|MOTION TO VACATE STRIKE ORDER OF 13
NOVEMBER IN CASE 539972, S. LOUIS MARTIN V GOOGLE, INC.
The strike order of 13 November 2014 MUST be vacated because the judge's statement that "the Plaintiff has failed to file an opposition to Defendant's motion, and has produced no evidence supporting a probability of success" is blatantly false.
Defendant S. Louis Martin filed multiple documents in opposition to the defendant's motion, which is easily provable from the Register of Actions; the plaintiff also had a high probability of prevailing in the case had it not been so hastily terminated (in fact, with no discussion of the case whatsoever). He had the support and backing of ethics scholars, industry experts, and almost every industry leader other than the defendant!
As to Google's claim of "constitutionally protected rights" (as a "publisher"), this was thoroughly rebutted in the documents. No one considers Google a publisher other than Google; it has taken on this title to suppress genuine publishers' constitutional rights and engage in anticompetitive behavior, both harmful to consumers and competitors.
Moreover, the judge was well aware of the filing of these documents, as was the clerk of the court. Therefore this strike order constitutes an act of perjury and malfeasance on the part of the judge, more than likely politically motivated.
S. Louis Martin demands the immediate vacating of this order, which is a nefarious attack on honest business owners and unsuspecting consumers.
By Dr. S. Louis Martin