurisdiction to hear this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1331
and 1343(a)(3), which confer original jurisdiction on federal district
courts to hear suits alleging the violation of rights and privileges
under the United States Constitution.
24. This Court has basic authority to grant restraining; declaratory and
injunctive relief pursuant to local rule 65; and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and
2202.
Page 5
III. COMMERCE
25. The acts and practices of defendants alleged in this complaint have been
in or affecting commerce, as “commerce” is defined in Section 4 of the
FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §44.
III. FACTS
26. This is an action arising out of single family home located at California,
(hereinafter “Subject Property”).
27. On or about July 20, 2006, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY purchased
the Subject Property in the name of his friend and colleagues
coplaintiff.
28. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY deposited the sum of $5,000.00 as
earnest money with the seller toward the purchase of the Subject
Property.
29. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY thereafter paid the sum of $27,687.70
toward the cost and fees of obtaining financing, escrow, title, taxes,
interest, appraisal, inspection and other material charges in the
course of purchasing the Subject Property.
30. Coplaintiff obtained two loans from defendant Argent being loan number
in the amount of $988,000.00 recorded in the County Recorder
office as first deed of trust (“First Mortgage Loan”) and in the
amount of $447,000.00 recorded in the County Recorder Office as
second deed of trust (“Second Mortgage Loan”). Hereinafter, First
Mortgage Loan and Second Mortgage Loan are collectively referred
to as the “Subject Loans”.
31. From August 1, 2006 to November 30, 2006, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY spent approximately $83,000.00 renovating, remodeling and
modernizing the Subject Property.
Page 6
32. From September 1, 2006 to December 1, 2006, ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY made monthly mortgage in the amount of
$8,165.00 toward the First Mortgage Loan and $4,489.47 toward
the Second Mortgage Loan a total of $132,617.88 to defendants
Argent and AMC and SLS.
33. On or about November 27, 2006, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY
received a “Notice of Default” recorded on November 13, 2006,
with County Recorder Office being instrument number 0-0
registered and recorded trough defendants CAL-WRC; and AMC and
Argent attempting to foreclose the Subject Property in accordance
with California Civil Code §2924b.
34. Effective November 13, 2006, defendants, Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-
WRC have filed Notice of Default attempting to foreclose on the
Subject Property without legal authority.
35. From October 1, 2006 to present, Argent; AMC and SLS have attempted
to collect payments toward the Subject Loans by contacting ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY on his unlisted cell telephone number
555-5555 at the rate of 7-9 times per day and in excess of 120
times.
36. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY has special interest in the Subject
Property because:
a. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY is the owner of the Subject Property;
b. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY negotiated the purchase of the Subject
Property;
c. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY deposited the sum of $5,000.00 as
earnest money with the seller’s escrow while purchasing the Subject
Property;
Page 7
d. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY paid all expenses toward inspection
and Appraisal of the Subject Property;
e. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY additionally paid all expenses toward
obtaining the financing, escrow and title fees toward the purchase of
the Subject Property;
f. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY invested the total sum of $233,305.58
of his monies, and his time for the past six month.
37. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY thereafter filed this present action
against non-federal defendants, in the defendant, USDC’s court
being case number CV-SJO (SSx) on or about December 13, 2006.
38. Subsequently this matter was referred to Judge Audrey “Collins”.
39. Thereafter, defendant, SLS filed its responsive pleading one day late,
causing ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY move to seek a default
judgment which was entered by the clerk of defendant USDC’s
court on February 6, 2007.
40. Shortly after, Collins, sua sponte set aside default of SLS. ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY immediately moved to recuse Collins. Having
realized she had made several errors, Collins recused herself and
transferred the present action to defendant, Otero.
41. Thereafter, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY filed a Motion to
Reconsider in the defendant Otero’s court. Without justifying his
ruling, Otero denied ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s Motion to
Reconsider. Additionally to intimidate ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY and in retaliation, Otero Threatened to sanction ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY without cause.
42. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY upon discovering that Otero is
prejudice and biased against him, filed a Motion for disqualification
Page 8
pursuant to Rule 455, on March 23, 2007.The disqualification of
Otero was then referred to his devoted buddy, defendant Gutierrez.
43. On or about March 29, 2007, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY filed a
Notice of Appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal challenging
the Vacature of Default of defendant SLS.
44. On or about April 26, 2007, Otero issued orders without jurisdiction
denying ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s Appeal and labeling it
as frivolous. Additionally in his despicable order, Otero conspiring
with defendant SLS’s attorney and coaching him to seek sanction
against ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY as stated in his meritless
ruling that ”….the Ninth Circuit is the avenue currently open for
Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing to pursue sanctions against
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY.”
45. Thereafter at an unknown date and time, Otero, contacted defendant
SLS’s attorney in the absence of ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY
discussing the action without the knowledge of ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY in an attempt to conspire and to commit fraud
against ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY.
46. Thereafter, defendant Gutierrez to harbor a colleague and to show his
devotion to his buddy denied ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s
Motion to disqualify Otero on bogus and farce grounds.
47. On or about May 21, 2007, Otero in his 13-page desperate ruling,
declared ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY a vexatious litigant
attempting to justify his own frivolous and scrupulous conducts by
attempting to limit ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s ability to
litigate his cases, for deprivations of his fundamental rights to
liberty and to be free from unlawful treatment on account of his
Page 9
legal representation as a non-represented party and in account of
his race and origin as a white American.
48. Although in addition to this First Amended Complaint, ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY has accepted Otero’s invitation, ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY intends along others to file for writ of prohibition
with the Ninth Circuit challenging Otero’s numerous baseless and
desperate rulings with the option of pursuing these atrocities
against ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY all the way to the United
States Supreme Court, should it become necessary.
49. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY has also accepted Otero’s invitation
toward injustices committed by Otero; therefore, ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY has ORDERED his editor in chief to increase the
publication of his monthly newsletter from 500,000 copies to
1,000,000. The excess circular shall be distributed in California,
allowing the Californians to learn about their beloved judiciaries
within federal district court. In this publication which will be
distributed in California effective June 25, 2007, the defendants;
USDC; Otero; Gutierrez; along with Alicemarie Stotler; Valerie Baker
Fairbank; Audrey B. Collins; John C. Rayburn and other corrupt,
crooked and unethical judges will be the monthly topic of ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s newsletter. Furthermore, ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY will monitor very closely the
courtroom performance of these abusive and cruel judges toward
other represented or non-represented litigants to bring awareness
to Californians in respect to their judiciaries.
50. Constitutionally and in fact of law and judicial rulings, state-
federal "magistrates-judges" or any government actors,
state or federal, may now be held liable, if they violate any
Page 10
Citizen's Constitutional rights, privileges, or immunities, or
guarantees; including statutory civil rights. Forrester v.
White, 484 U.S. at 227-229, 108 S. Ct. at 544-545 (1987);
Westfall v. Erwin, 108 S. Ct. 580 (1987); United States v.
Lanier (March 1997).
III. CAUSES OF ACTION AGINST FEDERAL-DEFENDANTS

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Fourteenth Amendment Violation of Equal Protection
51. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY repeats and realleges paragraphs 1
through 50 as if set forth fully.
52. Defendants, USDC; Otero; and Gutierrez acting under color of law and in
concert with one another, engaged in intentional discrimination of
non-represented litigant. In doing so, defendants have caused ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY to suffer deprivations of his
fundamental rights to liberty and to be free from unlawful
treatment on account of his legal representation as a non-
represented ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY. These actions
violated ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s rights to equal
protection of the laws, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to
the United States Constitution, it counterpart in California
Constitution, and 28 U.S.C. §1343.
53. Upon information and belief, and after a reasonable opportunity for
discovery, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY will establish that
defendants Otero; and Gutierrez targeted ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY because he was non-represented litigant.
Furthermore, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY will establish that
federal-defendants used and abused their authorities to reject and
Page 11
to deny ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s statutory rights, based
solely on ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s status as a non-
represented litigant and no other fact or circumstance which have
otherwise justified their actions.
54. As a non-represented litigant, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY is a
member of a protected class.
55. Otero purposefully denied ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s Demands;
Pleadings and Papers to shield, and to protect and to favor officer of
his own court over a non-represented litigant.
56. Gutierrez purposefully denied ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s
Demands; Pleadings and Papers to shield, and to protect and to
harbor his colleagues and to favor a buddy over a non-represented
litigant.
57. Otero and Gutierrez purposefully rejected ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY’s well drafted Motions; Papers; and Pleadings without
probable cause, without justification and without legal authority.
The conducts of Otero and Gutierrez were malicious and illegal to
favor a colleague and an officer of the court, over a non-
represented litigant.
58. Federal-defendants denying and rejecting ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY’s judicial and legal communications with the court had a
discriminatory effect on ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY.
59. By purposefully denying and rejecting ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s
communications with the court without cause and legal authority,
federal-defendants deprived ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY of
the equal protection of the law within the meaning of the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Page 12
60. Defendant, Otero acting under color of law, engaged in intentional judicial
discrimination. In doing so, Otero has caused ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTYto suffer deprivations of his fundamental rights to
Due Process of Law. These actions violated ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY’s rights to equal protection of the laws, in violation
of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it
counterpart in California Constitution, and 28 U.S.C. §1343.
61. The acts of the federal-defendants, Otero, and Gutierrez caused injury to
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY. They were intentional done in
knowing violation of ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s legal and
constitutional rights, without good faith, and with disregard and/or
callous indifference to ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s civil
rights.
62. The acts of federal-defendants, Otero and Gutierrez caused ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY to be hospitalized several times and to suffer
physical and mental distress. These conducts were malicious which
entitles ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY to damages in
accordance with the law.
63. As a further legal result of the above-described violations, ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY has suffered severe emotional distress, all to
his general damage, in a sum to be determined at the trial.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Fifth; Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment
Violation of Due Process of Law
65. No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law....
Page 13
66. Federal-defendants, USDC; Otero and Gutierrez are acting under the color
of federal laws, and have deprived ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY of his federal constitutional right to equal protection of the
laws in that they have denied ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY a
fair and equal protection under the law. Federal-defendants by
denying and rejecting ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s rights to
equal protection under the law have violated ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY’s Due Process Clause.
67. As a direct and proximate result of federal-defendants, ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY has suffered and continues to suffer substantial
damages, in an amount according to proof.
68. As a direct and proximate result of Otero’s prejudicial and bias rulings
and dishonorable conducts, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY has
suffered and continues to suffer substantial damages, in an amount
according to proof.
69. The precise amount of ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s damages
presently is unknown, but ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY is
informed and believes, and based on such information and belief
alleges, that his damages are in excess of the jurisdictional
minimum established for this court. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY will amend this complaint to state the true nature and extent
of his damages once they are ascertained with particularity.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 28 U.S.C. §1343
70. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 69 as if set forth
fully.
71. Federal-defendants were acting under the color of state law, and have
deprived ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY of his federal
Page 14
constitutional right to equal protection of the laws in that they have
denied ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY a fair and equal protection
under the law. Otero has unlawfully and without probable cause
denied ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s Motions without
reasonable justification and without jurisdiction and authority. By
doing so, Otero violated plaintiff’s civil rights under the constitution.
72. Defendants, Otero and Gutierrez through their illegal and unlawful
conducts have rejected ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s well-
drafted pleadings, and papers without justification and judicial
authority. By doing so, Otero and Gutierrez have deprived ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY from any rights, privileges, or
immunities secured by the Constitution and Laws.
73. USDC; Otero; and Gutierrez have effectively denied ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY's rights of the equal protection under the law under
28 U.S.C. §1343. Otero has been prejudicial and biased against ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY in his official duties by refusing to
rule pursuant to the Supreme Law of the Land. Otero has deprived
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY of the equal protection of the law,
by not applying the Supreme Law of the Land to the ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY's position.
74. Federal-defendants were acting under color of state or federal law with
regard to the duty to provide equal protection particularly suited to
the needs of ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY under the California
and United States Constitution or other laws that recognize and
provide such rights, immunities, or privileges to ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY.
Page 15
75. As a direct and proximate result of federal-defendants’ actions, ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY has suffered and continues to suffer
substantial damages, in an amount according to proof.
76. The precise amount of ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s damages
presently is unknown, but ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY is
informed and believes, and based on such information and belief
alleges, that his damages are in excess of the jurisdictional
minimum established for this court. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY will amend this complaint to state the true nature and extent
of his damages once they are ascertained with particularity.
77. The conducts set forth hereinabove were extreme and outrageous and an
abuse of the authority and position of the state-defendants and
each of them. Said conducts were intended to cause severe
emotional distress, or were done in conscious disregard of the
probability of causing such distress. In particular, defendants
engaged in an intentional and dishonest course of conduct to create
a justification for extortion against ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 42 U.S.C. §1985(2), (3)
Civil Conspiracy
79. Federal-defendant, Otero acting under color of law and in concert with
one another, by denying, rejecting and contacting non-federal
defendants’ counsel conspired against ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY to favor a colleague over a non-represented litigant.
80. The acts and conducts of Otero, under color of law and in concert with
one another created a cause of action for civil conspiracy to
Page 16
obstruct the due course of justice in violation of Section 1985(2), to
deny ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY equal protection of the laws
in violation of Section 1985(3), and to deprive ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY under color of state law of rights, privileges, and
immunities secured by the constitution and laws in violation of
Section 1985. Hoffman vs. Halden, (9th Cir. 1959) 268 F.(2d) 280.
81. Federal-defendant Otero’s acts were the direct and proximate cause of
injury to ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY. They were intentional
and done in knowing violation of ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY’s legal and constitutional rights, without good faith, and with
reckless disregards and/or callous indifference to ’ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY’s civil rights.
82. As a further legal result of the above-described violations, ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY has suffered severe emotional distress, all to
his general damage, to be determined at trial.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Eight Amendment, Prohibition against
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
84. The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution states,
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Otero and Gutierrez
as federal actors, have violated ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s
Eighth Amendment rights by demonstrating a deliberate
indifference and substantial risk of serious harm in violation of ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s rights clearly established Eighth
Amendment rights of which a reasonable person would have
Page 17
known, given the Supreme Court’s decisions proscribing the rights
and immunities under due process of law which are ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY’s primary constitutional rights as well as other
basic rights to petition the government to enforce his
constitutionally protected rights.
85. The unprovoked, unjustified, willful, and malicious intentional and
unethical performance of Otero against ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Gutierrez and
other judiciaries in supervisory positions by failing to take
reasonable measures to prevent and/or to remedy Otero and
Gutierrez’s abuse of ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY violated the
Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual
punishment.
86. As a proximate result of the excessive unethical conducts performed by
Otero and Gutierrez wielded against them, ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY’s sustained injuries and incurred medical bills and
other expenses. These injuries have caused and will continue to
cause ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY great pain and suffering,
both mental and physical, and accordingly ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY is entitled to compensatory damages against Otero
and Gutierrez, jointly and severally in an amount to be determined
at trial and punitive damages against each defendant in an amount
to be determined at trial.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
First Amendment, Interference with Freedom of Speech
Page 18
88. Defendant Otero, by adopting, promulgating, failing to prevent, failing to
remedy, and/or implementing a policy and practice of interfering
with ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s freedom of speech,
violated ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s rights under the First
Amendment to the United States Constitution.
89. Otero by limiting ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY in pursuit of enforcing
his constitutional rights under due process of law interfered with
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY freedom of speech, and
therefore, violated ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s rights under
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
90. As a result, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY suffered extreme emotional
distress and accordingly is entitled to compensatory and punitive
damages against Otero in an amount to be determined.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND
CORRUPT ORGANIZATION ACT, 18 U.S.C §1961, et seq.
92. This court arises under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §1961, et seq.
93. Otero and Gutierrez were an enterprise within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.
§196(4) which is a “person” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.
§196(3).
94. Otero and Gutierrez were an enterprise within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.
§196(4) which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect,
interstate or foreign commerce by virtue of the positions held
whereby decisions made provide a benefit, revenue, and income to
parties involved in litigation appearing before them.
Page 19
95. The acts of the federal-defendants, Otero and Gutierrez as set forth in
herein in detail repeated violations of both Federal and State law.
Therefore, these activities constitute a further component of a
pattern of racketeering activity within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.
§1961 AND (State Corruption Activities Act).
96. The acts of the federal-defendants, Otero and Gutierrez as set forth
herein constitute repeated and continuing conduct that was neither
isolated nor sporadic, but that involved a callus disregard for the
law that has evolved gradually over the years.
97. The acts of the federal-defendants, Otero and Gutierrez as set forth
herein demonstrate that said federal-defendants at all times
pertinent, and to the present, are conducting or participating in,
directly or indirectly, the affairs of a continuing criminal enterprise,
which enterprise is engaged in or affecting interstate commerce
under 18 U.S.C. §1961, through a pattern of racketeering activity,
as alleged and described fully herein through telephone
communications and the U.S. Postal Service.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Race Discrimination – Fifth Amendment Equal Protection
99. Defendant Otero by adopting, promulgating, failing to prevent, failing to
remedy, and/or implementing a policy and practice of imposing
hostility on ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY because of ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s race violated ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY’s rights under the Fifth Amendment to the United
States Constitution.
Page 20
100. As a result, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY suffered extreme physical
injuries and emotional distress, including permanent injuries, and
accordingly is entitled to compensatory and punitive damages
against Otero, in an amount to be determined at trial.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Intentional Outrageous Conduct
102. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY was subjected to outrageous conduct
intentionally imposed upon him by defendant Otero.
103. Otero by targeting ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY and discriminate
him; by conspiring to commit fraud against ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY; by ruling on pleadings and motions without
authority; by slandering ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY; by
coaching opponent’s counsel to do Otero’s dirty work; by declaring
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY a vexatious litigant in a desperate
and despicable technique; by his criminal and scandalous conducts
was outrageous in his performance and in his demeanor as a
federal judge.
104. Otero by refusing to rule on the merit of the case without bias and
personal interest to rule based on the rule of the law was
outrageous in his performance and in his demeanor as federal
judge.
105. Defendant Otero who corruptly influenced outcomes frequently acted as
sole proprietors. Otero misused his prestige and abused his
contempt powers. He did so in order to avoid legal process, Otero
lacked even slight command of the law. He confuses elementary
burdens of proof and persuasion; he misunderstands fundamental
rights, rules prematurely, and generally displays egregious
Page 21
ignorance of the rules that supposedly govern his decisions. Otero
disregards of the limits of his authority. Acting as quasi-vigilantes,
he engages in personal vendetta and revenge. Otero’s misuse of
the contempt power is probably common. He intimidates people by
threats of contempt. He displays poor judgment and inappropriate
behaviors when acting in his judicial capacities. By committing
these disgraceful conducts Otero was outrageous in his
performance and in his demeanor as a federal judge.
106. As a result, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY has suffered shock,
embarrassment and sever mental distress in the extent that ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY has been hospitalized several times.
107. As a result of the Outrageous Conducts of Otero, and as a further legal
result of the above-described Intentional Outrageous Conducts, ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY has suffered severe emotional
distress, all to his general damage, in a sum not determined at this
time but in excess of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000).
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
109. The conduct of federal-defendants, Otero and Gutierrez acting under
color of law and their authority as federal officers, have caused ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY to suffer extreme emotional distress.
110. The conduct of federal-defendant, Otero was intentional, reckless, and
negligent which maliciously and without legal authority ruled on
pleadings and motions before him; by conspiring to commit fraud
against ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY; by slandering ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY; by coaching opponent’s counsel to
do Otero’s dirty work; by declaring ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
Page 22
PARTY a vexatious litigant in a desperate and despicable technique;
by his criminal and scandalous conducts and by filing frivolous and
unmeritorious rulings. Therefore, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY
seeks the imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
Otero in an amount in excess of $5,000,000.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligence Infliction of Emotional Distress
112. The outrageous conduct set forth hereinabove was undertaken without
concerns for the foreseeable impact same would have on ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY.
113. Federal-defendant Otero acting under color of law and his authority as
federal officer, maliciously subjected ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY to outrageous conduct of repeated instances of
discrimination and retaliation, ruling on motions and pleadings
without legal authority; slandering ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY; coaching opponent’s counsel to do Otero’s dirty work;
declaring ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY a vexatious litigant in a
desperate and despicable technique; filing frivolous and
unmeritorious rulings, deliberate interference with ILL-TREATED
AND ABUSED PARTY’s rights to exercise of his freedom of speech
and beliefs and practices with the intent to causing and reckless
disregard of a substantial probability of causing several emotional
distress and physical pain and suffering. Defendant, USDC by
negligently and maliciously failing to take reasonable measures to
prevent and/or to remedy its employee and servant’s abuse of ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY rights and privileged violated the
United States Constitution and the California laws.
Page 23
114. As a proximate result of defendants’ conducts, ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED
PARTY has incurred, and will incur, medical expenses to alleviate
his distress, all to his detriment in an amount according to proof at
time of trial but in excess of $5,000.000.
III. CAUSES OF ACTION AGINST NON-FEDERAL DEFENDANTS

TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
115. The Injured Parties hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 114 as
though fully set forth herein.
116. There exists an actual controversy between the parties as and their rights
and obligations to each other under the law. Specifically there is a
controversy as to whether the Injured Parties’ monthly payment has
been credited and applied to the right loan accounts.
117. Defendants contend that the Injured Parties owe the sum of $12,744.90
effective November 13, 2006 toward the monthly mortgage
payment. The Injured Parties refute that contention because the
Injured Parties have made monthly payment to defendants Argent,
AMC, and SLS.
118. The controversy between the parties cannot be resolved without judicial
intervention and the only available legal authorities are California
Civil Code §2924b. Declaratory relief and injunctive order is
necessary as to the defendants in attempting to foreclose the
Subject Property, since all payments have been made timely.
119. Declaratory relief and injunctive order is necessary in this case to stop
foreclosure proceedings until such time this court to determine the
status of all the monies the Injured Parties have spent toward the
Subject Property including monthly mortgage payments.
Page 24
120. Defendants must be enjoined during the pendency of this action, and
from foreclosing the Subject Property without this court’s written
order.
THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Failure to Properly Post the Injured Parties Payments
though fully set forth herein
122. In the course and conducts of its obligation under the agreement, Argent
AMC; and SLS in numerous instances failed to properly post
payments received from the Injured Parties in a timely manner, and
then have assessed late fees and other charges as a result.
123. In respect to Subject Loans, the Injured Parties’ monthly statement
generated by Argent; AMC and SLS had due date that was payable
by the first of each month. The Subject Loans also had grace
periods of time after a loan payment is due but before which a late
fee may be assessed. From September 1, 2006, to December 1,
2006, in many instances, Argent; AMC and SLS failed to post the
Injured Parties’ on-time mortgage payments to appropriate
accounts in a timely manner, and then charged Subject Loans late
fees or additional interest for failing to apply payments “on time”.
Once Subject Loans’ were categorized as “delinquent” Argent; AMC
and SLS charged other unwarranted fees, including fees for
unnecessary or bogus property inspections, broker’s price opinions
and other charges.
124. Argent; AMC; and SLS’s actions have caused and likely to cause
substantial injury to the Injured Parties. This injury is not reasonably
avoidable by the Injured Parties and not outweighed by
countervailing benefits to the Injured Parties.
Page 25
125. As a direct and proximate result of defendant’s actions, the Injured
Parties have suffered and continue to suffer substantial damages,
in excess of $363,305.58 and other applicable expenses and fees to
be determined at the trial.
126. The precise amount of the Injured Parties’ damages presently is
unknown, but the Injured Parties are informed and believes, and
based on such information and belief alleges, that their damages
are in excess of the jurisdictional minimum established for this
court. The Injured Parties will amend this complaint to state the
true nature and extent of their damages once they are ascertained
with particularity.
abuse of the authority and position of the defendants. Said
conducts were intended to cause severe emotional distress, or were
done in conscious disregard of the probability of causing such
distress. In particular, defendants engaged in an intentional and
dishonest course of conduct to create a justification for extortion
against the Injured Parties.
128. As a further legal result of the above-described false and reckless
conducts, the Injured Parties have suffered severe emotional
distress, all to their general damage, in a sum not determined at
this time but in excess of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
($500,000).
FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Unfair and Deceptive Business Practices
Page 26
130. In the course and conduct of servicing and collection of Subject Loans,
Argent; AMC and SLS from October 1, 2006 to December 1, 2006, in
numerous instances forced late fees on subject Loans when such
payments were never late. Argent; AMC and SLS failed to properly
and adequately post the Injured Parties’ timely payments to
appropriate accounts instead negligently and fraudulently withheld
the payments until such time they became delinquent.
131. Argent; AMC and SLS’s actions have caused and are likely to cause
substantial injury to the Injured Parties. These injuries are not
reasonably avoidable by the Injured Parties and not outweighed by
distress, all to their general damages, in a sum not determined at
($500,000).
FIFTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Misrepresentation
Page 27
135. In the course and conduct of their servicing and collection of the Subject
Loans, Argent; AMC and SLS from October 1, 2006 to December 1,
2006, in numerous instances have represented, expressly or by
implication that the Injured Parties owe the amount specified in
defendants’ communications or monthly statements.
136. From October 1, 2006 to December 1, 2006, the Injured Parties did not
owe the amounts that have been specified in defendants’ monthly
communications. The Injured Parties did not owe the amounts
specified because, for example (a) fees included in the amounts
specified are a result of Argent; AMC; and SLS’s failure to properly
post payments as alleged in Thirteenth Cause of Action; (b) fees
included in the amounts specified are not allowed under the
mortgage contract or permitted by law as alleged in Sixteenth
Cause of Action; and/or (c) the amounts specified have been
calculated incorrectly by Argent; AMC or SLS.
137. Therefore, Argent; AMC and SLS’s representations as set forth are false
and misleading and constitute deceptive acts or practices.
substantial injury to the Injured Parties. These injuries are not
Page 28
($500,000).
SIXTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FRAUD
142. In the course and conduct of their loan servicing and collection, Argent;
AMC and SLS in numerous instances from October 1, 2006, to
December 1, 2006, have represented, expressly or by implication,
that fees assessed and collected by Argent; AMC and SLS were (a)
allowed under the mortgage contract and (b) permitted by law.
143. On numerous occasions, the fees assessed and collected by Argent; AMC
and SLS were (a) not allowed under the mortgage contract or (b)
not permitted by law. Nonetheless, Argent; AMC and SLS,
improperly assessed and collected these fees.
144. Therefore, Argent; AMC and SLS’s representations as set forth are false
and misleading and constitute deceptive acts or practices.
substantial injuries to the Injured Parties. These injuries are not
Page 29
($500,000).
SEVENTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (b)(1), and (b)(2)
148. Coplaintiff hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 147 as though fully
set forth herein
149. On or about July 20, 2006, Argent secured the financing for the First and
Second Mortgage Loans in the amount of $988,000.00 and
$447,000.00 consecutively.
150. On or about October 1, 2006, Argent assigned, transferred or sold the
servicing of the Subject Loans to either co-defendant AMC or SLS.
The rights and duties of AMC and SLS are not known to coplaintiff at
this time in respect to the Subject Loans. Both AMC and SLS claim
that Argent sold, transferred or assigned the servicing of the
Subject Loans to AMC and SLS.
151. In numerous instances, in connection with servicing of the Subject Loans,
Argent; AMC and SLS violated the requirements of Section 6 of
RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2605.
152. Argent had an obligation pursuant to 12 U.S.C. §2605 (b)(1), and (b)(2)(A)
to inform the Injured Parties 15 days before the effective date of
transfer of the servicing of the Subject Loans to either AMC or SLS.
Page 30
153. Although the transfer, sale or servicing of the First and Second Mortgage
Loans are not known at this time, AMC and SLS at the same time
and concurrently have demanded payments in their monthly
communications and collections.
154. Due to conducts of Argent in violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (b)(1), and (b)
(2) the Subject Loans have been recorded as default and the
Subject Property is in process of foreclosure by Argent; AMC; SLS;
and CAL-WRC.
155. Argent’s action have caused and likely to cause substantial injuries to
coplaintiff. These injuries are not reasonably avoidable by
coplaintiff and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to
coplaintiff.
against coplaintiff.
157. As a further legal result of the above-mentioned disclosure, coplaintiff has
suffered injuries all to his special damages in an amount to be
proven at trial.
conducts, coplaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress, all to
his general damages, in a sum not determined at this time but in
excess of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000).
EIGHTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (c)(1)
Page 31
159. Coplaintiff hereby incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 158 as though fully
set forth herein.
160. On or about October 1, 2006, Argent assigned, transferred or sold the
servicing of the Subject Loans to either AMC or SLS.
161. AMC and SLS had an obligation pursuant to 12 U.S.C. §2605 (c)(1), c(2)(A)
to inform coplaintiff 15 days after the effective date of assignment,
sale, or transfer of the servicing of the Subject Loans.
162. Although the transfer, sale or servicing of the First and Second Mortgage
Loans are not known at this time, AMC and SLS at the same time
and concurrently have demanded payments in their monthly
communications and collections.
163. AMC and SLS’s action have caused and likely to cause substantial injuries
to coplaintiff. These injuries are not reasonably avoidable by
coplaintiff and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to
coplaintiff.
164. Due to conducts of AMC and SLS in violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (c)(1),
and (c)(2) the Subject Loans have been recorded as default and the
and CAL-WRC.
Page 32
166. As a further legal result of the above-mentioned disclosure, the coplaintiff
has suffered injuries all to his special damages in an amount to be
proven at trial.
his general damage, in a sum not determined at this time but in
NINTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (b)(3)(A-G)
set forth herein
169. Argent had an obligation pursuant to 12 U.S.C. §2605 (b)(3)(A-G), to
statutorily disclose required information of the transferee servicing
company 15 days prior and no later than 30 days after the
assignment, sale, or transfer of the Subject Loans, to either AMC or
SLS.
170. Although the transfer, sale or servicing of the Subject Loans are not
known at this time, AMC and SLS concurrently and at the same time
have demanded payments in their monthly communications and
collections.
171. Argent’s acts or practices constitute unfair and deceptive acts or
practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section (b)(3)(A-
G) of the RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2605 b(3)(A-G). Therefore, coplaintiff is
entitled to rescission of the entire agreement in respect to the
Subject Loans.
172. Due to conducts of Argent in violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (b)(3)(A-G), the
Subject Loans have been recorded as default and the Subject
Page 33
Property is in process of foreclosure by Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-
WRC.
suffered injury all to his special damages in an amount to be proven
at trial.
TWENTIEST CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (c)(3)
set forth herein.
177. AMC and SLS had an obligation pursuant to 12 U.S.C. §2605 (c)(3), to
statutorily disclose information regarding transferee servicing
company pursuant to 12 U.S.C. §2605 (c)(3) not more than 15 days
after the effective date of assignment, sale or transfer of the
Subject Loans.
178. Although the transfer, sale or servicing of the Subject Loans are not
known at this time, AMC and SLS at the same time and concurrently
Page 34
have demanded payments in their monthly communications and
collections.
179. AMC and SLS’s acts or practices constitute unfair and deceptive acts or
practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section (c)(3) of
the RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2605 (c)(3). Therefore, coplaintiff is entitled
to rescission of the entire agreement in respect to the Subject
Loans.
180. Due to conducts of AMC and SLS in violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (b)(3)(A-
G), the Subject Loans have been recorded as default and the
and CAL-WRC.
proven at trial.
TWENTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (e)(1)(A-B)
Page 35
set forth herein.
185. Coplaintiff on November 1, 2006, delivered to Argent a qualified written
letter. In that coplaintiff notified Argent that coplaintiff was
concurrently receiving demands for payments from AMC and SLS.
186. On November 1, 2006, coplaintiff also delivered to AMC and SLS same
qualified written letter via First Class U.S. Mail.
187. Argent; AMC and SLS failed to provide a written response acknowledging
receipt of the correspondence within 20 days in accordance with 12
U.S.C. §2605 (e)(1(A).
188. Due to conducts of Argent; AMC and SLS in violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605
(e)(2)(A), the Subject Loans have been recorded as default and the
and CAL-WRC.
proven at trial.
Page 36
TWENTY SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (e)(2)(A-C)
set forth herein.
193. Coplaintiff on November 1, 2006, delivered to Argent a qualified written
letter. In that coplaintiff notified Argent that coplaintiff was
concurrently receiving demands for payments from AMC and SLS.
194. In accordance with section e(2) of RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2605 (e)(2), Argent;
AMC and SLS not later than 60 days after receipt of any qualified
written letter from coplaintiff had an obligation to investigate and
correct any error in compliance with 12 U.S.C. §2605.
(e)(2)(A-C), the Subject Loans have been recorded as default and
the Subject Property is in process of foreclosure by Argent; AMC;
SLS; and CAL-WRC.
proven at trial.
Page 37
TWENTY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2605 (d) and (e)(3)
set forth herein.
200. Although the effective date of assignment, sell or transfer of the Subject
Loans to transferee servicer is not known to coplaintiff, beginning
October 1, 2006, AMC and SLS commenced their collection efforts
by contacting coplaintiff demanding payments in respect to the
Subject Loans.
201. In the event of assignment, sale or transfer of the Subject Loans to AMC
or SLS; AMC and SLS can neither report the Subject Loans as
delinquent, nor can they charge any late fees associated with the
Subject Loans within the first 60 days after the completion of the
transfer, sale or assignment.
202. Argent, AMC and SLS in violation of section (d) and (e)(3) of RESPA, 12
U.S.C. §2605, (d), and (e)(3), have reported the Subject Loans as
delinquent and they have demanded late fees and other charges.
Additionally, Argent, AMC and SLS have declared the entire balance
on the Subject Loans in default and have begun foreclosure
procedures against coplaintiff’ property in violation of section (d)
and e(3) of RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2605 (d) and (e)(3).
(d) and (e)(3), the Subject Loans have been recorded with the
County Recorder Office as default effective November 13, 2006,
being instrument number 0-0 and the Subject Property is in process
of foreclosure by Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-WRC.
Page 38
proven at trial.
his general and punitive damages, in a sum not determined at this
time but in excess of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000).
TWENTY FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of 12 U.S.C. §2604 (d)
set forth herein.
208. In accordance with section (d) of RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2604 (d), Argent is
required to distribute to coplaintiff at the time of or receipt or
preparation of written application to borrow money to finance the
Subject Property and within 3 days from the receipt of such written
application an information booklet in compliance with section (a) of
RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2604 (a), and (b)(1-5) and (c) and (d).
209. As a legal result of the above-mentioned disclosure, coplaintiff has
proven at trial.
Page 39
his general and punitive damages, in a sum not determined at this
time but in excess of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000).
TWNETY FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
212. AMC and SLS are “debt collectors” as defined in Section 803(6) of the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §1692 (a)(6).
213. On numerous occasions, from October 1, 2006 to present, in connection
with the collection of debts when sold or transferred to AMC and SLS,
AMC and SLS have used false, deceptive, or misleading representations
or means, in violation of Section 807 of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692e,
including but not limited to:
(a) Falsely representing the character, amount, or legal status or
legal authority of the debt, or any services rendered or
compensation which may be lawfully received by a debt
collector for collection of a debt, in violation of
Section807(2)(A) and (B) of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §§1692e(2)
(A) and (B);
(b) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person
credit information which is known or which should be known
to be false, including the failure to communicate that a
disputed debt is, in violation of Section 807(8) of the FDCPA,
15 U.S.C. §1692e(8); and
(c) Using false representation or deceptive means to collect or
attempt to collect a debt or to obtain information
Page 40
concerning the Injured Parties, in violation of Section
807(10) of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692 e(10).
(d) By contacting the Injured Parties on their unlisted cell telephone
7-9 times on a daily basis and in excess of 127 times from
October 1, 2006 to present.
214. On numerous occasions, in connection with the collection of the debts
that were not in default when transferred or sold to AMC or SLS,
AMC and SLS have used unfair or unconscionable means to collect
or attempt to collect a debt, including but not limited to collecting
amounts (including any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental
to the principal obligation) not authorized by the agreement
creating the debt or permitted by law, in violation of Section 808(1)
of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692 f(1).
215. Pursuant to Section 814 of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692/, the acts and
practices alleged hereinabove also constitute unfair or deceptive
acts or practices in violation of FTC Act.
216. On numerous occasions, in connections with the collection of debts that
were not in default when sold or transferred to AMC or SLS, AMC
and SLS have failed to notify the Injured Parties of their rights to
dispute and obtain verification of their debts and to obtain the
name of the original creditor, either in the initial communication
with the Injured Parties by defendants, or within five days
thereafter, in violation of Section 809(a) of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C.
§1692 g(a).
217. On numerous occasions from October 1, 2006, to present in respect to
the Subject Loans, AMC and SLS have used abusive collection
practices in violation of 41(a), 15 U.S.C. §1692 (a).
Page 41
218. On numerous occasions from October 1, 2006 to present, in connection
with the collection of debts that were not in default when sold or
transferred to AMC or SLS, AMC; and SLS have contacted the
Injured Parties without The Injured Parties’ prior consent in violation
of 41(c), 15 U.S.C. §1692c (a).
219. On many instances, in connection with the collection of debts that were
not in default when sold or transferred to AMC or SLS, from October
1, 2006 to present, AMC; and SLS’s representatives, employees or
agents have contacted The Injured Parties at unusual times and
place by calling them on their unlisted cell telephone either at
home or at place of their employment, even after the Injured
Parties informed AMC; and SLS’s representatives, employees and
agents that they should stop calling and harassing The Injured
Parties all in violation of 41c (a)(1) and (3), 15 U.S.C. §1692c (a)(1)
and (3).
220. On many instances from October 1, 2006 to present, in connection with
the collection of debts when sold or transferred to AMC or SLS;
AMC; and SLS’s representatives, employees or agents in violation of
41c (C), 15 U.S.C. §1692c (C) have contacted the Injured Parties
even after the Injured Parties sent AMC, and SLS a written demand
to cease and decease all future communication with The Injured
Parties.
221. The conducts of AMC; and SLS set forth hereinabove were extreme and
outrageous and an abuse of the authority and position of the
defendants. Said conducts were intended to cause severe
emotional distress, or were done in conscious disregard of the
probability of causing such distress. In particular, defendants
Page 42
engaged in an intentional and dishonest course of conduct to create
a justification for extortion against the Injured Parties.
222. As a further legal result of the above-mentioned disclosure, The Injured
Parties have suffered injury all to their special damages in an
amount to be proven at trial.
distress, all to their general and punitive damages, in a sum not
determined at this time but in excess of One Million Dollars
($1,000,000).
TWNETY SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
225. Coplaintiff also alleges Defendants, Argent; AMC and SLS have reported
incorrect and damaging information concerning the alleged debt to
credit reporting agencies in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act [15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.]
incorrect and damaging information concerning the Subject
Property as foreclosed to credit reporting agencies in violation of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act [15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.]
incorrect and damaging information concerning the Subject Loans
as late and delinquent to credit reporting agencies in violation of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act [15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.]
Page 43
distress, all to their general and punitive damages, in a sum not
determined at this time but in excess of One Million Dollars
($1,000,000).
TWENTY SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Declaratory Relief and Accounting
230. In the course of servicing the Subject Loans, Argent; AMC; and SLS
abused their positions to collect unauthorized and unwarranted fees
that were either illegal to collect or not supported by the
agreement. In that Argent, AMC; SLS continuously contacted the
Injured Parties attempting to collect payments without legal
authority.
231. The Injured Parties from September 1, 2006 to present have made
monthly payments to Argent; AMC and SLS in respect to the Subject
Loans.
232. Effective November 13, 2006, Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-WRC have
recorded the Subject Loans as default with the County Recorder
Office being instrument number 0-0 and attempted to foreclose on
the Subject Property.
233. Effective November 13, 2006, Argent; AMC; and SLS and CAL-WRC are
claiming a balance due and owing in the amount of $12,744.90
234. There is an actual controversy between the parties which currently exist
concerning their respective rights and duties in those Argent; AMC;
SLS and CAL-WRC, claim that the Injured Parties owe the total sum
of $12,744.90 in respect to the Subject Loans, and the Injured
Parties refute that contention and claim that the Subject Loans
have all been paid on time and there is no amount due or owing on
Page 44
said accounts. The Injured Parties therefore, is entitled to an
accounting of the sums defendants received which did not credit to
the Subject Loans.
235. The Injured Parties request a judicial determination of their rights and
duties, and seek a declaration as to the rights and obligations of the
defendants’ hereinabove.
TWNETY EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Extortion and Duress
237. As alleged hereinabove, Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-WRC with their
ulterior motives and the knowledge of the falsity of their claims
herein set forth above, are attempting to extort additional monies
from the Injured Parties and unless it is paid they will proceed with
foreclosure of the Injured Parties’ property.
238. As an extortionist threats, Argent, AMC and SLS demanded money from
the Injured Parties in order to cease foreclosure process. In fact the
Injured Parties paid the extortionist demand to prevent foreclosure.
In any event, Argent; AMC and SLS proceeded with foreclosure even
after they their extortionist threat was satisfied.
239. As a result of Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-WRC’s extortionist threats to
foreclose on the Injured Parties’ property, the Injured Parties will
suffer in excess of $127,687.70 toward the cost and fees of
obtaining financing, escrow, title, taxes, interest, appraisal,
inspection and other material charges in the course of purchasing
Page 45
suffer in excess of $133,000.00 renovating, remodeling and
modernizing the Subject Property.
suffer in excess of $322,617.88 toward the monthly mortgage in
respect to the Subject Loans.
242. As a result of Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-WRC’s illegal and extortionist
threats to foreclose on the Injured Parties’ property, the Injured
Parties will suffer in excess of $333,305.58 in respect to the Subject
property, the loss of use of their money, the interest at the legal
rate from July 20, 2006 and thereafter and therefore plaintiff is
entitled to recovery of all of his money in the amount of
$333,305.58.
243. As a result of Argent; AMC; SLS; and CAL-WRC’s illegal and extortionist
threats to foreclose on the Injured Parties’ property, the Injured
Parties will suffer in excess of $650,000.00 equity generated in the
Subject Property due to remodeling, renovating and modernizing of
the Subject Property. Therefore, the Injured Parties are entitled to
recovery of all the equity generated in the subject Property in the
amount of $650,000.00.
244. The aforementioned conducts, policies and customs of Argent; AMC; SLS;
and CAL-WRC were undertaken, aided, authorized, supervised or
consented to by each defendant with malice, with a willful and
wanton desire and design to violate, and with deliberate
indifference to and reckless disregard of, the aforementioned rights
of the Injured Parties. Such conduct, policies, practices and customs
constituted malice, oppression or fraud, and thereby entitle the
Page 46
Injured Parties to an award of punitive or exemplary damages in
the amount of $5,000,000.00 against each defendant.
TWNETY NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Slander of Title
246. On November 13, 2006, Argent; AMC; and CAL-WRC recorded the Subject
Property with the County Recorder Office under the “Notice of
Default”; an attempt to commence foreclosure proceedings.
247. The publication which invaded the Subject Property’s right to privacy has
been recorded under instrument number 0-0.
248. The disclosure by Argent; AMC; and CAL-WRC, created publicity in the
sense of a public disclosure to a large number of people in the City,
County, State of California. The County Recorder Office is employed
by several hundred employees who have access to said publication.
Furthermore, the public disclosures including Notice of Defaults are
read and viewed by hundreds of thousands of people each week
throughout the City in County, and throughout other Counties in
California and more importantly in other State within the United
States.
249. The publicity created by Argent; AMC; and CAL-WRC, placed the Subject
Property in a false light in the public eye in that the November 13,
2006 “Notice of Default” was falsely and illegally issued by Argent;
AMC; and CAL-WRC, and publicly conveyed, and was intended to
convey, a calculatedly false and inaccurate impression of the
Subject Property owned by the Inured Parties who acted in a
heinous and eluding manner failing to make his schedule monthly
payments.
Page 47
250. The formulation, publication and public dissemination of the November
13, 2006 disclosure by Argent; AMC; and CAL-WRC, and/or DOES 1
through 10, and each of them, jointly or separately, were each done
with actual malice in that each was done with all or some of
defendant’s’ knowledge of the November 13, 2006 falsity, or in
reckless disregard of the truth. At all relevant times, all or some of
the defendants were aware, or should have been aware, of facts
contrary to the defendants’ malicious allegations.
251. The publicity created by Argent; AMC; and CAL-WRC, and each of them,
was done with malice in that it was made either with knowledge of
the falsity of the statements or in reckless disregard of the truth.
The statements describing the Injured Parties’ actions, character
and intentions were calculated falsehoods.
252. Defendants, and each of them, were also negligent in publishing the
November 13, 2006, “Notice of Default”. With ordinary and
reasonable care, defendants would have realized, or could have
discovered, that the Notice of Default was obviously false and
grossly libelous, offensive and damaging to the Injured Parties and
statements, the Injured Parties have suffered severe emotional
distress, all to his general damage, in a sum not determined at this
time but in excess of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000).
254. As a further legal result of the above-mentioned disclosure, the Injured
Parties have suffered injury in his business all to their special
damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
255. In making the disclosure described above, defendants, and each of them
are guilty of oppression, fraud or malice in that defendants made
Page 48
the disclosure with a willful disregard of the Injured Parties’ rights.
Defendants’ acts in formulating, publishing and disseminating the
November 13, 2006, were done with the knowledge by defendants
that such acts would cause the Injured Parties to suffer great loss,
mental anguish and injuries in their business. Defendants’ acts
were therefore willful, wanton, intentional and actually malicious
and oppressive, thereby justifying the award of exemplary and
punitive damages in excess of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000).
THIRTIEST CAUSE OF ACTION
INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
256. Coplaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 255 as if set forth
fully.
257. The conduct of non-federal defendants, acting under color of law and
their authority as lenders, have caused coplaintiff to suffer extreme
emotional distress.
258. The conduct of non-federal defendant, was intentional, reckless, and
negligent which maliciously and without legal authority attempted
to foreclose on coplaintiff’s property; by reporting false and
inaccurate information to credit reporting agencies and by falsifying
information that coplaintiff has been late and delinquent in making
payments toward the Subject Property. Therefore, coplaintiff seeks
the imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against each
non-federal in an amount in excess of $5,000,000.
THIRTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Negligence Infliction of Emotional Distress
259. Coplaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 258 as if set forth
fully.
Page 49
260. The outrageous conduct set forth hereinabove was undertaken without
concerns for the foreseeable impact same would have on
Coplaintiff.
261. Non-federal defendant acting as collection agencies; and lenders by
abusing their authorities, maliciously subjected coplaintiff to
outrageous conduct of repeated instances of discrimination and
retaliation, filing frivolous and unmeritorious foreclosure
procedures, deliberate interference with coplaintiff’s rights to
exercise of guaranteed constructional rights with the intent to
cause and reckless disregard of a substantial probability of causing
sever emotional distress and physical pain and suffering. Non-
federal defendant, Argent by negligently and maliciously failing to
take reasonable measures to prevent and/or to remedy its
employee; agents and servant’s abuse of Coplaintiff ‘s rights and
privileged violated the United States Constitution and the California
laws.
262. As a proximate result of non-federal defendants’ conducts, Coplaintiff has
incurred, and will incur, medical expenses to alleviate his distress, all to
his detriment in an amount according to proof at time of trial but in
excess of $5,000.000.
III. CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FDCPA
263. Defendants, Argent, AMC; and SLS have violated the FDCPA as described
above, with actual knowledge or knowledge fairly implied on the
basis of objective circumstances.
264. Section 814(a) of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692/ and Section 4 of the
Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, 28 U.S.C. §2461,
as amended, authorize the court to award monetary civil penalties for
each violation of the FDCPA.
Page 50
III. CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF RESPA
265. In the event of a knowing violation, which constitutes a pattern or
practice of violation of the Chapter 27 of RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2605, in
addition to rescission the court may award relief under 15 U.S.C. §1640.
III. INJURED PARTIES INJURIES
266. The Injured Parties have suffered, and will continue to suffer, substantial
injury as a result of defendants’ violations of FDCPA, and RESPA.
Absent injunctive relief by this court, the defendants are likely to
continue to injure the Injured Parties and harm public interest.
267. The Injured Parties have suffered and will continue to suffer extreme
emotional distress and financial losses and therefore is entitled to seek
present and future medical treatments and present and future monetary
losses.
III. THE COURT’S POWER TO GRANT RELIEF
268. Section 814(a) of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1681s (a), and 28 U.S.C. §§2201
and 2202 empower this court to grant injunctive and other ancillary
relief, including rescission, consumer redress, disgorgement and
restitution, to prevent and remedy any violations of any provision
of law enforced by the plaintiff.
269. This court, in the exercise of its equitable jurisdiction, may award other
ancillary relief to remedy injury caused by defendants’ law
violations.
III. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

IV. WHEREFORE, plaintiff seeks a permanent restraining order against
Otero and Gutierrez.
Page 51
V. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY seeks an order restraining Otero and
Gutierrez from ever presiding over any of ILL-TREATED AND
ABUSED PARTY’s actions;
VI. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY seeks an order disqualifying Otero
and Gutierrez from the present action;
VII. ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY seeks an order declaring Otero
incompetent; bias; prejudice and racially motivated with hatred,
repugnance and abhorrence as a dishonorable judge;
VIII. Permanently enjoin and restrain federal defendants from violating ILL-
TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’s constitutional rights as outline in
the complaint;
IX. the Injured Parties request that this court, pursuant to section 814(a) of
the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692/(a); FCRA, 15 U.S.C. §1681; section 16
of RESPA, 12 U.S.C. §2614; 12 U.S.C. §2605; 15 U.S.C. §1640; 12
U.S.C. §2603 (b)(1)(2); 12 U.S.C. §2604 (b)(1-5); AND 12 U.S.C.
§2607 (a) and (b); and pursuant to its own equitable powers;
X. Enter judgment against each defendant and in favor of the Injured
Parties for each violation charged in the complaint;
XI. For the actual monetary damages as described in the complaint in the
amount of $333,305.58;
XII. Award monetary damages in excess of $1,000,000.00 for First through
Ninth Cause of Action against Otero and Gutierrez in favor of the
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY;
XIII. Award monetary damages in excess of $5,000,000.00 for Tenth and
Eleventh Cause of Action against Otero and Gutierrez in favor of
the ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY;
Page 52
XIV. Award exemplary and punitive damages in excess of $10,000,000.00
for First through Eleventh Cause of Action against Otero and
Gutierrez in favor of the ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY;
XV. Award monetary; exemplary and punitive damages as outlined in the
complaint;
XVI. Permanently enjoin and restrain non-federal defendants from violating
the FDCPA; FCRA and RESPA;
XVII. Award such ancillary equitable relief as the court deems necessary to
prevent unjust enrichment and to redress consumer injury
resulting from defendants’ violations of the FDCPA, FCRA and
RESPA, including but not limited to rescission or reformation of
contracts, the refund of monies paid, and disgorgement of ill-
gotten gains;
XVIII. Award Injured Parties monetary civil penalties for each violation of
defendants’ violations of FDCPA, FCRA and RESPA;
XIX. For attorney fees;
XX. Award the Injured Parties the costs of bringing this action, as well as
such other and additional relief as the court may determine to be
just and proper.
XXI. TRIAL BY JURY
Plaintiffs hereby demands a trial by jury.
Dated: May 31, 2007
__________________________ __________________________
ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY Co-plaintiff
Page 53

Sue District Judge

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sue District Judge

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ILL-TREATED AND ABUSED PARTY’;

THIS CASE WAS TRANSFERRED TO U. S. DISTRICT COURT IN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

III. CAUSES OF ACTION AGINST FEDERAL-DEFENDANTS

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

III. CAUSES OF ACTION AGINST NON-FEDERAL DEFENDANTS

THIRTY FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

III. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Dated: May 31, 2007

You might also like