- 4 -
challenging the notice of determination.2 The petition arrived
in an envelope bearing a U.S. Postal Service postmark dated
March 9, 2001. In response to the petition, respondent filed a
motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction asserting that the
petition was not filed with the Court within 30 days of the
District Court’s order of dismissal issued December 20, 2000.
Petitioner filed an objection to respondent’s motion to
dismiss asserting that: (1) His petition was filed with the
Court within 30 days of the District Court’s order of dismissal
issued February 8, 2001; and (2) respondent failed to conduct an
administrative hearing in this case.
This matter was called for hearing at the Court’s motions
session held in Washington, D.C. Counsel for respondent appeared
at the hearing and offered argument in support of respondent’s
motion to dismiss. Although no appearance was entered by or on
behalf of petitioner at the hearing, petitioner filed with the
Court a written statement and a supplemental written statement
pursuant to Rule 50(c).3 Petitioner repeated his argument that
2 At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in
Sagle, Idaho.
3 Before the hearing, the Court summarily denied
petitioner’s motion for hearing to determine real parties in
interest. The motion was replete with frivolous arguments and,
among other things, asserted:
Natural person petitioner, Franklin A. Ogden
therefore requests a hearing wherein respondent must
declare via a sworn statement, subject to the penalty
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011