[Ice]

"<u>No authority is cited </u>by Respondent for this conclusory allegation of North Carolina's Foreign sovereignty."



If you don't give Judicial Notice and explain, in detail, the law that defines the <u>u.</u>S.A. and the <u>U.</u>S.A., then how is the judge going to rule on your claim? If the "law" was cited it would have painted a clear and distinct picture for the judge. A claim was made and was not supported by law... therefore, "frivolous".



If this distinction had been made using proper procedure and supported by law, the judge would then have to make that distinction every time he mentioned the U.S.A. or the u.S.A. in his brief. Due to the fact that the distinction was never made the judge was allowed to use the terms interchangeably... thereby keeping the perception that these 2 separate entities are one and the same.



Every time the "United States" is mentioned after the above quoted statement... ask the question: "Which 'United States'?"



It's a damn shame that people are attempting to demonstrate truths in court without knowing the procedures that will accomplish it.



<u>"Petitioner has failed to produce evidence </u>demonstrating he is indeed a nonresident alien."



Petitioner failed to do so when Petitioner failed to support the claim addressed in "A". ( The first quote above ).



If Petitioner's initial claim had been supported by law, which wasn't done, the conclusion of "C" would have been just the opposite BECAUSE the Petitioner would have successfully demonstrated his "non-resident alien" status. The Petitioner's failure to demonstrate his claim by supporting that claim with "law" allowed the judge to totally dismiss his claim and rule against it.



Question to the members: How would Petitioner support his claim of "non-resident alien" status?