The Divine Oracle Sophia Stewart

AN EMBEZZLEMENT OF COPYWRITEN MATERIAL

2010-02-14T15:38:00.000-08:00

Recent Up Dates to an Ongoing Battle of Deciet and Embezzlement of Sophia Stewart's copywritten work.

This is in response to the Wall Street Journal Article dated February 4^th 2010 titled - Terminator is Actually a Drama - attached for your review are Liens filed by Stewart pursuant to this matter. We are in possession of material evidence to break this story.California Judge Margaret M. Morrow has already received the following 1 Minute and 45 Seconds and the Articles of Incorporation that was hidden.When you see this brief discussion, you will see an example of what can happen to a person that has a correct legal position when artful techniques are used to mislead a federal judicial official. Notwithstanding the fact that the first minute and 45 seconds of the film read exactly on the copyright of the writer, and the person that claimed ownership of the remainder did not claim to own that portion of the film, and the matter was in evidence through her copyright and her opponent claimed to have started the company when she had no story on the same day she referred to in the film, May 12th, every aspect of the representatives for the defendants failed to disclose this matter to the federal judge in a proper context. Then the defendant used that material misrepresentation to achieve summary judgment under rule 56 which should have been impossible when the true creator had the first copyright and film dialogue that read on her work that the so-called owners did not claim in their copyright submission. This is a story that has intrigue, betrayal, misconduct, abuse of the legal system, and a curious inability to perceive the harm to the original creator, an African American writer.

This website has a clear presentation of facts that can not be denied. It is worth your review. - http://wwwthedivineoraclesophia.blogspot.com/

Please review all information carefully.

We look forward to communication regarding this matter.

In Reference to Cameron’s entertainment lawyer Burt field’s comments, “that all of the pictures that he [Cameron] created are totally his own, original work,” and that “He [Cameron] hasn’t taken anything from anybody, including her”, we respectfully submit the following: ______________ _______________

Best Regards,

§18 U.S.C. 4

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

§18 U.S.C. 3

Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

1 MINUTE AND 45 SECONDS

HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT

Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUY6E-ByYVs

Part II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLyJuMWttE4

Part III: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AH8viFxZLy4

-A Hovercraft of immense proportions enters the scene with the most advanced computer oriented laser guided weapons known to the post nuclear world.

-A man pops up from nowhere and begins to run as his friend hopes that he make it.

-Still, with precision, the computer generated robot focuses, aims, and disperses his atom relationships so as to mystify his very existence.

-Terminator open with a post nuclear darkened war scene canvassed by robots controlled through computer chips with laser-guided weapons in or about 2010 to 2030 A.D.

-What’s critical to understand here, is that this 1 minute and 45 second description of a nuclear war in Terminator do not appear anywhere in the script written by James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd.

-Yet, the words and the “post nuclear war” comes verbatim from Sophia Stewart’s the Third Eye.

“The proposed science fiction film deals with Earth during the year 2110 A.D. By that time planet Earth had experienced horrible nuclear wars…” “The 22^nd Century will be a time in which Earth will have experienced many computerized nuclear wars, and for the first time in history, the people of earth will feel the ultimate nuclear war that will bring universal death.”

-The Third Eye Movie Treatment by Sophia Stewart

“This willful failure to disclose Stewart’s contribution makes Cameron’s and Hurd’s copyright registration invalid…for willfully failing to reveal that the substantial contributing author was omitted with the intent to deny her royalties in the project."

“The year 2110 A.D. brought many great changes on Earth. Mankind just finished experienced the last of the Atomic Age, when evolution of awareness began; and man was going from the unconscious stages of evolutionary development in to the conscious levels of it. There was no doubt earth would be destroyed.”

–Quotations from “The Third Eye” by Sophia Stewart

“Yet, on a reading of Stewart’s "Third Eye as copyrighted 81’, 83’ and 84’, it is undeniable that the first 1 minute and 45 seconds of Terminator came from that discussion and that it is totally excluded from the copyright submission of Cameron and Hurd to the Copyright Office.”

“He entered Earth’s atmosphere in a flash of brilliant light;”

“After the energy, he lies naked and still…”

–The Third Eye by Sophia Stewart

“The technique of taking the script and sending it through a “chop shop” so that many of its features are changed while unpublished and then bringing it forth as a published work is described as infringement in Dezendorf v. Twentieth Century Fox. Yet, it is plainly present in the movie. This is evidence that Gale Anne Hurd had consciousness of the wrongfulness of this activity and did not want it to be said that she wrote exactly what was written in Stewart’s treatment. [TXU 117-610 COPYRIGHT] The May 1, 1981 treatment is covered by copyright registration number Txu 117-610 in the name of Sophia Stewart. This is evidence of a theft of the script, knowing unauthorized use of it, and an intent to deny Stewart of her share of the profits associated therewith”.

“Kyle Reese: “What day is it? The date!”

Cop in Alley: “12th... May…”

Sophia Stewart completed the six-page treatment of the Third Eye on May 1, 1981. It was forwarded to the Vice President of Creative Affairs of Fox before May 7, 1981. Surprisingly, Gale Anne Hurd, then the public relations and marketing director of New World Productions under Roger Corman (who had never produced a film), started Pacific Western Productions on May 12, 1981.

“Kyle Reese: “What day is it? The date!”

Cop in Alley: “12th... May…”

- May 12, 1981-

Is it simply coincidence, that Gale Ann Hurd started Pacific Western Productions on the same day Kyle Reese began his search for Sarah Conner? Or, is this the M/O of an Embezzlement of copywritten material? Allegations of "criminal copyright infringement" must be evidenced by: “Access” “Copying” & “Substantial Similarity” to a protected literary work.In relation to Terminator; Ms. Sophia Stewart, former USC Film student, has evidenced all three.

As Recently as December 2009, Twenty-Two year old Samantha Tumpach was taping portions of her sister's surprise party at a local theater and accidentally captured some scenes of the film “New Moon” on her digital camcorder. Although Samantha insisted she was not trying to record the new release on purpose, she was arrested for “criminal use of a motion picture exhibition” - a criminal statue intended to curb piracy by deterring movie watchers from recording movies in theaters and selling “bootlegged” copies. Initially, Samantha faced up to three years in prison. Fortunately for Tumpach, she only spent two-days in jail following her arrest.

If Law Enforcement protects the rights of Billion dollar corporations, shouldn’t Law enforcement also protect the rights of citizens?

While young movie watchers are being jailed for accidentally capturing a few scenes of a film; the Stewart case is shining the light on white collar crime sweeping America. Stewart uncovered a white collar theft of her protected literary work, its embezzlement and how that was used as a means to conceal the crime and escape punishment.

What’s critical to remember, is that the 1:45 description of a nuclear war in Terminator do not appear anywhere in the script written by James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd. No “post nuclear war” was revealed in any draft done by James Cameron including the draft from June of 1982. Without any “post nuclear war” revealed by Cameron’s scripts, why does a Terminator travel through time to kill Sarah Conner? And what does Kyle Reese have to protect Sarah Conner from? Nevertheless, the words, “nuclear war” and the element of “time travel” come verbatim from Sophia Stewart’s copywritten material - The Third Eye.

The act of trying to conceal unauthorized use of someone’s protected literary work, “hidden in plain sight” of a newly released film, is the weakest link in the chain of criminal copyright infringement. [Terminator & Reese] To be caught with copywritten “source material” that bears no resemblance to the film or movie it is based upon, is to catch a thief with a smoking gun. [James Cameron T2]

Once again, it’s for good reason that thieves don’t register stolen property without changing the appearance of what was stolen. These “changes” and “alterations” are premeditated measures used to escape detection and consequence. Likewise, this pattern of theft is consistent with child kidnappers who are known by law enforcement to shave the heads or otherwise “alter” the appearance of children they abduct. Nevertheless, a mother will always recognize her baby. [Stewart Quote]

“If someone steals your car and puts it through a chop shop, (where the crooks add or take away from it) trying to make it their own, is it still your car? Do you go out and buy another car to prove yours was stolen?” –Sophia Stewart, Legal Owner of the Matrix & the Terminator

AN EMBEZZLEMENT OF COPYWRITEN MATERIAL

Dec 20 2009 Sophia Stewart Speaks New Interview

2009-12-20T23:44:00.000-08:00

-The Smoking Gun- The 1:45 Terminator Introduction

2009-12-10T16:10:00.000-08:00

The film opens with a post nuclear darkened war scene canvassed by robots controlled through computer chips with laser-guided weapons in or about 2010 to 2030 A.D. A hovercraft of immense proportions enters the scene with the most advanced computer oriented laser guided weapons known to the post nuclear world. A man pops up from nowhere and begins to run as his friend hopes that he make it. Still, with precision, the computer generated robot focuses, aims, and disperses his atom relationships so as to mystify his very existence.

Then the insert on the screen wrote these unscripted words: “The machines rose from the ashes of the nuclear fire. Their war to exterminate mankind had raged for decades, but the final battle would not be fought in this time. It would be fought here, in our present tonight.” (Exhs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, The Third Eye)

This description does not appear anywhere in the script written by James Cameron. Yet, the words and the post nuclear war came from MY SOURCE WORK. This was not revealed in any draft done by James Cameron including the draft from June of 1982.

Sophia Stewart completed the six-page treatment of the Third Eye on May 1, 1981. It was forwarded to the Vice President of Creative Affairs of Fox before May 7, 1981. Surprisingly, Gale Anne Hurd, then the public relations and marketing director of New World Productions under Roger Corman who had never produced a film, started Pacific Western Productions on May 12, 1981.

The first minute and 45 seconds of the film includes visual dialogue that is not written into the first, second, third, fourth, or fifth draft of the screenplay.

In the April 29, 2005 Motion for Summary Judgment submitted to the Court by Bruce Isaacs of Beverly Hills, he did not disclose to the court the following facts:

1) that the first minute and 45 seconds of the film does not read on the screenplay by Cameron and Hurd;

2) that the first minute and 45 seconds of the film does read on the treatment by Sophia Stewart dated May 1, 1981;

3) that the May 1, 1981 treatment was sent to Fox before May 7, 1981;

4) that the May 1, 1981 treatment was transferred from Fox to Roger Corman of New World Pictures prior to May 9, 1981;

5) that Gale Hurd, Corman's assistant, started Pacific Western Productions on May 12, 1981 while James Cameron was in Italy and did not know about the May 1, 1981 treatment;

6) Cameron was required to play along with Hurd to get the opportunity to write and direct the project based upon Stewart's work product.

(ABSOLUTE FRAUD!!!)

If Law Enforcement protects the rights of corporations, shouldn't Law Enforcement protect the rights of citizens?

The Stewart case shines a light on white collar crime now sweeping America. Stewart uncovered a sophisticated theft of her protected literary work, its embezzlement and how that was used as a means to conceal the crime and escape repercussions. For Instance: “This willful failure to disclose Stewart’s contribution makes the copyright registration invalid under 18 U.S.C. 1001 for willfully failing to reveal that the substantial contributing author was omitted with the intent to deny her royalties in the project. Yet, on a reading of the "Third Eye" as copyrighted on February 2, 1983, it is undeniable that the first minute and 45 seconds came from that discussion and that it is totally excluded from the copyright submission of Cameron and Hurd to the Copyright Office. The technique of taking the script and sending it through a chop shop so that many of its features are changed while unpublished and then bringing it forth as a published work is described as infringement in Dezendorf v. Twentieth Century Fox. Yet, it is plainly present in the movie. This is evidence that Hurd had consciousness of the wrongfulness of this activity and did not want it to be said that she wrote exactly what was written in Stewart’s treatment. The May 1, 1981 treatment is covered by copyright registration number Txu 117-610 in the name of Sophia Stewart. This is evidence of a theft of the script, knowing unauthorized use of it, and an intent to deny Stewart of her share of the profits associated therewith”.

The FBI recently admitted that the epidemic of Mortgage fraud spread across America is born from the "lending industry" itself not borrowers. Is the "film industry" itself any different? If so, why did a Warner Brothers Attorney named Judy Neulak inform Stewart that she (Neulak) knew for a fact, that Warner Brothers had used Stewart's protected literary work? Why is Warner Brothers & Fox permitting the sale of images of "The Matrix" and "The Terminator" with Stewart's book "The Third Eye" on amazon.com (since 2005) without suing Stewart for copyright infringement? - http://www.amazon.com/Third-Eye-Mother-Matrix/dp/0978539648 Who will explain the fact that the alleged creator's scripts BEAR NO RESEMBLEMCE to what's on screen in both sets of Terminator and Matrix films? Due to a lack of “source material” - did Cameron, Hurd & the Wachowski’s get caught hiding stolen source material in the plain sight of the movies themselves?
For a good reason, thieves don’t register what they steal without an attempt to fraudulently alter the 'make and model' of what was stolen. These “Alterations” are actually “calculated measures” used to escape detection and repercussions. Likewise, this pattern of theft is consistent with child kidnappers who are known by law enforcement to shave the heads and/or otherwise “alter” the appearance of children they abduct in order to (1) keep their parents from ever recognizing them and (2) escape repercussion. Nevertheless, a good mother will always recognize her baby.

“If someone steals your car and puts it through a chop shop, (where the crooks add or take away from it) trying to make it their own, is it still your car? Do you go out and buy another car to prove yours was stolen?”

–Sophia Stewart, Legal Owner of the Matrix & the Terminator

Major Script language Associated with Infringement #2

2009-11-28T10:55:00.000-08:00

Draft in Development

Terminator
Main Titles – Chapter One
Arrival of the Terminator Chapter Two
A1 Title Sequence – Slitscan Effect A1

Fifth Draft
March 11, 1984
March 19, 1984 revision pages

By James Cameron with Gale Anne Hurd

[This description is evidence of the intent of the parties to engage in willful copyright infringement within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. 506 (e).]

Gradually the sound of distant traffic becomes audible.
A low angle bounded on one side by a chain link fence and on the other by the one-story public school buildings.

Spray can hieroglyphics. A Los Angeles public school in a blue-collar neighborhood.

Angle between school buildings, where a trash dumpster looms in a low angle. A cat crosses frame.

Close on CAT, which freezes, alert, sensing something just beyond perception.

A source less wind rises, and with it a keening WHINE.
Papers blow across the pavement.
The cat YOWLS and hides under the dumpster.
Windows rattle in their frames.
The Whine intensifies, accompanied now by a wash of frigid purple light. A concussion like a thunderclap right overhead blows in all the windows facing the yard.

C.U. – C.A.T., its eyes are wide as the glare dies.

1A/FX Angle – Dumpster 1A/FX

Electrical discharges arc from the dumpster to a water faucet and climb a drainpipe like a Jacobs’ ladder.

2 EXT. School yard – Night 2

Slow Pan as the sound of stray electrical crackling subsides.
Frame comes to rest on the figure of a naked man kneeling, faced away, in the previously empty yard.
He stands slowly.
This man is in his late thirties, tall and powerfully built, moving with graceful precision.

He is the TERMINATOR.

Actual depiction of the introduction of the Terminator Film does not include the cat, the war scene, or the statement overlay.

Description observed by the writer.

The film opens with a post nuclear war darkened war scene canvassed by robots controlled through computer chips with laser-guided weapons in or about 2010 to 2030 A.D. A hovercraft of immense proportions enters the scene with the most advanced and computer oriented laser guided weapons known to the post nuclear world. A man pops up from nowhere and begins to run as his friend roots that he make it. Still, with precision, the computer generated robot focuses, aims, and disperses his atom relationships so as to mystify his very existence.

Then the insert from the screen wrote these words:

The machines rose from the ashes of the nuclear fire. Their war to exterminate mankind had raged for decades, but the final battle would not be fought in this time. It would be fought here, in our present tonight.

This description does not appear any where in the script written by James Cameron. Yet, the words and the post nuclear war came from some source. This was not revealed in any draft done by James Cameron including the draft from June of 1982.

Sophia Stewart completed the six-page treatment of the Third Eye on May 1, 1981. It was forwarded to the Vice President of Creative Affairs of Fox before May 5, 1981. Surprisingly, Gale Anne Hurd, then the public relations and marketing director of New World Productions under Roger Corman who had never produced a film, started Pacific Western Productions on May 12, 1981. The only thing that she could have had was the embezzled treatment of Sophia Stewart. How do we know this?

The description above that constitutes the first minute and 45 seconds of the film does not come from the script written by James Cameron with Gale Hurd. Instead, it reads on the language of the “Third Eye” that was written by Sophia Stewart on May 1, 1981. The copyright is Txu-116-610.

The copyright filed by Cameron and Hurd is subject to nullification under 18 U.S.C. 1001 for willfully failing to disclose their use of Stewart's stolen treatment.

Sophia Stewart copyrighted the May 1, 1981 treatment in February of 1983. Gale Hurd and James Cameron therefore had a duty to identify her work as a derivative contribution in paragraph 6 of the related copyright application. Did they do that?

Their copyright registration on February 3, 1984 says, “No.”

Its material features are as follows:

Registration Number: Pau-584-564
Authors: James Cameron and Gale Ann Hurd
Description: 129 pages
Note: Screenplay
Claimant: Hemdale Film Corp.
Created: 1983 [first registered screenplay by Cameron alone with writer’s guild in July of 1982 thereby making copyright registration knowingly false]
Author on © application: Gale Ann Hurd, as employee for hire of Pacific Western Productions. [However, Hurd was the sole stockholder of the entity started on May 12, 1981 that seemed to operate with the script embezzled from Fox without the knowledge, consent, or approval of Sophia Stewart, the creative force behind the writing of the Third Eye.]

Sophia Stewart, then a USC film student, did not know that Gale Hurd, a Phi Beta Kappa graduate from Stanford, had secured her script by improper means and developed a Public Relations campaign to make it appear that the concept and plot design came totally from Cameron and Hurd. This willful failure to disclose Stewart’s contribution makes the copyright registration invalid under 18 U.S.C. 1001 for willfully failing to reveal that the substantial contributing author was omitted with the intent to deny her royalties in the project. Yet, on a reading of the "Third Eye" as copyrighted on February 2, 1983, it is undeniable that the first minute and 45 seconds came from that discussion and that it is totally excluded from the copyright submission of Cameron and Hurd to the Copyright Office.

The technique of taking the script and sending it through a chop shop so that many of its features are changed while unpublished and then bringing it forth as a published work is described as infringement in Dezendorf v. Twentieth Century Fox.

Yet, it is plainly present in the movie. This is evidence that Hurd had consciousness of the wrongfulness of this activity and did not want it to be said that she wrote exactly what was written in Stewart’s treatment. The May 1, 1981 treatment is covered by copyright registration number Txu 117-610 in the name of Sophia Stewart. This is evidence of a theft of the script, knowing unauthorized use of it, and an intent to deny Stewart of her share of the profits associated therewith.

Phil Banks

Sophia Stewart’s former lawyers Are Part Of Fraud.

2009-11-14T16:24:00.000-08:00

“HAD the evidence, hid it & did not submit it in the california COURTS”
What evidence?

-The “Terminator” & “Matrix” movies already in the attorney’s possession
-600 Pages of probative evidence
-*Constructive Trust Pacific Western Productions
(*The shell company that produced the 1:45sec [verbatim] out of Stewart’s 81 Third Eye Movie Treatment)
-*The articles of Incorporation with the Secretary State of California
-*The names of Attorneys who constructed the Trust
-Lubell’s Confession, Forged Admissions and other documents
-Perjury Affidavits of all the Defendants, Bruce Isaacs & John Shulaman
-Stewart’s copywritten Movie Treatment and manuscript (81, 83, & 84)
-“The Third Eye” book itself
What Pedigree lawyer on case worth BILLIONS of dollars is going to fumble routine legal tasks; such as submitting crucial evidence to win a case? Since when did lawyers cease the desire to make money? When did news become so one sided? Why is Sophia Story being “blacked-out” of the mainstream media? Why hasn’t Main Stream media Contacted Sophia Stewart to hear her side of the story? Madoff’s story did not get back yard coverage. Sophia Stewart’s story is the Bernie Madoff of Hollywood worth BILLIONS! Is the media paid off?
A band of corrupt Attorneys charged Sophia Stewart, Legal Owner of The Matrix & Terminator, $50,000.00 (U.S. dollars) only to sabotage her entire California civil case by withholding the submission of the most critical evidence. We know now why Sophia Stewart did not appear in California court: She was bared and gagged from doing depositions and appearances.
According to New York District Attorney Thomas Warnom, Bureau Chief, Special Prosecutions Bureau, Stewart’s former attorney Jonathan Lubell received “a sentence of One to Three Years in August of 2005”. Jonathan Lubell confessed to have forgered Stewart’s Admissions (among other documents), all by himself without anyone else's help. Not one of Sophia Stewart’s former lawyers had the integrity to inform Stewart of the fact that Jonathan Lubell was convicted and serving time, due to forgery and grand larceny, while working Stewart’s Billion dollar case. Jonathan Lubell’s confession & conviction is an Automatic Default judgment. Sophia Stewart has won both cases! Therefore, a convicted attorney Jonathan Lubell along with, Michael Stoller (indicted for fraud), Dean Webb (cited for rambling) and Gary Brown (indicted for fraud) represented a “cavalry of corruption” that rode in to sabotage Stewarts multi-Billion dollar Civil Case in California Courts. Again, since when did lawyers cease the desire to make money? Sophia paid her former lawyers $50,000.00 (U.S. dollars) to do their jobs as attorney’s & officers of the court, not “saboteurs” working as “the loyal opposition” behind their clients back.
If Sophia Stewart wasn’t telling the truth, there would be no reason for a “cavalry of corruption” to perpetrate over 30 counts of fraud & perjury. Judge Brooke C. Wells ruled that the 30 counts of Fraud and Perjury stand as of August 11th 2009. And as you know two sentences of fraud over turns & wins a case because a Judge can not aid & abet in a criminal scheme.
If you own something, you don’t need a “fake deed” because you have the real one.
Sophia Stewart has the real copyrights to the Matrix and the Terminator; therefore she is the legal owner.
Fraud is used to hide the truth, never to compliment it.

SOPHIA STEWART : THE CORRECT FACTS

2009-11-14T11:25:00.000-08:00

Its one thing that life and the experiences of our trials and tribulations teach us all,and that is our Christ consciousness shall always prevail in what the purpose of true integrity means when we are honest within ourselfs.Below you shall see the email conversations between Sophia Stewart The Mother of the Matrix,Terminator and Mr Bruce Isaacs the defendants attorney from her first case that was intentionally frauded and Sabotage by the accused in this cover up that could actually become a blockbuster movie within the eventual outcome of the truth finally coming to the light for Sophia Stewart.

Date: Friday, November 13, 2009, 6:07 PM

Bruce Isaacs,

I reserve the right to have a jail cell available for you, the Defendants, & my former lawyers for all the fraud and perjury you put in the California Court. My former lawyers had the evidence, hid it, and did not submit it.

This was the only way for you to get a phony judgment. Beside the fraud, my 81' copyrighted treatment wins the case period. This is the reason it was hidden from Judge Morrow, and never submitted.

The confession letter of Jonathan Lubell put all of you in jail. He has already done the actionable fraud. You reserved your rights by taking my rights from me!

Today, right now, I am taking my rights back!

Now " you have the right to remain silent, anything more you have to say will be held against you in a court of law. This is including your emails, your lying Declaration, the fraudulent liens ( with the phony $300, 000 dollar judgment ) which you entered illegally against me, the rightful owner & Writer of the Matrix & Terminator, in the California, Utah, & Nevada courts.

My emails are not lies, they are the truth, nothing but the truth so help me God!

I did not get my day in court because you , the Defendants, and my former lawyers fix the California Court by entering fraud, perjury, baring & gaging me, and hiding the evidence.

These are the correct facts.

I won both of my cases because of all the fraud & perjury. Two sentences of fraud over turns & wins a case. A Judge can not aid & abet in a criminal scheme!

Your emails are false, defamatory, & actionable.

The only rights that you can reserve now, are the rights to pay or go to jail!

The media have a right to examine the evidence and the people have a right to know the truth---

Sophia Stewart

Writer of Matrix & Terminator

The legal Owner

On Thu, 11/12/09, Bruce Isaacs wrote:

From: Bruce Isaacs
Subject: RE: RE: SOPHIA STEWART FLYER
To: "sophia stewart" , "David Bias" <biashdavid@yahoo.com>
Cc: "Jackie Hawthorne" , "Taaj" <secretary@diasporarestoration.org>, "Glenda Gill" , "Glenda Taylor" , "T Angelo" , "Jim Petzke" , "Kathy" , "Kate Chilton" , chuchu4444@aol.com, "Peter Mott" <mrpetermott@aol.com>, "Stanley Lewis" <3dmovies@gmail.com>, "Bruce Isaacs"
Date: Thursday, November 12, 2009, 9:31 AM

Ms. Stewart:

This is my last e-mail to you.
Your e-mails are wrong.
You got your day in court. You lost.
Those are the facts.
Your e-mails are false, defamatory and actionable.
We reserve all rights.
I will have no more communications with you. This matter is over and done.
Bruce Isaacs

Bruce Isaacs,Esq.
Wyman & Isaacs, LLP
5757 Wilshire Blvd. , Suite 475
Los Angeles, CA 90036

ph: (323) 648-4144; fax (323) 648-4133
bisaacs@wymanisaacs.com

From: sophia stewart [mailto:sophiastewart10@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:14 PM
To: David Bias
Cc: Jackie Hawthorne; Taaj; Glenda Gill; Glenda Taylor; T Angelo; Bruce Isaacs; Jim Petzke; Kathy; Kate Chilton; chuchu4444@aol.com; Peter Mott; Stanley Lewis
Subject: Fw: RE: SOPHIA STEWART FLYER

--- On Thu, 11/12/09, Eduardo Michon Small wrote:

From: Eduardo Michon Small
Subject: RE: SOPHIA STEWART FLYER
To: "'sophia stewart'"
Date: Thursday, November 12, 2009, 1:07 AM

Sophia Stewart's crooked ass lawyers actually HAD THE EVIDENCE, HID THE EVIDENCE & DIDN'T SUBMIT THE EVIDENCE.

What evidence?

A Manuscript, Screen Treatment, Graphics, copywritten material 81', 83', & 84, Terminator and Matrix films where NEVER SUBMITTED AS EVIDENCE BY SOPHIA STEWARTS ATTORNEY'S

What Pedigree lawyer on case worth Billions of dollars is going to fumble routine legal tasks such as submitting crucial evidence to win a case?

Since when did lawyers cease the desire to make money?

Her Lawyers "had it", 'hid it" and "didn't submit it".

Outright fraud committed.

From: sophia stewart [mailto:sophiastewart10@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 9:52 PM
To: Bruce Isaacs
Cc: Kathy; Taaj; E_Small
Subject: RE: SOPHIA STEWART FLYER

Bruce Isaacs,

Put me to the test! I dare you. File a lawsuit and prove your clients wrote it. All of your asses are going to jail for fraud and perjury. I will prove to the media with my evidence that you and my former lawyers fixed the California Court Case. You hid my 1981 copy written treatment from Judge Morrow and all of you ( Defendants ) lied under oath. You tried to prove independent creation by lying that James Cameron's 1982 movie treatment came before my 1983 book. He had no 1982 treatment, just assignments to the dubby company called Pacific Western Production which was part fraud and part law ,that dubby company produced the one minute and 45 seconds out of my 81 Third Eye movie treatment! One minute and 45 second is verbatim in the Terminator's & Matrix's introductions. I have all the names of the lawyers that created this shell company. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that James Cameron and the Wachowskis Brothers never wrote the Terminator nor the Matrix.

My former lawyer Jonathan Lubell have confessed in a letter that he forgered my Admissions ( among other documents ) , all by himself without anyone else's help. That fraud alone overturns the California Case and wins me the Utah.! Plus Lubell went to jail for fraud on another case while he was committing fraud on my case for over a year. You cannot fix fraud and perjury. Get over it... I want my credit and I want my money , or you damn sure going to jail , every last one of you and that is a promise.

Sophia Stewart

Writer of the Matrix & Terminator---

On Wed, 11/11/09, Bruce Isaacs wrote:

From: Bruce Isaacs
Subject: RE: SOPHIA STEWART FLYER
To: "sophia stewart"
Cc: "Kate Chilton" , "Kathy" , "Jim Petzke" , "Bruce Isaacs"
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 10:05 PM

Dear Ms. Stewart:

Your statements are false and actionable.
We reserve all rights.
bi

Bruce Isaacs,Esq.

Wyman & Isaacs, LLP
5757 Wilshire Blvd. , Suite 475
Los Angeles, CA 90036
ph: (323) 648-4144; fax (323) 648-4133
bisaacs@wymanisaacs.com

From: Eduardo Michon Small [mailto:e_small@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 3:15 PM
To: Bruce Isaacs; 'Sophia Stewart'
Subject: RE: RE: SOPHIA STEWART: THE CORRECT FACTS

Mr. Isaacs will you be filing a lawsuit to prove Sophia Stewart’s email is “false, defamatory and actionable”?

From: Bruce Isaacs [mailto:bisaacs@wymanisaacs.com]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 3:23 PM
To: Eduardo Michon Small; Sophia Stewart
Subject: RE: RE: SOPHIA STEWART: THE CORRECT FACTS

I do not know who you are.

Bruce Isaacs,Esq.

Wyman & Isaacs, LLP

5757 Wilshire Blvd. , Suite 475

Los Angeles, CA 90036

ph: (323) 648-4144; fax (323) 648-4133

bisaacs@wymanisaacs.com

From: Bruce Isaacs [mailto:bisaacs@wymanisaacs.com]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 3:34 PM
To: Eduardo Michon Small; Sophia Stewart
Subject: RE: RE: SOPHIA STEWART: THE CORRECT FACTS

I’m waiting for you to identify yourself. If you refuse to do so, I see no point to answering your question.

Bruce Isaacs,Esq.

Wyman & Isaacs, LLP

5757 Wilshire Blvd. , Suite 475

Los Angeles, CA 90036

ph: (323) 648-4144; fax (323) 648-4133

From: Eduardo Michon Small [mailto:e_small@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 3:50 PM
To: Bruce Isaacs; 'Sophia Stewart'
Subject: RE: RE: SOPHIA STEWART: THE CORRECT FACTS

Mr. Isaacs, if you’re telling the truth, my identity is of no consequence.

Will you be filing a lawsuit to prove Sophia Stewart’s email is “false, defamatory and actionable”?

From: Bruce Isaacs
Subject: RE: RE: SOPHIA STEWART: THE CORRECT FACTS
To: "Eduardo Michon Small" , "sophia stewart"
Date: Friday, November 13, 2009, 6:53 PM

Done. Goodbye. Bruce Isaacs

Bruce Isaacs,Esq.

Wyman & Isaacs, LLP

5757 Wilshire Blvd. , Suite 475

Los Angeles, CA 90036

ph: (323) 648-4144; fax (323) 648-4133

bisaacs@wymanisaacs.com

From: Sophia Stewart [mailto:sophiastewart10@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 4:01 PM
To: Bruce Isaacs - Warner Brothers Attorney
Subject: RE: RE: SOPHIA STEWART: THE CORRECT FACTS

Bruce Isaacs, No this not done, it is just the beginning.

Sophia Stewart

Writer of the Matrix & Terminator, Legal Owner

This email is going to go around the world a billion times!

Sophia Stewart Has Won Both Cases!

2009-11-12T00:46:00.000-08:00

Sophia Stewart uncovered the fraud in both cases. As you know two sentences of fraud overturns or wins the court case, because a judge cannot aid or abet in a criminal scheme. Sophia Stewart has proven she wrote the Matrix & Terminator. Judge Brooke C. Wells ruled that the evidence (30 counts of fraud & perjury) stand August 11, 2009. Sophia Stewart won both cases and media is welcome to look at the evidence!

THE MATRIX & TERMINATOR MOVIE WAS STOLEN feat Sophia Stewart

2009-10-23T03:38:00.000-07:00

MOTION AND REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

2009-10-01T16:39:00.000-07:00

SOPHIA STEWART
P.O. BOX 31725
Las Vegas, NV 89173

In Propria Persona
IN THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT, STATE OF UTAH
SOPHIA STEWART,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL T. STOLLER, JONATHAN LUBELL, DEAN WEBB, GARY BROWN and JOHN DOES I through X, individuals whose identities are not yet known,

MOTION AND REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION FOR AN EXPEDITED JUDGMENT DUE TO FRAUD UPON THE COURT, AND PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A JURY TRIAL PURSUANT TO SEVENTH AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

Case No. 2:07cv00552
Judge Clark Waddoups
Magistrate Brooke C. Wells

COMES NOW PLAINTIFF SOPHIA STEWART, brings forth this Motion and Request Reconsideration For An Expedited Judgment Due to Fraud Upon The Court, Perjury, Contempt, and Subverting the Due administration of Justice of the California and Utah Courts, as well as, the business of the Federal Branches of Government in Violation of Plaintiff’s Civil and Constitutional Rights in Contravention to 18 U.S.C. 241 to be heard on the ______ day of September, 2009, at 10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter, as counsel maybe heard in the above-entitled courtroom, located at U.S. District Court, District of Utah 350 South Main Street, Room 150, Salt Lake City, UT 84101 against Co-conspirators Michael T. Stoller, Jonathan Lubell, Dean Webb, and Gary Brown. This movement is filed in conjunction with Stewart’s Objection To Court Order and Ruling dated September 9, 2009, Denying Plaintiff Judgment Against Defendants. Plaintiff hereby Request to pick “A Jury Trial” pursuant to the Seventh Amendment of the United States Constitution. Defendants have left the battlefield warranting Judgment. Plaintiff asserts the Defendants totally lost their case when the Court issued a Ruling on August 11, 2009, and there is no need for Stewart to hire an attorney after the smoke has cleared.
COGNIZABLE FACTS TO SUPPORT CLAIMS
Defendants Michael Stoller, Dean Webb, Gary Brown, and Jonathan Lubell fraudulently billed Stewart no less than $50,000.00 dollars for “Non-legitimate” legal services to “Gather” and “Enter” all Probative Evidence on the issue of “Legal Rights of Ownership” into Court Record which affirmed the “Fraudulent Assignment Copyrights” for the Terminator and Matrix Movies, screenplays, and no less than 600 pages of Probative Evidence, and the Defendants with “Wanton / Malice Intent” deliberately did not enter “Any Evidence” (“Emphasis Added”) that was “Within their Possession” into Court Record, thus constituting “Intrinsic Fraud” for which Plaintiff hereby states Claims for relief to be based pursuant to First Cause of Action (Breach of Contract), Second Cause of Action (Breach of Covenants of Good Faith and Fair Dealing), Third Cause of Action (Malpractice), Fourth Cause of Action (Civil Conspiracy), Fifth Cause of Action (Fraud), Sixth Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duties), and Seventh Cause of Action (Conversion) .
WANTON / WILLFUL CONCEALMENT OF EVIDENCE

Gary Brown:

“And I’m happy to also voice the fact, that “I haven’t seen” (“Emphasis Added”) the “Terminator” or “Matrix” movies. They are sitting on my “Shelf” (“Emphasis Added”) at home for me to “View.” (Exhs. 190, 191, Reporter’s Transcript Proceedings “Sept. 27, 2004”)

What is sitting on the “Shelf” (Emphasis Added”)?

Jonathan Lubell:

“I sent you “600 Pages of Documents” along with a listing describing the documents and, where “APPLICABLE” (“Emphasis Added”) the SIGNIFICANT.” (“Emphasis Added”); (Exh. 240, dated “May 3, 2005” (Emphasis Added”))
Jonathan Lubell:

“From what I understand, “No one Else” “sent documents to be produced” (“Emphasis Added”) in response to the defendants’ Rule 34 demands.” (Exh. 240)

MALICE FRAUDULENT REPRESENTATION OF DEPOSITIONS
Defendants Michael Stoller, Dean Webb, Gary Brown, and Jonathan Lubell fraudulently billed Stewart no less than $50,000.00 dollars to for non-legitimate legal services and “Blocked” Stewart from attending her depositions, while operating in consort to misrepresent the “True Nature” of judicial proceedings for the times and dates of said deposition, of which, resulted in Stewart being procedurally “Bared/Gagged,” from timely Entering Any Evidence, for which Plaintiff hereby states Claims for relief to be based pursuant to First Cause of Action (Breach of Contract), Second Cause of Action (Breach of Covenants of Good Faith and Fair Dealing), Third Cause of Action (Malpractice), Fourth Cause of Action (Civil Conspiracy), Fifth Cause of Action (Fraud), Sixth Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duties), and Seventh Cause of Action (Conversion) .
GARY BROWN: “We are going to postpone it.” (Exh. 316)

W.B. Attorney David Boren:

“Therefore, both Lubell and Brown “Unilaterally” cancelled Ms. Stewart’s deposition one business day before it was scheduled to take place.” (Exhs. 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, Declaration David H. Boren, dated March 28, 2005)

“On Monday, February 21, 2005, (President Day), Bruce Isaacs received a call from an associate of Ms. Stewart, who stated that he was calling on behalf of Ms. Stewart. The associate (Lawyer) left a VOICEMAIL MESSAGE (“Emphasis Added) stating that Ms. Stewart was “unsure whether her deposition was going forward” and she was “unsure whether she should BOARD AN AIRPLANE (“Emphasis Added”) and FLY to Los Angeles to attend her DEPOSITION.” “The associate asked that Bruce call him to let him know whether Ms. Stewart should board and Airplane to fly to Los Angeles for her Deposition. This phone message showed that Ms. Stewart was “Indeed Available” to attend her deposition on February 22, 2005.” “Therefore, we were “Mystified” why Jonathan and Gary “Unilaterally Cancelled” Ms. Stewart’s “Deposition” when she was “Clearly Available” to be “Deposed.” (Exhs. Declaration of David H. Boren, pg. 7, dated March 28, 2005) (Exhs. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, Letter, March 18, 2005, pg. 3, lines 3-11); (Exh. 29, Gary Brown Dep. Cancellation, dated Feb. 18, 2005);

“Bruce and I called Stoller back at 4:30 PM to find out why we had not received the “Production of Documents” which were promised to be delivered that day, as well as, the other discovery responses.”
ABANDONMENT OF CASE
Right after Judge Morrow’s ruling of the dismissal of the RICO claims without prejudice with leave to amend, Dean Webb immediately abandoned the case after he sabotaged the Amended Complaint, and all Defendant Attorneys had “Knowledge of it, and operated in consort to conceal Webb abandoning the case, while simultaneously “Padding Their Bills,” thus constituting “Civil Conspiracy” for which Plaintiff hereby states Claims for relief to be based pursuant to First Cause of Action (Breach of Contract), Second Cause of Action (Breach of Covenants of Good Faith and Fair Dealing), Third Cause of Action (Malpractice), Fourth Cause of Action (Civil Conspiracy), Fifth Cause of Action (Fraud), Sixth Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duties), and Seventh Cause of Action (Conversion) .
JONATHAN LUBELL:
“Dean abandoned his representation of Sophia Stewart in the fall of 2004. He was responsible for Sophia’s RICO Claims and the First Amended Complaint which mainly focused on the seven RICO causes of Action.” (Exh. 240)
FRAUD / IMPEACHED TESTIMONY
Defendants Michael Stoller, Dean Webb, Gary Brown, and Jonathan Lubell fraudulently billed Stewart no less than $50,000.00 dollars and with “Malice Aforethought” did not perform “Any” legitimate legal services and through the use of the federal mails and federal interstate wires the defendants have fraudulently and wrongfully gained access to, acquired, feloniously absorbed, misappropriated, and / or tortuously and/or criminally obtained, by and through “False Pretenses” encroached upon Stewart’s Inalienable Rights of Ownership / Property; in order, to “Fraudulently Convert” her “Protected Literary” work, for which Plaintiff hereby states Claims for relief to be based pursuant to First Cause of Action (Breach of Contract), Second Cause of Action (Breach of Covenants of Good Faith and Fair Dealing), Third Cause of Action (Malpractice), Fourth Cause of Action (Civil Conspiracy), Fifth Cause of Action (Fraud), Sixth Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duties), and Seventh Cause of Action (Conversion) .
Gary Brown:

“Further, she “Never Paid” me “Anything.” (“Emphasis Added”); (Docket 73, Gary Brown Opposition to Application For Default of Judgment and Request for Judicial Notice, pg. 2); (Exhs. 44.1, 44.2, Padded Bill Gary Brown)

“Our “Main Job” (“Emphasis Added”) now is “carefully assembling evidence” (“Emphasis Added”) and helping you prepare for a deposition.” (Exh. 225, Brown Memo, dated “October 30, 2004”)

“I don’t want us to become “Discredited” (“Emphasis Added”) by an “Unauthorized Move.” (Exh. 225)

FRAUD, FRAUD AND MORE FRAUD

“Thanks for sending money.” (“Emphasis Added”); (Exh. 225, Brown Memo, dated “October 30, 2004”) ; (Exhs. 217, 218, T-Shirt - “Slogan” (“Emphasis Added”); (U.S. TAX CODE TITLE 26, Subtitle A, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter B, PART IX, Sec. 269A - Personal service corporations formed or availed of to avoid or evade income tax); (“Conspiracy to Defraud by Interference with Government Functions,” prosecuted pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §371 falls under guideline 2C1.7., See id. App. a, § 2C1.7”); (U.S. TAX CODE - TITLE 26, Subtitle F, CHAPTER 68, Subchapter B, PART II, Sec. 6723, Added Pub. L. 99-514, title XV, Sec. 1501(a), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2733; amended Pub. L. 101-239, title VII, Sec. 7711(a), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2390); (Exh. 44.10, 44.11, Padded Bills)
“PREPARATION OF FRAUDULENT ADMISSIONS”
Defendants Michael Stoller, Dean Webb, Gary Brown, and Jonathan Lubell fraudulently billed Stewart no less than $50,000.00 dollars and did not perform “Any Legitimate Legal” Services and through the use of the federal mail and federal interstate wires, all of the Defendants were “Aware” that Jonathan Lubell with Wanton Malice Intent “Prepared” a plethora of “Fraudulent Admissions” having “Forged” his Clients Signature” that the Co-conspirators entered into the California Judiciary without Stewart’s knowledge while concealing the same; in order, to Fraudulently Convert “Inalienable Rights Of Ownership,” for which Plaintiff hereby states Claims for relief to be based pursuant to First Cause of Action (Breach of Contract), Second Cause of Action (Breach of Covenants of Good Faith and Fair Dealing), Third Cause of Action (Malpractice), Fourth Cause of Action (Civil Conspiracy), Fifth Cause of Action (Fraud), Sixth Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duties), and Seventh Cause of Action (Conversion) .
JONATHAN LUBELL:
“Furthermore, after I completed the responses to all “Eight” (“Emphasis Added”) Requests for Admissions and to two of the Special Interrogatories “Without” substantive assistance of “Anyone Else.” (“Emphasis Added”)
Defendants Michael Stoller, Dean Webb, Gary Brown, and Jonathan Lubell fraudulently billed Stewart no less than $50,000.00 dollars to for non-legitimate legal services and through the use of the federal mails and federal interstate wires Gary Brown interfered and encroached upon Stewart’s Civil and Constitutional Rights by “Scaring off” and/or “Threatening” Stewart’s attorney Ted McBride while providing “Material Instructions” (“Emphasis Added”) to McBride to “Fix” the current case now before the court by specifically cutting out the “Fraud Claims” stated in the Amended Civil Complaint to be solely replaced with a “Malpractice Claim,” because the Co-conspirators are “Aware” that a “Malpractice Claim” by itself cannot “Overturn” the initial U.S. District Court of California Case, thus the Plaintiff hereby states Claims for relief to be based pursuant to First Cause of Action (Breach of Contract), Second Cause of Action (Breach of Covenants of Good Faith and Fair Dealing), Third Cause of Action (Malpractice), Fourth Cause of Action (Civil Conspiracy), Fifth Cause of Action (Fraud), Sixth Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duties), and Seventh Cause of Action (Conversion) .
GARY BROWN:
“the fundamental legal theory to be applied is about “legal malpractice” and not breach of contract, “FRAUD” (“Emphasis Added”) or “Conspiracy.” (Exh. 312)
“The applicable statute…for “Legal Malpractice” in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 340.6, which “Limits Actions”…(“Emphasis Added”)…. “Discovery of the Wrongful Conduct” (“Emphasis Added”) and “DAMAGE” (“Emphasis Added”) by the Plaintiff. (Exh. 312)
TERRORIST THREATS AGAINST LEGAL COUNSEL
18 U.S.C. 241 / RICO
Gary Brown:
“I also assure the Court that I have never “Intended” (“Emphasis Added”) to bother Mr. McBride about his representation of Ms. Stewart.” (Exh. 121)

SUBVERTING GOVERNMENT BUSINESS /ASCENTING IN CONSORT TO FRAUDULENT “EXTORTION LIENS” WITH CALCULATED FORETHOUGHT TO SCARE OFF ATTORNEYS

Jonathan Lubell:

“Affiant has not been involved in any activity which would have compromised or scared off attorneys.” (Docket 72, pg. 13); (Exhs. 21, 22, 63, 115, 116) (Uwe Geertz, Steven Fishman vs. Johnathan Lubell, Margaret M. Morrow, Judge, No. BC 122 468, dated 25 Dec 1995, Super. Crt., Cal., Cty., LA) - “Malicious Prosecution Complaint / Deprivation of Right to Counsel”)

ARGUMENT

Plaintiff graciously requests that the Court host a hearing to Authenticate the “Signatures of the Fraudulent Admissions Jonathan Lubell forged and concealed the same on behalf of his client Sophia Stewart? The Court has acknowledged that the Plaintiff has submitted overwhelming evidence. In light of the above, Rule 60 Fed.R.Civ.P. permits the Court to impose disciplinary measures from its judgments or orders for certain reasons and more than “Two Sentences of fraud in this case are Obvious including “Forgery.” (“Emphasis Added”) Among those reasons are (b) (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, “Forgery” or excusable neglect. And (b)(3) actual fraud (whether heretofore denominated Intrinsic or Extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party. As such Plaintiff by this liberally construed Objection brings Requests Judgment and/or Motion Relief from Judgment Pursuant to Rule 60, because the Defendants have left the battlefield. (TCBY Sys. Inc. v. EGB. Assoc., Inc. 2 F.3d 288, 290-91 [8th Cir. 1993]. For the reasons stated above, plaintiff hereby prays for relief.
I declare under penalty of perjury that all of the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Dated: 09/16/09 Respectfully Submitted,

__________________________

CERTICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that on this __16____ day of September 2009, I caused to be mailed via first class U.S. mail, postage pre-paid, a true and correct copy of the foregoing S. Stewart Objection + Memorandum to the following:

Jonathan Lubell
1325 6th Ave.
28th Floor
N.Y., New York 10019
212-763-8550
__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
Michael Stroller
Attorney at Law
9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500
Beverly Hills, California 90212

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
Gary Brown
One Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 301
Pasadena, California 91105

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
Kathleen Liuzzi
DUNN & DUNN, PC
505 East 200 South 2nd Floor
Salt Lake City, Utah 84102
__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
c/o Court Clerk
United States District Court, District of Utah
350 South Main Street, Room 150,
Salt Lake City, UT 84101.
(1 Original & 2 Copies)
__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Utah that the above is true and correct.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dated: 09/16/09

Sophia Stewart

DONE,DONE,DONE, SOPHIA'S CASE

2009-10-01T16:16:00.000-07:00

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DIVISION, DISTRICT OF UTAH

SOPHIA STEWART,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MICHAEL T. STOLLER, JONATHAN

LUBELL, DEAN WEBB, GARY BROWN

and JOHN DOES I through X,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

Civil No. 2:07-cv-00552

ORDER & RULING

JUDGE CLARK WADDOUPS

MAGISTRATE JUDGE BROOKE C.

WELLS

_____________________________________________________________________

On July 2, 2009, Defendant Michael Stoller filed his Motion To Strike Plaintiff’s

Pleadings 1 In response, Plaintiff Sophia Stewart filed an objection and response to the

motion.2 Upon review of the pending motion, the Court now rules as stated herein and

denies defendant’s Motion To Strike.

1Initially, it appears that Mr. Stoller’s motion was actually filed as part of

defendant’s affidavit in opposition to plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint. See,

Docket Number 74. However, at the request of the court clerk’s office, Mr. Stoller filed

his motion to strike separate from his affidavit. Docket Number 76.

2Docket Number 78 and 79. Pleading entitled “Objection And Response To

Jonathan Lubell, Gary Brown, Dean Webb, and Michael Stoller’s Objection To Motions

And Memorandums For Default Of Judgment And Motion To Strike.” See also, Docket

Number 82 pleading entitled “Objection To Defendant Michael T. Stoller’s Motion To

Strike Plaintiff’s Pleadings; Points And Authorities.”

In his pending motion, Mr. Stoller addresses plaintiff’s failure to follow rules and

procedures, ultimately requesting that this Court “strike the sham pleadings filed by the

Plaintiff.”3 Defendant’s motion, however, is unclear as to which of plaintiff’s pleadings

he seeks to strike. Specifically, the Court is uncertain whether Mr. Stoller’s motion

seeks to strike all of plaintiff’s pleadings, those pleading’s most recently filed, or is in

fact a motion to dismiss the entire action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(b)(6).

If Mr. Stoller’s motion is characterized as a motion to dismiss, on August 28,

2008, Judge Waddoups issued a Memorandum Decision and Order 4 denying Mr.

Stoller’s previously filed motion to dismiss.5 Moreover, if plaintiff’s motion is in

reference to plaintiff’s recently filed pleadings, on June 14, 2009, this Court entered an

Order denying plaintiff’s motion for judicial notice, motion for default judgment and

motion to amend.6 Absent additional information from defendant as to the substance of

his motion, the courts’ prior rulings appear to moot the pending matter.

Thus, given both the amorphous nature of the motion and the previous rulings

issued by both Judge Waddoups and this court, the court hereby denies defendant’s

motion to dismiss.

3Docket Number 76. Defendant Stoller’s Motion To Strike Plaintiff’s Pleadings;

Points And Authorities.

4Docket No. 35.

5Docket No. 20.

6Docket No. 75.

2

DATED this 11 day of August, 2009.

BY THE COURT:

______________________

Brooke C. Wells

United States Magistrate Judge

3--
GUILT-LESS NESS, JOY YES-NESS, FREEDOM!!!!!!

GUILT-LESS NESS, JOY YES-NESS, FREEDOM!!!!!!

2009-08-15T11:40:00.000-07:00

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DIVISION, DISTRICT OF UTAH

_____________________________________________________________________

SOPHIA STEWART,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MICHAEL T. STOLLER, JONATHAN

LUBELL, DEAN WEBB, GARY BROWN

and JOHN DOES I through X,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

Civil No. 2:07-cv-00552

ORDER & RULING

JUDGE CLARK WADDOUPS

MAGISTRATE JUDGE BROOKE C.

WELLS

_____________________________________________________________________

On July 2, 2009, Defendant Michael Stoller filed his Motion To Strike Plaintiff’s

Pleadings 1 In response, Plaintiff Sophia Stewart filed an objection and response to the

motion.2 Upon review of the pending motion, the Court now rules as stated herein and

denies defendant’s Motion To Strike.

1Initially, it appears that Mr. Stoller’s motion was actually filed as part of

defendant’s affidavit in opposition to plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint. See,

Docket Number 74. However, at the request of the court clerk’s office, Mr. Stoller filed

his motion to strike separate from his affidavit. Docket Number 76.

2Docket Number 78 and 79. Pleading entitled “Objection And Response To

Jonathan Lubell, Gary Brown, Dean Webb, and Michael Stoller’s Objection To Motions

And Memorandums For Default Of Judgment And Motion To Strike.” See also, Docket

Number 82 pleading entitled “Objection To Defendant Michael T. Stoller’s Motion To

Strike Plaintiff’s Pleadings; Points And Authorities.”

In his pending motion, Mr. Stoller addresses plaintiff’s failure to follow rules and

procedures, ultimately requesting that this Court “strike the sham pleadings filed by the

Plaintiff.”3 Defendant’s motion, however, is unclear as to which of plaintiff’s pleadings

he seeks to strike. Specifically, the Court is uncertain whether Mr. Stoller’s motion

seeks to strike all of plaintiff’s pleadings, those pleading’s most recently filed, or is in

fact a motion to dismiss the entire action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(b)(6).

If Mr. Stoller’s motion is characterized as a motion to dismiss, on August 28,

2008, Judge Waddoups issued a Memorandum Decision and Order 4 denying Mr.

Stoller’s previously filed motion to dismiss.5 Moreover, if plaintiff’s motion is in

reference to plaintiff’s recently filed pleadings, on June 14, 2009, this Court entered an

Order denying plaintiff’s motion for judicial notice, motion for default judgment and

motion to amend.6 Absent additional information from defendant as to the substance of

his motion, the courts’ prior rulings appear to moot the pending matter.

Thus, given both the amorphous nature of the motion and the previous rulings

issued by both Judge Waddoups and this court, the court hereby denies defendant’s

motion to dismiss.

3Docket Number 76. Defendant Stoller’s Motion To Strike Plaintiff’s Pleadings;

Points And Authorities.

4Docket No. 35.

5Docket No. 20.

6Docket No. 75.

2

DATED this 11 day of August, 2009.

BY THE COURT:

______________________

Brooke C. Wells

United States Magistrate Judge

3--
GUILT-LESS NESS, JOY YES-NESS, FREEDOM!!!!!!

SOPHIA STEWART OBJECTION AND RESPONSE

2009-07-22T14:44:00.000-07:00

SOPHIA STEWART
P.O. BOX 31725
LAS VEGAS, NV 89173

IN PROPRIA PERSONA
IN THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT, STATE OF UTAH

SOPHIA STEWART,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL T. STOLLER, JONATHAN LUBELL, DEAN WEBB, GARY BROWN and JOHN DOES I through X, individuals whose identities are not yet known,

Defendants.
SOPHIA STEWART OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO JONATHAN LUBELL, GARY BROWN, DEAN WEBB, AND MICHAEL STOLLER’S OBJECTION TO MOTIONS AND MEMORANDUMS FOR DEFAULT OF JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO STRIKE

Case No. 2:07cv00552
MAGISTRATE BRUCE C. WELLS

COMES NOW Plaintiff, Sophia Stewart (“Stewart”) bringing forth this “Objection and Response” To Defendants’ Jonathan Lubell, Dean Webb, Gary Brown, and Michael Stoller’s Opposition to Motions and Memorandums for Default of Judgment, and Objection for Motion To Strike Pleadings. The Defendants have committed “predicate acts’ of Fraud upon the court via mail and wire, while “Impugning” the “Integrity” of the Court.
The padded bills alone are sufficient to disbar all of the defendants, and the Court in examination of the “Perjury,” “Slanderous,” “Libel” statements, and Fraud, should issue an “Order” rendering “Default of Judgment,” and “Contempt of Court” for said Criminal Offenses and Intimidation of Stewart’s Civil and Constitutional Rights. It is “Gross Miscarriage of Justice” how said Defendants have been allowed to commit Perjury with impunity, while submitting Fraudulent, Slanderous and Libel Statements in utter “Contempt of the Federal Court System” as the Defendants’ “Willfully” violated Stewart’s Due Process, Equal Protection, and Rights to a Fair Trial availed by the her U.S. Constitutional and Civil Rights which have been trampled upon in this case. In addition, the Defendants being officers of the court have subverted the “Due Administration of Justice and Government Business,” due to discrimination based on “Gender and Race” because Stewart is an African American female compared to “Similar Situated” Jews and/or Whites as the Court System was utilized as an “Extortion Arena.” (Exh. T, Terminator DVD); (Exh. T2, Terminator II); (Exh. T3, Terminator (Exh. M, Matrix DVD); (Exh. M2, Matrix Reloaded,); (Exh. M3, The Matrix Revolution DVD); (Exh. M4, Matrix DVD)
Stoller, Brown, Webb, and Lubell received nearly $50,000.00 dollars from Stewart, and the Defendants “Willfully” in a “Premeditated Fraudulent Scheme” set-out to “Under Prepare” and “Ignore” the “Exculpatory Probative Evidence” on the “Issue of Guilt” against James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, Hemdale Films, Pacific Western Productions, Carolco Pictures, Larry Wachowski and Andy Wachowski; thus, said Defendants must be held accountable for violations of Fraud, Conspiracy to commit perjury upon the court, Civil and Constitutional violations of law pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 241 against Stewart as a member of the Minority Community. The Plaintiff asserts Lubell, Brown, Webb, and Stoller in a “Premeditated Diabolical Scheme” “Operated in Consort” to conceal from the U.S. District Court the establishment of “Access” to The Third Eye, six page movie treatment and the 45 page manuscript, as said Defendants intentionally “Cut Out” the “Operative Claims” and/or with “Malice” drafted an amended complaint intentionally “Riddled” with “Tortfeasor Errors” that specifically failed to state claims or liability against “Pacific Western Production” as the conduit of the “Constructive Trust.” The Defendants with “Malice” set out to “Under Prepare” and “Ignore” obvious facts and/or shelf “Probative Evidence” on the issue of guilt by concealing the actual six film DVDs to affirm “Access, Direct Copying Verbatim, and Substantial Similarity” to Stewart six page movie treatment, including but not limited to the 45 page manuscript of “The Third Eye.” Lubell was paid $1500 dollar to go to Washington to the U.S. Copyright Office and “Expedite the Fraudulent Copyrights filed by James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, Pacific Western Productions, Larry Wachowski and Andy Wachowksi and failed to carry out basic and/or any form of “legitimate” legal services as cited by the obvious fraudulent statements listed below with receipts. (Exhs. 130, 131, Contract by Bruce Isaac, dated 2007)
“J. Cameron “Assigned” to “Pacific Western Productions and Pacific Western Productions assigned to Hemdale Film…” (Exh. 11); (Exh. B, “The Third Eye, 45 Page Manuscript)
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT “PERJURY” / PREMEDIATED FRAUDLENT SCHEME UPON THE COURT
Jonathan Lubell:
“Similarly, Affiant had no “Knowledge” or “Information” of “Pacific Western Article of Incorporation.” (Docket 72, pg. 5, Lubell Memorandum in Opposition Regarding the Motion For Judicial Notice); (Exhs. 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, Notice of Deposition of Cora Lee, dated March 25, 2005 and “Signed by Lubell, Stoller, Brown, and Webb); (Exh. A, Sophia Stewart Civil Complaint in the United State District Court of California, dated); (Exh. , Affidavit from Cora Lee with Jonathan Lubell’s name on the front)
“Affiant had no knowledge of or participation in any of the events or subjects referred to by Stewart in the paragraph.”( Docket 72, pg. 5)
“Affiant is the undeniable fact that Affiant had no “knowledge,” communications, agreements, negotiations, “Involvement” or “Any other relationship” with “Pacific Western Productions” or it’s representatives.” (Docket 72, pg. 7); (Exh. 11,12);
“Affiant was not involved in drafting any complaint against “Pacific Western Productions” or in considering the making of such claim. There is “no evidence” that Stewart “said anything about making such a claim” or the “failure to make such a claim.” More over, she produces not a scintilla of evidence that affiant and the three other lawyers were involved in a “Premeditated Fraudulent Scheme” when they drafted the Amended Complaint. (Docket 72, pg. 10); (Exh. A, Stewart’s Civil Complaint dated)
“Affiant has no knowledge or information regarding “Assignments” (“Emphasis Added”) or “Conspiracies” which Stewart puts in her Affidavit.” (Docket 72, pg. 11) ; (Exh. 11)
“Affiant has no knowledge of concealment from the Court of the February 15, 1994 copyright.” (Docket 72, pg. 15)
The first minute and 45 seconds of the first film produced by Pacific Western Productions, Inc. began with video dialogue that reads on her treatment, but appears nowhere in the screenplays of James Cameron from July of 1982 through February 3, 1984 when its written version was registered under Pau-584-564. The evidence that counters these representations was in the first minute and 45 seconds. The court sanctioned Petitioner for not putting forth evidence of infringement. Yet, the evidence was in the DVDs, the script, the draft, and the work product, in possession of Plaintiff’s Counsel and “obstructed and/or sitting” somewhere on the “Shelf” next to “Purchase Receipts." Neither James Cameron nor Hurd claimed authorship of that subject matter in the production.” (Exhs. 130, 131)
CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE / INTRINSIC FRAUD
“The liability of the directors of the corporation for monetary damages shall be eliminated.” (Exhs. 13, 14, 14.1, 14.3, 14.4, 14.5, Power of Attorney/Gagged Order/Concealment Judge Margaret M. Morrow/Fraudulent Concealment of Constructive Trust)
CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE / INTRINSIC FRAUD / PERJURY
“Affiant has “no knowledge of or participation” in any attempt to “conceal evidence” or “dupe” Judge Morrow. (Docket 72, pg. 6, Line K); (Exhs. 130, 131)
CONSPIRACY TO INTERFERE WITH GOVERNMENT DUTIES
“I have no ongoing inconsistent agreements with any other persons other than Phil Banks for this purpose. Phil Banks has agreed not to “Inform” (“Emphasis Added”) Judge Margaret Morrow of the “Subject Matter” (“Emphasis Added”) of his findings should the parties pay the amount previously offered which was authorized by me.” (Exhs. 14.6, 14.7, 14.8; Bruce Isaac Contract);
“CONSPIRACY” TO COMMITT PERJURY / MAJOR FRAUD
UPON THE COURT
Gary Brown:
“Brown denies that “Any Attorney” prevented Ms. Stewart from presenting her evidence and particularly denies that Brown committed malpractice.” (Docket. 39, Brown’s Answer to Complaint, Line 25, Sept. 23, 2008)
“Brown denies that he canceled Ms. Stewart's deposition and is not informed that “Anyone else Canceled” it and so must deny all of the allegation.” (Docket. , Line 46, Gary Brown Answer to Complaint dated July 30, 2007); (Exhs. 142, 143, Bruce Isaac dated March 24, 2005)
Jonathan Lubell:
“Affiant had not entered into any conspiracy with other attorneys for any purpose, including concealing information from Judge Morrow.” (Docket 72, pg. 5, Lubell Memorandum in Opposition Regarding the Motion For Judicial Notice) ; (Exhs. 130, 131)

PERJURY UPON THE COURT/ INTRINSIC FRAUD / INTERFERENCE WITH GOVERNMENT DUTIES
Gary Brown:
“I conferred with Jonathan Lubell. He is not able to be here for the deposition of Sophia Stewart on February 22, 2005, and is the “One” to prepare her. We suggest that the “discovery be postponed” until after the hearing on March 21, 2005” (Exhs. 29)
“With respect to your complaint that the attorneys failed to respond to the discovery requests, the attorneys stated that Messrs. Lubell, and Webb handled the discovery. Mr. Brown stated that he was “removed from your case on or about May 18, 2008, due to his health problems,” and that your complete file was turned over to Mr. Stoller. Mr. Stoller stated that, by the time he joined your case, prior counsel had already addressed the discovery matter.” (Exh. 50, 51, California Bar Association Letter, October 28, 2008); (Exh. 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, Declaration David H. Boren, dated March 28, 2005); (Exh. 170 Reporters Transcript); (Exhs. 175, 176, 177, P.O. Box 165153, Salt Lake City Utah 84116 Padded Bill dated “July 31, 2004”)

FRAUD / IMPEACHED TESTIMONY

“Ms. Stewart pretends to be a resident of Utah…. “That is where we “Always” contacted her. It was always my understanding that Ms. Stewart had immigrated from Utah to Nevada.” (Docket 73, Gary Brown Opposition, Pg. 5); ((Exhs. 175, 176, 177, P.O. Box 165153, Salt Lake City Utah 84116 Padded Bill dated “July 31, 2004”)

CONPSPIRACY TO COMMITT PERJURY UPON THE COURT

“On the road again, we are on the road again ...” (dated July 16, 2004, 11:14 PM Memo From Gary Brown to Jonathan Lubell); (Exhs. 180, 181, Letter from Lubell to Brown, dated “Feb. 22, 2005”)

In the process of Stoller blaming Webb and Brown, and Brown and Webb blaming Stoller, while Lubell erroneously denies “involvement” and/or “responsibilities of the other three, the Defendants have affectively affirmed “Intrinsic Fraud” by their efforts to have collected nearly $50,000 dollars and not performed “Any” legitimate legal service.”

INTRINSIC FRAUD UPON THE COURT IN VIOLATION
OF INDUSTRIAL ESPIONAGE ACT

“Affiant was not involved in the issue of whether the six films should have been lodged in the Court.” ((Docket 72, pg. 12)

W.B. Attorney David Boren:

“Therefore, both Lubell and Brown “Unilaterally” cancelled Ms. Stewart’s deposition one business day before it was scheduled to take place.” (Exhs. 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, Declaration David H. Boren, dated March 28, 2005)

“On Monday, February 21, 2005, (President Day), Bruce Isaacs received a call from an associate of Ms. Stewart, who stated that he was calling on behalf of Ms. Stewart. The associate (Lawyer) left a VOICEMAIL MESSAGE (“Emphasis Added) stating that Ms. Stewart was “unsure whether her deposition was going forward” and she was “unsure whether she should BOARD AN AIRPLANE (“Emphasis Added”) and FLY to Los Angeles to attend her DEPOSITION.” “The associate asked that Bruce call him to let him know whether Ms. Stewart should board and Airplane to fly to Los Angeles for her Deposition. This phone message showed that Ms. Stewart was “Indeed Available” to attend her deposition on February 22, 2005.” “Therefore, we were “Mystified” why Jonathan and Gary “Unilaterally Cancelled” Ms. Stewart’s “Deposition” when she was “Clearly Available” to be “Deposed.” (Exhs. Declaration of David H. Boren, pg. 7, dated March 28, 2005) (Exhs. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, Letter, March 18, 2005, pg. 3, lines 3-11); (Exh. 29, Gary Brown Dep. Cancellation, dated Feb. 18, 2005);

“Bruce and I called Stoller back at 4:30 PM to find out why we had not received the “Production of Documents” which were promised to be delivered that day, as well as, the other discovery responses.”

PREMEDIATED MAJOR FRAUD SCHEME / PERJURY / CONSPIRACY
AGAINST CIVIL &
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS / 18 U.S.C. 241
Gary Brown:

“And I’m happy to also voice the fact, that “I haven’t seen” (“Emphasis Added”) the “Terminator” or “Matrix” movies. They are sitting on my “Shelf” (“Emphasis Added”) at home for me to “View.” (Exhs. 190, 191, Reporter’s Transcript Proceedings “Sept. 27, 2004”)

Jonathan Lubell:
“With reference to the actual movie source that was not submitted to the court, Affiant was “Never Involved” (“Emphasis Added”) with “that issue” (“Emphasis Added”) and “Never Discussed” with anyone at that time.” In fact, at the time that the movies would have been submitted, “Affiant no longer represented as a month before in “May of 1995,” she terminated his services.” (Docket 72, pgs. 10-11)

“Affiant has no relationship, knowledge or information regarding the alleged event. The response to the alleged concealment of evidence from Judge Morrow, is set forth is supra, II G.” (Docket 72, pg. 12)

“Affiant had not aided and abetted in the theft of the “Bereaved parties money.” (Docket 72, pg. 14)

“The Court has precluded Stewart from offering “testimony” in opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Thus, none of the evidence that she has submitted maybe considered.” (Exh. 194, Pg. 17, Lines 5-7, Judge Morrow, Court Order); (Exhs. 195, 196, Judge Morrow Crt. Order, Pg. 23, Lines 20 – 22); (Exh. 197, Judge Morrow Crt. Order, Pg. 32, Lines 22-23)
CONCLUSION
The Defendants’ Webb, Brown, Stoller, and Lubell, have not diligently defended their case for more than two years. In April of 2009, the Plaintiff filed her Default of Judgment, and to date said Defendants’ have “Unmercifully” committed Perjury upon the Court. For this reason, the Plaintiff is graciously requesting that the Court Issue an Order granting Default of Judgment.
I declare under the penalty of perjury that all of the foregoing are true and correct.
DATED: July 13, 2009 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

____________________________

CERTICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that on this __13____ day of July 2009, I caused to be mailed via first class U.S. mail, postage pre-paid, a true and correct copy of the foregoing S. Stewart Objection & Response + Memorandum in Support + Declaration in Support of Objection + Exhs. A, B, T, T2, T3, M, M2, M3, M4, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 190, 191, 194, 197, 200, 209, 205, 206, 215, 216, 217, 218, 225230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, to the following:

Jonathan Lubell
1325 6th Ave.
28th Floor
N.Y., New York 10019
212-763-8550

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Michael Stroller
Attorney at Law
9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500
Beverly Hills, California 90212

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Gary Brown
One Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 301
Pasadena, California 91105

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Kathleen Liuzzi
DUNN & DUNN, PC
505 East 200 South 2nd Floor
Salt Lake City, Utah 84102

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
c/o Court Clerk
United States District Court,
District of Utah.
350 South Main Street, Room 150,
Salt Lake City, UT 84101.
(1 Original & 2 Copies)

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Utah that the above is true and correct.
Respectfully Submitted,

Sophia Stewart

SOPHIA STEWART’S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTION

2009-07-22T14:39:00.000-07:00

SOPHIA STEWART
P.O. BOX 31725
LAS VEGAS, NV 89173

IN PROPRIA PERSONA
IN THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT, STATE OF UTAH

SOPHIA STEWART,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL T. STOLLER, JONATHAN LUBELL, DEAN WEBB, GARY BROWN and JOHN DOES I through X, individuals whose identities are not yet known,

Defendants.
SOPHIA STEWART’S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO JONATHAN LUBELL, GARY BROWN, DEAN WEBB, AND MICHAEL STOLLER’S OBJECTION TO MOTIONS AND MEMORANDUMS FOR DEFAULT OF JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO STRIKE

Case No. 2:07cv00552
MAGISTRATE BRUCE C. WELLS

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

“Because Stewart has not submitted copies of the Matrix films in opposition to the defendants motion for summary judgment, these comparisons can not be made.” (Exh. 198, Judge Morrow Court Order, pg. 49, lines 1-2); (Exhs. 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, Copyright Infringement /Comparisons by Jonathan Lubell Memo to Dean Webb, dated Oct. 12, 2004)

Brown, Webb, Stoller, and Lubell, “Fraudulently” Billed Stewart $284.50 dollars to acquire copies of the DVDs, CD, movies and musical soundtracks from local stores; in order, to submit said evidence into Court record. How can Brown, Webb, Stoller, and Lubell fraudulently collect nearly $50,000 dollars in legal fees, and expenses and thereafter “Admit” in a Federal Court to not have performed legitimate legal services? (Exh. T, Terminator DVD); (Exh. T2, Terminator II); (Exh. T3, Terminator (Exh. M, Matrix DVD); (Exh. M2, Matrix Reloaded,); (Exh. M3, The Matrix Revolution DVD); (Exh. B, “The Third Eye, 45 Page Manuscript); (Exh. 39, Padded Bill, “Best Buy, DVDs of Matrix Terminator “for Court filing of Mtn. to Reconsider, dated June 22, 2005”); (17 U.S.C. 106, 17 U.S.C. 501, 17 U.S.C. 506, and 18 U.S.C. 1001)

“By failing to proffer the alleged infringing films for the comparison with her work, and by failing to adduce any other admissible evidence of striking similarity she has failed to satisfy that burden.” (Exh. 198, Judge Margaret Morrow Court Order, Pg. 49, lines 5-7)

FRAUD / IMPEACHED TESTIMONY
Gary Brown:
“Further, she “Never Paid” me “Anything.” (“Emphasis Added”); (Docket 73, Gary Brown Opposition to Application For Default of Judgment and Request for Judicial Notice, pg. 2); (Exhs. 44.1, 44.2, Padded Bill Gary Brown)

“Our “Main Job” (“Emphasis Added”) now is “carefully assembling evidence” (“Emphasis Added”) and helping you prepare for a deposition.” (Exh. 225, Brown Memo, dated “October 30, 2004”)

“I don’t want us to become “Discredited” (“Emphasis Added”) by an “Unauthorized Move.” (Exh. 225)

FRAUD, FRAUD AND MORE FRAUD

“Thanks for sending money.” (“Emphasis Added”); (Exh. 225, Brown Memo, dated “October 30, 2004”)

“AFFRIMATION OF ACCESS”

“Whether the Matrix film was written “before” (“Emphasis Added”) or after October 26, 1993, has no relevance to the issues in the case, however, as Wachowski “Admits” (“Emphasis Added”) that the film was written in 1993, “after Stewart’s purported submission of the “Third Eye” to “Him,” and his brother in 1986.” (Exh. 198 , Judge Morrow Court Order, pg. 49, lines 25-27); (Caperton v. Massey, 08-22)

TERRORIST THREATS AGAINST LEGAL COUNSEL
18 U.S.C. 241 / RICO
Gary Brown:
“I also assure the Court that I have never “Intended” (“Emphasis Added”) to bother Mr. McBride about his representation of Ms. Stewart.” (Exh. 121)

SUBVERTING GOVERNMENT BUSINESS /ASCENTING IN CONSORT TO FRAUDULENT “EXTORTION LIENS” WITH CALCULATED FORETHOUGHT TO SCARE OFF ATTORNEYS

Jonathan Lubell:

“Affiant has not been involved in any activity which would have compromised or scared off attorneys.” (Docket 72, pg. 13); (Exhs. 21, 22, 63, 115, 116) (Uwe Geertz, Steven Fishman vs. Johnathan Lubell, Margaret M. Morrow, Judge, No. BC 122 468, dated 25 Dec 1995, Super. Crt., Cal., Cty., LA) - “Malicious Prosecution Complaint / Deprivation of Right to Counsel”)

PERJURY UPON THE COURT
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT INTRINSIC FRAUD

Jonathan Lubell:
“Here is a draft of approximately half of our Initial Disclosure required under Rule 26(a), F.R.C.P. The full draft should be completed within 2 days! Your comments would be appreciated.”
“Gary, as we discussed, please send a letter to defendants' attorneys complaining about their “failure to “describe” the subjects of the information that their “witnesses” have.” (Exhs. 200, 201, Email Acknowledging Judy Neulak dated November 9, 2004)
INTRINSIC FRAUDULENT / PREPARATION OF FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS TO JUDICIARY
“Finally, basic to Stewart’s claim against Affiant is the undeniable fact that Affiant had no “knowledge,” communications, agreements, negotiations, “involvement” or any “other relationship” with “Pacific Western Production” or its representatives. Whatever Stewart may imagine, Pacific Western Production was doing, Affiant was not involved.” (Exh. 11); ((Docket 72, pg )
How can it be justified that the Defendants Fraudulently Schemed to collect $50,000 dollars for legal services not performed from Stewart, and now has admitted to a Federal Court “No obligation” “knowledge” “communications,” and specifically “No Involvement” specifically with “Pacific Western Productions?” (Exh. 11); Buchwald v. Paramount Pictures, 1990 WL 357611 (Cal. Superior); (Dennis v. Sparks, 449 U.S. 24 (1980); (U.S. v. Cross, 128 F.3rd 148 (3rd Cir. 1997)); Caperton v. Massey, 08-22, The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871)
INTRINSIC FRAUDULENT STATEMENTS / PERJURY STATEMENTS/IMPEACHED TESTIMONY
Response: “Affiant was not involved in drafting any complaint or claim against Pacific Western Production or in “Considering” the “Making” of any such claim. During the period when Affiant was attorney for Stewart, he never “Heard” or “Received” any “Statement, Comment, or Written Communication” from Stewart referring to making any claim against Pacific Western Production. There is no evidence that Stewart said anything about making such a claim or failure to make a claim. (Docket 72, pg. 10); (Exh. 11); (Exh. A, Stewart Civil Complaint)
The Defendants’ rendered Stewart equivalent to Dred Scott, in that she had no “Inalienable Rights” of “Ownership” in which a White man was bound to respect. The Defendants adopted President Andrew Johnson’s April 1866 “Black Codes” that obstructed her ability as an African-American from testifying against the Jewish members and gentile White men and women for “Theft” of Stewart’s Terminator and Matrix copyrights. Stewart in accordance with Judge Morrow asserts and affirms the Defendants Brown, Webb, Stoller, and Lubell having received nearly $50,000 dollars thereafter “Maliciously” drafted an “Inconsistent Complaint” that was designed to omit “significant” evidence on the issue of guilt against James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, and Pacific Western Productions, Larry Wachowski and Andy Wachowski thus amounting to “Intrinsic Fraud” and Constitutional and Civil Rights violations:
PREPARATION OF FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS
“Stewart’s admissions conclusively establish that Cameron, Hurd, “Nor Any Other Person Connected with the Terminator” 1, 2, and 3 had access to the six page treatment or the 47 page Third Eye manuscript.” (Exh. 194, Judge Morrow Order, Pg. 17, Lines 15-16)
“Stewart is barred…. her admission that Fox had no role in creating, writing, and developing or producing Terminator 1, 2, and 3.” (Exh. Judge Morrow Order, pg. 19, lines 10-12)
MICHAEL T. STOLLER “UNSIGNED” DECLARATION JUNE 27, 2005 HIDDEN HILLS:

“I did not initially file an opposition to Defendants Motions For Summary Judgment on behalf of Plaintiff in light of the lack of discovery in the automatic admission conclusively established against her cause. After the court denied plaintiff’s motion for relief under the Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 60 (b), and granted Plaintiff three days, in which to file oppositions to the two motions for Summary Judgment, “I did not lodge the infringing films, as I believed that it was part of “Defendant’s Initial Burden” of establishing that there was no genuine issue as to independent creation and substantial similarity.” (Exh. 205, 206, Unsigned Declaration of Michael T. Stoller)

Objectively speaking, the fraud is staggering in this case, in terms of the scope of duration, and the “degree of betrayal,” as well as, "the breach of trust is massive." Jonathan Lubell, Dean Webb, Gary Brown, and Michael Stoller went far beyond the "garden variety of negligence" and crossed the line into willful misrepresentations amounting to grounds for Perjury, Contempt of Court, 18 USC §241 - Conspiracy against Civil Rights, and to Defraud by Interference with Government Functions, 18 USC §242 - Deprivation of Civil Rights under the color of law. The tone of “Detestation” by the Ivy league Harvard, New York University, Southwestern Univ., UCLA seasoned attorneys / “Scientologists” to proclaim the Utah Courts lacks “Authority” over their Fraudulent conduct reflects a “False” sense of “Privilege” to be above the law. Plaintiff objects to Brown’s Perjury Affidavit because it bares no “legitimate” signature. The Defendants crimes are "extraordinarily evil" and it was “not merely a bloodless crime” that takes place on paper but one that subverted “All” levels of Authority and Power of the Federal Branch of Government with utter “Disdain” and “Contempt” for U.S. Federal Court Justice System. (Exhs. 175, 176, 177, P.O. Box 165153, Salt Lake City Utah 84116 Padded Bill dated “July 31, 2004”); (Exhs. 110, 111, 113, 115 Idaho Bans Florida Foreclosure Rescue, Michael T. Stoller)
Plaintiff asserts Defendants Stoller, Brown, Webb, and Lubell breached their duties with fraudulent intent to fail to conduct discovery of any sort, failed in their legal duties to enter into court record the Terminator and Matrix six movies, including the federally protected intangible copyrights on the issue of guilt, failed in their legal duties to serve the Defendants with Interrogatories, misrepresented the true nature of judicial proceedings, “Prepared” and submitted “Fraudulent Admissions” on behalf of their client to a Federal Court System which resulted in “Baring/Gagging” her, while intentionally and willfully concealing the same, and providing false and misleading advice to their client in an attempt to convenience her not to amend her complaint in violation of 18 U.S.C. §24, and failed to file an “Appeal” on the Court matter. The defendants conduct was both “but for” and a proximate cause of an “egregious financial injury” to Stewart for the value of her copyrights for the Terminator and the Matrix in the amount of $7 billion dollar, plus $3.5 billion in “Punitive Damages” for a total value of $10.5 billion dollars. Based upon Defendants Stoller, Brown, Webb, and Lubell operating in consort to obstruct the 45 page manuscript from being entered into evidence, and the DVDs six movies of Terminator and Matrix from being entered into Court evidence, while said movies were actually sitting on the “Shelf” of Brown’ next to nearly $50,000 dollars worth of receipts, Plaintiff Stewart graciously requests the court grant her Default of Judgment.

I declare under penalty of perjury that all of the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: July 13, 2009
Respectfully Submitted,

______________________________

CERTICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that on this __13____ day of July 2009, I caused to be mailed via first class U.S. mail, postage pre-paid, a true and correct copy of the foregoing S. Stewart Objection & Response + Memorandum in Support + Declaration in Support of Objection + Exhs. A, B, T, T2, T3, M, M2, M3, M4, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 190, 191, 194, 197, 200, 201 205, 206, 215, 216, 217, 218, 225 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, to the following:

Jonathan Lubell
1325 6th Ave.
28th Floor
N.Y., New York 10019
212-763-8550

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Michael Stroller
Attorney at Law
9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500
Beverly Hills, California 90212

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Gary Brown
One Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 301
Pasadena, California 91105

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Kathleen Liuzzi
DUNN & DUNN, PC
505 East 200 South 2nd Floor
Salt Lake City, Utah 84102

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
c/o Court Clerk
United States District Court,
District of Utah.
350 South Main Street, Room 150,
Salt Lake City, UT 84101.
(1 Original & 2 Copies)

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Utah that the above is true and correct.
Respectfully Submitted,

Sophia Stewart

AFFIDAVIT OF SOPHIA STEWART IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTION

2009-07-22T14:35:00.000-07:00

SOPHIA STEWART
P.O. Box 31725
Las Vegas, NV 89173

IN PROPRIA PERSONA
IN THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT, STATE OF UTAH
SOPHIA STEWART,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL T. STOLLER, JONATHAN LUBELL, DEAN WEBB, GARY BROWN and JOHN DOES I through X, individuals whose identities are not yet known,

Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT OF SOPHIA STEWART IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO JONATHAN LUBELL, GARY BROWN, DEAN WEBB, AND MICHAEL STOLLER’S OBJECTION TO MOTIONS AND MEMORANDUMS FOR DEFAULT OF JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO STRIKE

Case No. 2:07cv00552
Magistrate John C. Wells

Sophia Stewart declares:
1.I have personal knowledge of the matters set-forth in this Affidavit.
2.The Plaintiff asserts that Defendants’ Lubell, Webb, Brown, and Stoller “Maliciously” in a “Premeditated Diabolical Fraudulent Scheme” operated in “Consort” to “Prepare” and “Submitted” a plethora of “Fraudulent Admissions” on my behalf to the California Federal court without my knowledge and thereafter willfully conspired to conceal the same to circumvent my “Inalienable Rights Of Ownership,” thus constituting “Intrinsic Fraud.” Stoller, Brown, Lubell, and Webb, as well as, Judge Morrow are Church of Scientologist lawyers and should have disclosed their “Conflict of Interests,” “Withdrawn as Counsel,” including “Recusal;” however, said parties chose to secretly conceal this information, as Defendants trampled on my Civil and Constitutional Rights. I did not “Prepare” or “Submit” any of the Fraudulent “Admissions” listed below into the U.S. District Court of California, Case No.: CV-03-2873 MMM (VBXx):
“PREPARATION OF FALSE AND FRAUDULENT EVIDENCE TO JUDICIARY / JUDICIAL LYNCHING”
“Stewart’s admissions establishes that: (1) no person at Fox was involved in any way in creating , writing, developing or producing Terminator 1, 2, and 3; (2) Stewart has no factual basis or evidence to support the allegation that Fox provided Cameron a copy” of the treatment or the 47 – page manuscript; (3) Stewart “ha[s] no factual basis or evidence to support the allegations that Fox provided Hurd a copy” of the treatment or the 47 page manuscript; (4) Stewart “ha[s] no factual basis or evidence to support the contention that Fox provided any person connected with” Terminator 1, 2, and 3 a copy of the treatment or the 47 page manuscript; (5) Cameron did not have access to the treatment or 47 page manuscript; (6) and Hurd did not have access to the treatment or the 47 page manuscript. (Pg. 14, Lines 1 – 7)
CONSPIRACY TO PREPARE FALSE EVIDENCE TO DEFRAUD BY INTERFERENCE WITH GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS
“The admission establish that: (1) no one at Warner Bros. had access to the six page movie treatment or 47 page manuscript prior to creation of Matrix 1; (2) Larry Wachowski and Andy Wachowski did not place an advertisement soliciting works of science fiction in a national magazine; (3) Stewart never submitted the treatment or 47 page manuscript to Larry Wachowski, Andy Wachowski, Silver or Bloom; (4) Larry Wachowski and Andy Wachowski, Silver and Bloom did not have access to the six page movie treatment or the 47 page manuscript prior to the creation of Matrix 1, 2, 3; and (5) Larry and Andy Wachowski independently created Matrix 1, 2, and 3. Stewart also admitted that no one connected with Matrix 1, 2, and 3 had access to the treatment or the 47 page manuscript.” (Pg. 24, Lines 13-19 & Pg. 48, Lines 1 – 2, Judge Morrow Court Order)
CONSPIRACY TO PREPARE FRAUDULENT /FALSE EVIDENCE TO JUDICIARY & JUDICIAL LYNCHING
“Stewart has admitted that Terminator 1is neither striking nor substantially similar to “The Third Eye” that Terminator 2, is neither striking nor similar to “The Third Eye,” and that Terminator 3 is striking nor similar to “The Third Eye. Stewart has also admitted that the protectable expression in “The Third Eye” is not substantially similar to the protectable expression in any of Terminator 1, 2, and 3.” (Pg. 41, Lines 1 – 9, Judge Morrow Court Order)
“Stewart’s admission that the 47 page manuscript is not substantially similar or strikingly similar necessarily encompasses any similarities found in the synopsis .” (Pg. 42, lines 6-7, Judge Morrow Order); (Exh. T, Terminator DVD); (Exh. T2, Terminator II); (Exh. T3, Terminator (Exh. M, Matrix DVD); (Exh. M2, Matrix Reloaded,) (Exh. M3, The Matrix Revolution DVD); (Exh. Total Recall DVD)
“Stewart has also admitted that the protected expression in “The Third Eye” is not substantially similar to the protected expression in any of Terminator 1, 2, and 3. (Exhs. Pg. 41, lines 8 – 9, Order Dismissing Case.)
“Stewart admission that the 47 page manuscript is not substantially or strikingly similar necessarily encompassing any similarities found in the synopsis. Here admissions, therefore, establish that there are no striking similarities between the works. (Exh. Pg. 42, lines 5-8, Order Dismissing Case)
3.Attorney General of Florida brought forth “Indictments” against Michael T. Stoller who is the Owner of Mortgage Assistance Solutions llc, case no. L06-3-1014. [See: Los Angeles Bar Association Complaint number former “Government Federal Post Office worker” - Keith & Danielle Hardesty, 08014737 dated April 13, 2009 – Caused the Homelessness of a “Government Federal Post Office Worker” and his family with 8 children that are now all dispersed and living in a car in Pasadena and across different homes throughout the U.S..]; (http://www.mortgagefraudblog.com/index.php/weblog/permalink/idaho_bans_florida_foreclosure_rescue/);(Colannino v County of L.A., BC413089); (Exhs. 110, 111, Idaho Bans Florida Foreclosure Rescue, Michael T. Stoller) (Exhs. 114, 115) Enclosed herewith, you shall find further misconduct by Dean Browning Webb for a rambling lawsuit. (Exh. 116) Michael Stoller had 72 counts of Mortgage fraud, $2 million dollars in penalties and fees, and he is banned from practicing law in Texas, Florida, and Illinois. The attorney general of Illinoise Lisa Madigan brought indictments against Stoller.
The Conversion of “The Third Eye” into the “The Terminator”
4.I wrote a treatment for a motion picture regarding a post nuclear war fight between man and machine conscious organisms without feelings or empathy and completed it on May 1, 1981. Upon completion of the treatment, I sent the document to the Vice President of Creative Affairs of Twentieth Century Fox, Susan Merzbach before May 6, 1981. On May 12, 1981, just days after it was submitted, Corman’s public relations and marketing assistant, Gale Ann Hurd, a graduate of Stanford University, started Pacific Western Productions, Inc. in California.
5.The only story that was worked on by Pacific Western Productions from May of 1981 through October of 1984 had to do with a post nuclear war fight between man and machines appearing to be as men called cyborgs. Through Fox, New World Productions had access. Through New World Productions, Pacific Western Productions, Inc. had access to my treatment called the “Third Eye”.
6.By virtue of “Access,” the aspect of The Terminator and Matrix that are substantially similar to my copy written work of The Third Eye is the first minute and 45 seconds of the first film produced by Pacific Western Productions, Inc. It began with video dialogue that reads on my screen treatment, The Third Eye, but appears nowhere in the screenplays of James Cameron from July of 1982 through February 3, 1984 when its written version was registered under Pau-584-564.
7.This significant evidence in the screenplay is extraordinarily significant since that it is the first section of film footage produced by Pacific Western Productions.
The police officer answered Kyle Reese
"What day is it?"
“May 12th."
8.It is the day when the Terminator sought to take out Sarah Connor in the film. It is the actual day when Gale Anne Hurd set out to take out all of my intellectual property rights so that their production group would not experience the theater prejudice that had been previously experienced by Roger Corman of New World Productions, Inc. when he made "The Intruder", a film about racial desegregation in the sixties.
9.Racial discrimination by concerted action is a federal offense under 18 U.S.C. 241. The failure to disclose a true Author on a copyright registration is a violation of 17 U.S.C. 201, 18 U.S.C. 1001, and 17 U.S.C. 506. The combination and conspiracy against trade by prior anyone is a federal “Antitrust crime” under 15 U.S.C. 1. You can not overcome a criminal act by taking the copyright of an African American and then trying to impose the Dred Scott decision on me as if I was a pre-civl war slave who had no rights that a White was bound to respect. Dred Scott v. Sanford has been a nullity in the United States at least since the 1868 adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment that gave such persons citizenship. The willful deprivation of my copyright rights is an offense under 18 U.S.C. 241 and 18 U.S.C. 1001.
10.When my work was commercially sold without recognizing my authorship or entitlement to share in the revenue, James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, and Hemdale Films, Pacific Western Productions, Carolco Pictures, Mario F. Kassar, Andrew G. Vajna, Andy Wachowski, Larry Wachowski, and Fox, Inc. knowingly and willfully engaged in copyright infringement within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. 506. The first minute and 45 seconds of the film entitled the "Terminator" actually comes from my May 1, 1981, copy written treatment that was sent to Fox between May 1, 1981 and May 7, 1981. Gale Hurd through Roger Corman of New World Productions, Inc. commenced her company on May 12, 1981 to terminate my intellectual property rights. Substantial similarity is supported under 17 U.S.C. 106, 17 U.S.C. 501, 17 U.S.C. 506, and 18 U.S.C. 1001.
Access and Substantial Similarity Automatically Support a Finding of Infringement
11.In Dezendorf v. Twentieth Century Fox, the court held that the theft of an unpublished work that is then placed in a final commercial work of another without the consent of the prior author is evidence of infringement.
12.The authorship for the registration dated February 3, 1984 under the names of James Cameron and Gale Hurd is a false statement in that they willfully failed to disclose my contribution being the sole author of “The Third Eye,” of which, makes me the only “Author” of “The Terminator” and the “Matrix” movies and sole Owner of the Copyrights.
13.Yes, it is true that neither James Cameron nor Gale Anne Hurd represented in the screenplay registered with the Writer’s Guild in July of 1982 or the final draft submitted to the copyright office in February of 1984 that they authored the language that describes the visual dialogue shown in the first minute and 45 seconds. This visual dialogue shown in the first 1 minute and 45 seconds is hidden in plain sight. If you do not compare the movies with my work, then you would have missed this significant issue. This primary issue would have won me the California judgment. This is the reason why the Defendants operated in consort to obstruct the six films of the “Terminator,” “Matrix,” and six page movie treatment “The Third Eye” from being entered into court evidence. This description is evidence of the intent of the parties to engage in willful copyright infringement within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. 506 (e).
EXT. School yard – Night 2
14.Frame comes to rest on the figure of a naked man kneeling, faced away, in the previously empty yard. He stands slowly. This man is in his late thirties, tall and powerfully built, moving with graceful precision. The first minute and 45 seconds of the film includes visual dialogue that is not written into the first, second, third, fourth, or fifth draft of the screenplay. Actual depiction of the introduction of the Terminator Film does not include the cat, the war scene, or the statement overlay.
15.On April 29, 2005, Motion for Summary Judgment submitted to the Court by Bruce Isaacs, Legal Counsel of the Defendants in the California Court, Case No. CV-03-2873 MMM (VBKx), he did not disclose to the court, nor did Lubell, Webb, Brown, and Stoller disclose the following facts:
1) that the first minute and 45 seconds of the film does not read on the screenplay by Cameron and Hurd;
2) that the first minute and 45 seconds of the film does read on the treatment by Sophia Stewart dated May 1, 1981;
3) that the May 1, 1981 treatment was sent to Fox before May 7, 1981;
4) that the May 1, 1981 treatment was transferred from Fox to Roger Corman of New World Pictures prior to May 9, 1981;
5) that Gale Hurd, Corman's assistant, started Pacific Western Productions on May 12, 1981 while James Cameron was in Italy and did not know about the May 1, 1981 treatment;
6) Cameron was required to play along with Hurd to get the opportunity to write and direct the project based upon Stewart's work product.
7) that the first minute and 45 seconds of the Terminator and Matrix movie introductions reads verbatim upon my treatment The Third Eye, including the characters are conclusive with investigative findings of the FBI.
15. The Defendants knowingly and willfully failed in their legal responsibilities to timely file “Default of Judgment” against Andy and Larry Wachowski, because the Wachowskis never responded to the Summons, and the First Amended Complaint. (Exhs. 215, 216)

16. Dean Webb “Sexually Harassed” me with numerous phone calls. Webb contacted me at “Wee-Hours” of the night inappropriately using explicit “Sexual language.” Right after Judge Morrow’s ruling of the dismissal of the RICO claims without prejudice with leave to amend, Dean Webb immediately abandoned the case after he sabotaged it, and I did not receive any more phone calls:
Dean Webb:
“Here is my picture, taken around 4:00 p.m., this afternoon by my brother Rob=rt. I told you I needed my hair cut, and I “Wetted down my hair” (“Emphasis Added”) and “Pulled off my Glasses!” “Hope your not disappointed.” (“Emphasis Added”) “Next time I'll wear a suit and tie!” (“Emphasis Added”); (Exhs. 217, 218)
17. In light of “Demeaning and Derogatory” comments by Dean Webb, Michael Stoller, Gary Brown, and Jonathan Lubell it would be a “Gross Miscarriage of Justice” for the Court to allow the Defendants to further “Impugn the Integrity of the Court” through willful acts of “Perjury,” “Slander, “Libel,” and “Retaliation.” These are the reasons why, I should be granted Default of Judgment.
PRAYER FOR JUDGMENT
18. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, and each and everyone of them, jointly and severally as follows:
1)Compensatory Damages
2)Recovery of Reasonable Attorney Fees and Costs arising
3)Punitive Damages
4)For such further and other relief as the court deems just and proper
I declare under the penalty of perjury that all of the forgoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

DATED this__13___ day of July, 2009

Submitted,

_____________________________ SOPHIA STEWART

STATE OF _____________ )
):ss
COUNTY OF ___________ )

On the _______ day of Affidavit, July 2009, personally appeared before me Sophia Stewart, the signer of the foregoing Affidavit, who duly acknowledged that he executed the same.
_____________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: _________

CERTICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that on this __13____ day of July 2009, I caused to be mailed via first class U.S. mail, postage pre-paid, a true and correct copy of the foregoing S. Stewart Objection & Response + Memorandum in Support + Declaration in Support of Objection + Exhs. A, B, T, T2, T3, M, M2, M3, M4, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 190, 191, 194, 197, 200, 201 , 205, 206, 215, 216, 217, 218, 225, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243 to the following:

Jonathan Lubell
1325 6th Ave.
28th Floor
N.Y., New York 10019
212-763-8550

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Michael Stroller
Attorney at Law
9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500
Beverly Hills, California 90212

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Gary Brown
One Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 301
Pasadena, California 91105

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other

Kathleen Liuzzi
DUNN & DUNN, PC
505 East 200 South 2nd Floor
Salt Lake City, Utah 84102

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
__X__Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
c/o Court Clerk
United States District Court,
District of Utah.
350 South Main Street, Room 150,
Salt Lake City, UT 84101.
(1 Original & 2 Copies)

__X__U.S. Mail
_____Facsimile
_____Electronic Transmission
_____Hand-delivery
_____Other
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Utah that the above is true and correct.
Respectfully Submitted,

Sophia Stewart

Proof of Fraudulent Copyrights In The "Matrix/Terminator"

2009-04-07T07:59:00.000-07:00

February 25, 2009

David Carson,
Deputy General Counsel
U.S. Copyright Office
101 Independence Ave. S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20559-6000
202-707-8380 (O); 202-707-8366(F)
202-707-6787 (PH) Records Research Certification Section.
202-252-3519(F)

PARTIES:
Larry Wachowski Groucho II Film Partnership Thea Bloom
Andy Wachowski Anarchos Entertainment
James Cameron Susan Merzbach Hemdale Films
Gale Ann Hurd Pacific Western Production Inc. Time Warner Entertainment Co. LP
20th Century Fox Film Corp Warner Bros. Circle of Confusion Limited
Joel Silver Silver Pictures Village Roadshow Productions

REFERENCE: TERMINATOR 4 SALVATION
TERMINATOR TV SERIES – SARAH CONNER CHRONICLES
MATRIX

Fraudulent Copyrights: James Cameron Gale: PAu 584-564 [V2080P249] (1984)
Matrix / By Andy Wachowski & Larry Wachowski: [V2998P506] (1994)

Registration Number
Card Catalog Office Rm. #402 Registration

Violations: 18 USC §241 Conspiracy against Civil Rights, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245 Federally Protected Activities, 18 U.S.C. 1513 (b) (1), 18 U.S.C. 1513 (a)(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. 1641 and 18 U.S.C. 1961(1);, 18 U.S.C. Section § 1832(a)(5) (conspiracy to steal federally protected intangible copyrights, Fraud, Conspiracy to Obstruction Justice, Penal Codes 8, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21a, 27, 30, 31, 32, 33, 95 Improper Influence Referee, 118, 118a, 119, 121, 123, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 133, 134 Preparing False Evidence, 135 Conceals Evidence, 136, 136.1, 137, 138 Bribe, 140 Fraudulent Liens, 182 Criminal Conspiracy, 184, 186 California Profits of Organized Crime, 186.9 Money Laundering, 186.10 Punishment Money Laundering, 186.11, 186.2(a)(6)(13)(20)(21)(22)(b)(1)(2)(3), 484 Theft, 487 Grand Theft, 489 Punishment Grand Theft, 496 Receiving or Concealing Stolen Property, 422.6 et seq. - Civil Rights Injury, 422.7 Intimidation Civil Rights, 422.9 Punishment for Civil Rights Violations, 470 Falsification of Records, 499c(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(b)(1)(2)(3)(4) Trade Secrets Theft; Copying Information without consent, 503, 504 Fraudulent Appropriation, 508 Fraudulent Appropriation, 518 Extortion, 519 Threats, 520 Punishment Extortion, 521 Extortion, 523 Fraudulent Liens, 524, 531 Fraudulent Conveyance, 531a Fraudulent Execution, 532 Obtaining Property under False Pretenses, 532a False Statements to Agency, 653f(a)(b)(c)(e) Solicitation of a Crime, 679.01, 778a, 786 Theft of Property Taken into Another Jurisdiction, 792, 1179 New Trial, 1180, 1181, 13870 Race Crime, Felony Copyright Act of 1992 expanded under §17 U.S.C. 506, and 18 USC §2319, Industrial Espionage Act, 15 U.S.C. 1, 17 U.S.C. 106, 17 U.S.C. 409 (d), 18 U.S.C. §1001 (a) (1), 18 U.S.C. 1341, 18 U.S.C. 1513, 18 U.S.C. Section 152 and 17 U.S.C. 506 (e), 18 USC §2319

Stewart’s Copyrights: (TXu 117-610) (1981-1983);( TXu-154-281”) (1984)

FBI Case Assigned Number Appeal 02-0180; FBI #: FOIPA Number: 1125381-000

Dear General Counsel:

Sophia Stewart, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

I have requested that the F.B.I. forward to your attention a copy of the Investigative findings of “THEFT” (“Emphasis Added”) constituting “Felony Copyright Infringement” for Fraudulent Copyright Filings [V2080P249; V2998P506] by James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, Larry Wachowski, Andy Wachowski, Fox, Warner Bros., Hemdale Films, Susan Merzbach, Pacific Western Production Inc, Anarchos Entertainment and benefactors Joel Silver, and Thea Bloom, who were “Unjustly Enriched” from the pilfering of my work [TXu 117-610]; [TXu-154-281], in violation of 17 U.S.C. 408 (d) and 18 U.S.C. 1001, Felony Copyright Act of 1992 expanded under §17 U.S.C. 506, and 18 USC §2319, and Industrial Espionage Act. Enclosed, herewith you shall find evidence of Bruce Isaac on behalf of Warner Bros. attempting to enter into an unholy agreement with my former legal counsel that was designed to steal my copyrights. (Exhs. 14.6, 14.7, 14.8)

You are hereby “COMPELLED” upon receipt of F.B.I. investigative findings of THEFT, FRAUD and MISREPRESENTATION to terminate, nullify, void and/or render inoperative any and all Fraudulent Copyrights [V2080P249; V2998P506], and you are “ORDERED” to remove any and all related electronic internet database filings by James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, Larry Wachowski, Andy Wachowski, Fox, Joel Silver, Warner Bros., Hemdale Films, Pacific Western Production Inc, and Anarchos Entertainment, including but not limited to any other persons, people, and companies. You are to “CEASE AND DESIST” from any further “Willful Acts of Acquiescence,” “Collusion” and/or “Aiding and Abetting” the above perpetrators with carrying out the commission of “THEFT, Fraud, Felony Copyright Infringement, and Industrial Espionage Act” for the unlawful use of the “Terminator 4 - Salvation,” movie and the “Terminator TV Series Sarah Conner Chronicles,” and the “Matrix.”

Antonio Meucci (Florence, April 13, 1808 – October 18, 1889) was an Italian inventor who developed a form of voice communication apparatus in 1857. On January 13, 1887, the Government of the United States moved to annul the patent issued to 'Alexander Graham Bell on the grounds of “Fraud and Misrepresentation,” a case that the Supreme Court found viable and remanded for trial. Whereas, Meucci died in October 1889, the Bell patent expired in January 1893, and the case was discontinued as moot without ever reaching the underlying issue of the true inventor of the telephone entitled to the patent; and, Whereas if Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell. (See: http://www.chezbasilio.it/us_bell.htm)

In my case, the Register of Copyrights was authorized to request the Executive Branch of government to investigate the circumstances to make sure that the government is not providing an unlawful monopoly pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1 because the facts to support exclusive use under 17 U.S.C. 106 are factually inaccurate. Since, the Perpetrators registrations are based upon “Fraudulent and Materially False Facts” that were called into question by the Copyright office, it had the authority to request that the investigatory arm of the United States confirm the facts to eliminate the possibility of an offense under 18 U.S.C. 1001 (a)(1). Accordingly, the Copyright Office is hereby authorized by this correspondence to acquire a complete copy of the F.B.I. investigative findings. Furthermore, pursuant to this letter, I am demanding that the F.B.I. turn over all of its investigative findings to the General Counsel of the U.S. Copyright Office being Tanya Sandros.

Susan Merzbach embezzled my work through a Constructive Trust, and she did not get Twentieth Century Fox to pay me any consideration or to sign any kind of agreement to authorize the COPYING and/or use of my work in violation of the Fair Business Practices requirements of the state of California, or in accordance with 17 U.S.C. 106. Furthermore, the copyright registration by Hurd, Cameron, Larry and Andy Wachowski does not disclose the use of the Third Eye by Sophia Stewart as it was required by paragraph 6 of the copyright application and in accordance with 17 U.S.C. 409.

The failure to correct a “Knowingly False Copyright Registration” automatically constitutes “Gross Negligence,” and “FRAUD and MISREPRESENTATION” on behalf of the Executive Branch of the government and raises a “Breach of Duty” by failing to give an accurate disclosure to the “Executive Branch of Government,” and the Public in contravention to 18 U.S.C. §1001 (a)(1) and 17 U.S.C. 506 (e). The Executive Branch of the government has “knowingly and willfully” concealed, suppressed, and/or committed acts of omission by failing to uphold the law and relinquish FBI Investigative findings to the Department of Justice for prosecution of the thieves for “Felony Copyright Infringement,” with calculated intent to cause me loss of property, and a physical injury for which there is no “Immunity” for imposing the archaic “POLICY” of “Black Codes” in violation of 28 U.S.C. S 1346(b), and 28 C.F.R. §35.178.

The F.B.I.’s confirmation of “THEFT” is affirmed by the “Introduction” of the Terminator and the Matrix directly reading on my six page treatment and book “The Third Eye,” but does not read on James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, Larry Wachowski, or Andy Wachowski’s treatments, screenplays, and scripts, etc. My 1981 treatment “Creation Date” for my copyright supersedes any and all of the above perpetrators copyrights, scripts, and treatments etc. You are “Aware” (“Emphasis Added”) of the fraudulent declarations / affidavits submitted to the United States District Court, In the Central District of California by James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, Larry Wachowski, and Andy Wachowski constituting Perjury and Fraud.

In addition, enclosed herewith you shall find Larry Wachowski’s interview and factual statements equivalent to a deposition which impeaches his Perjury / Fraudulent Affidavit in the State Court and U.S. States District Court, In the Central District of California, case [CV-03-2873MMM[VBKx], before Judge Margaret M. Morrow:

“Yeah, and you know, it’s like the third movie has its revelation moments, but they're all based on things that have been built up through all three movies. The BEGINNINGS, the little tiny INTRODUCTIONS TO EACH FILM, has kind of a REFLECTION of what each movie is about. And, you know, in those little tiny prefaces to each film, we kind of tell the audience where we are in the journey of development. I mean, the Matrix is an exploration of consciousness, those little tiny bits and pieces at the BEGINNING OF EACH OF THE FILMS sort of tries to help you MAP (“Emphasis Added”) it out a little bit.”

F.B.I. investigators’ in the Nevada Office, INSTUCTED me to “Take the MONEY from the opposition and look the other way.” Your agencies have been AWARE (“Emphasis Added”) that I have refused to accept both “Gauged Settlement Offers” of $5 million dollars, of which, the latter offer was made by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, because he owns 5% of the Terminator. I reserve only searing criticism for the Executive Branch of the Government to have deliberately obstructed the prosecution of ALL perpetrators for Felony Copyright Infringement which was designed to unnecessary interpose delay, force and “inequitable settlement” upon the Minority Economy, and impede the due administration of justice by knowingly “Aiding and Abetting” the perpetrators with avoiding Felony Criminal Charges. Nonetheless, Governor Schwarzenegger informed me that I did not have to file a lawsuit against the Defendants; in order, to obtain justice. Governor Schwarzenegger made to comment because he knew that ALL of the perpetrators had committed Felony Copyright Infringement.

The U.S. Copyright Office and the F.B.I. have subjected me to discrimination on the basis of Race, and Gender through “Willful Acts of Acquiescence” that were designed with “calculated intent” and/or “wanton reckless disregard” to sanction an “Illegal Monopoly” in violation of RICO by imposing the archaic government “POLICY” of “Black Codes”; in order, to fraudulently convert ownership of my copyrights for the “Unjust Enrichment” of “WHITE Collar Criminals,” causing me a egregious financial and physical injury including deprivation of my Constitutional Rights, and Civil Rights, because I’m an African-American female compared to similar situated Caucasians males. In light of the comments made by Warner Bros. actor Aaron Eckhart who played Harvey Dent in the recent film “Batman The Dark Knight,” the perpetrators, including Fox are “Aware” that the thieves copied The Third Eye treatment and they have “Collectively” utilized their “Financial Resources” for the making of “Terminator 4 - Salvation,” and the “Terminator TV Series Sarah Conner Chronicles,” automatically constituting RICO violations. Furthermore, according to Harvey Dent’s comments, the perpetrators are AWARE that a violation of Felony Copyright Infringement Act against one party pursuant to RICO, imputes Felony Copyright Infringement charges against ALL perpetrators in violation of RICO. (Art Buchwald v. Paramount Pictures, Corp. (Cal. App. 1990) p. 621)

As a proximate result of the “Appearance of Impropriety” by rogue government agents failure to prosecute the White Collar Criminals for THEFT, Felony Copyright Infringement, and Fraud; the “Unauthorized and Illegal Monopoly” sanctioned by the former Executive Branch of the U.S. Government has “Unjustly Enriched” [“Fox Executives”] who siphoned billions of dollars out of the “Minority Economy,” and Fox Shareholders who were Defrauded. More than a decade of rouge government agents being remiss in their duties compounded by an administration under President George W. Bush who took over 908 days of vacation has allowed the above parties to loot Corporate America, which resulted in suppressing individuality, initiative, KILLED OFF COMPETITION, (“Emphasis Added”), drove out the independent managers, Minority Management Trainees in the corporate structures, and stifled the NATURAL GENIUS, as a proximate result of Racism; of which, has disproportionately “Economically Disenfranchised” a large contingency of Minorities and Fox shareholders in the Entertainment Corporate Structure, while DRIVING REAL ARTISTS INTO OBSCURITY.

The U.S. Copyright Office and the F.B.I. have encroached upon my “Inalienable Rights” in contravention to the Constitutions of the United States and California which state in part: “All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.”

It is the responsibility of the United States not to knowingly participate in combination to “Restrain Trade” by leaving in place a knowingly “False Submission of Authorship.” The FBI concluded that the copyright registration, Pau-584-564 was materially false, thus it has duty to have the United States Attorney General to take appropriate steps regarding 18 U.S.C. 1001, 15 U.S.C. 1, and 18 U.S.C. 191 to vindicate the public interest.

Upon receipt of this “CEASE and DESIST ORDER,” you have approximately 15 working days to forward to my attention “Confirmation” from the U.S. Copyright Office affirming that you have terminated, nullified, voided and/or rendered inoperative any and all related “Fraudulent Copyrights” [V2080P249; V2998P506], and REMOVED said “False and Misleading and/or Fraudulent Documentation” from your electronic internet database which are filed by James Cameron, Gale Ann Hurd, Larry Wachowski, Andy Wachowski, Fox, Joel Silver, Warner Bros., Time Warner, Hemdale Films, Pacific Western Production Inc, Anarchos Entertainment, and any other persons, people, companies that are made a party to this THEFT.

DATED this_____ day of February 2009
SOPHIA STEWART

AUTHOR/OWNER of Terminator & Matrix
ALL EYES ON ME, INC.
P.O. BOX 31725
LAS VEGAS, NV 89173

On the _____ day of _________________, 2009, personally appeared before me _______________________, the signer of the foregoing Affidavit, who duly acknowledged that(s)he executed the same.

______________________________
Notary Public
Expires________________________

cc: Barack Obama, President Elect, Fax
Internal Revenue Service, Form 3949-A. Fresno, CA 93888
Eric Holder, Assistant Attorney General, 202-307-6777(F)
Valerie Caproni, General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Investigations, (F) 202-324-5366
Robert A Brady, Representative Chairman of Committee on House Administration 202-225-7664 (F)
Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, 202-225-4188 (F)
Harry Reid, Majority Leader of the Senate, Fax: 202-224-7327
John Ensign, Senator of Nevada, Fax: (202) 228-2193
David Carson, General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office, 202-707-8380 (O), 202-707-8366(F)
Michael B. Muksey, U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General, 202-307-6777 (F)
Derek Anderson (Co-CEO) THE HALCYON COMPANY, 323-315-7165(F)
Victor Kubicek (Co-CEO) THE HALCYON COMPANY, 323-315-7165(F)
Bruce Issac, Attorney (310) 358-3224 (F)

Special Fraud Agents"IRS"

2009-04-07T07:31:00.000-07:00

March 31, 2009

Special Fraud Agents
Internal Revenue Service
Fresno, CA 93888

Re: James Cameron T-Salvation Productions, LLC
Gale Ann Hurd T-Salvation Distribution, LLC
Andy Wachowski T Asset Acquisition Company
Larry Wachowski T-Salvation Distribution (BVI)
Derek Anderson Halcyon Holding Group
Victor Kubicek The Halcyon Company
Hemdale Films Halcyon Consumer Products
Carolco Films Dominon Group
Pacific Western Productions Inc.

Dear Special Fraud Investigators:

How many times will the IRS allow the above parties to set-up dummy companies with off shore accounts involving the Terminator & Matrix Franchises that are designed to evade taxes by reporting a loss, when in actuality the above wealthy perpetrators have filed bankruptcy and /or are in violation with the IRS. They committed fraud and tax evasion.

Fox shareholders lost $3.5 billion dollars as a proximate result of Corporate Espionage by former fox executives. In, 2007, a lawsuit was filed against Anderson and Kubicek in the United States Court for the Central District of California (CIMEX investments, et al. v. Dereck Anderson, Victor Kubicek, USDC 07-00386) seeking return of a $250,000 loan made by motion picture investors to Anderson and Kubicek for the purpose of obtaining a script option and production feasibility study for “Conspirator”. According to the allegations of the lawsuit, the money was not used for this intended purpose but rather was misappropriated by Anderson and Kubicek.

According to Moritz Borman vs. Derek Anderson, and Victor Kubicek, Case No. SC102043, on Number 4, “it also was revealed that Anderson and Kubicek had deliberately concealed from Borman their history of misrepresenting their industry qualifications and DEFRAUDING INVESTORS in their prior motion picture PROJECTS in order to fraudulently procure the OWNERSHIP of the underlying franchise rights, including the rights to the Picture, distribution rights and financing for the Picture…”

According to Mr. Borman, line Number 17, there is a “Commingling of monies and failure to adhere to corporate formalities, such that any individuality and separateness among them has ceased, and they are alter egos of each other. Mr. Borman allege, “that it was the intent of Anderson and Kubicek to set up the fraudulent scheme of companies named as Defendants herein in order to defraud individuals and creditors and transfer various assets to the different corporate entities. In addition, Mr. Borman allege that the entities are mere shells or shams without capital or assets, are financially insolvent, and were conceived, intended, and used by Anderson and Kubicek as devices to AVOID individual liability and are so inadequately capitalized that their respective capitalization was illusory. Adherence to the fiction of the separate existence of T – Salvation Productions, LLC, T-Salvation Distribution, LLC, T Asset Acquisition Company, LLC, T-Salvation Distribution (BVI) LTD., Halcyon Holding Group, LLC, Halcyon Consumer Products, LLC and Dominon Group, LLC as entities distinct from Anderson and Kubicek would promote injustice and fraud. (Tax Evasion)(Also see Enron)

According to Mr. Borman on line 57, that “Anderson and Kubicek were sued in United States District Court in the Central District of California (CIMEX Investments, et. Al. v. Derek Anderson and Victor Kubicek, USDC 07-00386) for swindling motion picture investors out of at least $250,000.00.”

In addition, Bruce Isaac contrived a malpractice lawsuit so that the insurance company would pay their legal fees. Therefore they committed fraud with the insurance company. Should you have further questions regarding these matters, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Sophia Stewart
P.O. BOX 31725
LAS VEGAS, NV 89173

SS/dh

cc: President Barack Obama, FAX:
Sen. John Whitmire, Chairman of the Senate’s Criminal Justice Comm., 512-475-2015
Eric Holder, Assistant Attorney General, 202-307-6777(F)
Steve Cooley, Dist. Attorney, (213) 974-1484 (F)
Valerie Caproni, General Counsel, F.B.I. 202-324-5366 (F)
Steve Mangel, International Film Guarantors, Fax: (310) 309-5696
Kurt Benjamin, Pacificor, LLC, info@pacificor.com
Michael Klein, Pacificor, LLC , info@pacificor.com
Charles (Chuck) Kavitsky, Fireman's Fund Insurance Companies, 415.899.3600

The Matrix ! and Its Revelations........Look Inside!

2009-02-19T05:16:00.000-08:00

One of the most popular and thought-provoking
movies of all time was and still is the Matrix.
Viewers all over the world were
captivated by the film's primary message: People get into
deep trouble when they mistake what they perceive for
reality. What most viewers do not realize is that prior to
the release of this groundbreaking film, western
intelligence agencies were already using the term "the
Matrix" to describe today's world. This was in contrast to
their work with remote viewers, who would "escape the
matrix" to gather intelligence. Art truly does imitate life.

In the movie, the Matrix is an elaborate Artificial
Intelligence computer simulation that's so captivating that
people mistake it for reality. People perceive they are
walking about and interacting with others, but their
physical bodies are actually submerged in fluid-filled pods,
"plugged into" the Matrix, while their vital life force is
harnessed to power the Matrix.

After Neo (Keanu Reaves) learns the truth, with the help of
Morpheus's (Lawrence Fishburne) training, he is able to
overcome his misconception that the Matrix is reality. Neo
rebels against the machines that create his false reality
and, eventually, he escapes the limitations of the Matrix.
To others, he has developed superhuman abilities, but, "in
reality," he has merely recognized the truth.

Escaping the Matrix is a metaphor for the mystic path to
enlightenment.

The Matrix can be defined as the world that we perceive,
which includes the physical world, as well as higher planes
of emotions and thoughts, which also affect us.

Within the Matrix, are countless fear-based thoughts and
emotions that condition us to accept limitations. We are
taught that we have little power, and what little power we
do have, we are advised to delegate to authority figures and
experts.

Swimming in a sea of negative thoughts, we are prompted to
use our creative ability to imagine even more negative
thoughts. Without introspection, the Matrix gets darker and
more dense.

Anyone who blindly accepts these prevalent, negative
thoughts will have his or her life path dictated by the
Matrix.

But those who recognize that it is our collective thoughts
and beliefs that power the Matrix will recognize the way
out.

When we incarnate on earth, we temporarily forget the higher
truth of who we are. Our life mission is to remember, to
connect with our innermost self, so that we may transcend
the Matrix.

The reality we perceive with our senses is not the true
reality, but merely a small portion of reality, masquerading
as the whole. But, unlike the "alternate reality" that Neo
must extricate himself from, in our "reality," there is no
need to rebel. Rather, our goal should be to transcend. We
want to "be in this world, but not of it."

The outer world is a reflection of our inner thoughts and
beliefs, whether individual or collective, which have been
conditioned by our experience in the Matrix. Consequently,
the Matrix is a learning environment, where we get feedback
on how our thoughts manifest. Thankfully, our negative
thoughts do not (typically) manifest instantaneously.
Otherwise, we would risk the spontaneous destruction of our
world by thinking negative thoughts.

Clearing yourself of negative energies through daily
meditation can provide a direct link to the "ultimate
reality," i.e., the pure consciousness residing within each
of us.

As your negative beliefs are purified through regular
contact with the "light" of your divine nature, unhealthy
emotions, such as fear and anger, will naturally begin to
diminish, and you'll be free to transcend to higher states
of consciousness. You will "download" more of your own true
self, while simultaneously and automatically attracting
others of similar vibration.

Your world will become more synchronistic. You will repel
angry, fearful people, and those who stick around will
become calmer and more centered. You will radiate love. By
simply being in higher consciousness, you will have a
greater effect on the world than the most gifted orators and
political leaders.

The higher your consciousness and energy are vibrating, the
faster your thoughts will manifest. When you align with your
innermost self, you are aligned more closely with the Source
of all creation. At the apex of your individual
consciousness, you are connected with The One. You then have
at your disposal the entire universe to help you manifest
the highest good for all.

In actuality, we are single points of awareness in the
Oneness that is Reality. What we interpret as the physical
world is the projection of this awareness, which is taking
place in the Mind of God. We are, as Shakespeare pointed
out, merely "actors" in a divine play.

When we wake up to this knowledge, the play does not stop.
We are free to act or interact, in bliss and peace,
unattached to the Matrix. We have within us the power to
create "heaven on earth."

The Mother of ‘The Matrix?'

2008-10-31T09:32:00.000-07:00

By Masha Savitz
Epoch Times Staff

Why did Laurence Fishburne of “The Matrix,” say on air on a WBLS morning show a few years back, that he wanted to meet Sophia Stewart, whom some refer to as the “Mother of The Matrix?” What is it about Stewart and her claims to authorship of the visionary blockbuster that makes her so compelling?

The story, like “The Matrix” itself, continues to challenge reality—blending fiction with truth like a silver spoon on a trip down the rabbit hole of legal battles—the stuff movies are made of.

“Well, he got his wish,” says Stewart of Fishburne, “in 2006, when we both did the red carpet at the Palms Casino for CineVegas Magazine. He was flirting with me and I enjoyed it,” she admitted, listing just a few of her celebrity fan base.

“Wesley Snipes took me out to dinner. Diddy met me, Jesse Jackson invited me to his private birthday party in Beverly Hills, and Hammer showed me great honor by telling everyone he knew who I was and why it was important to meet me.”

The Claim

Stewart claims authorship of “The Matrix” based on her original and copyrighted work “The Third Eye.” In a court in Utah, where Stewart resides, Judge Dale Kimball has ascertained one thing—Stewart never had a fair trial when she originally took this case to court in 2004 in the state of California following an aborted settlement, according to Stewart.

It was concluded that the original case against Andy Wichowski, Larry Wichowski, Thia Bloom, Twentieth Century-Fox Film Co., Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., and Joel Silver resulted in a fraudulent judgment obtained by her original attorneys who deliberately concealed all forms of evidence, deposition requests, and conspired to violate her civil rights to a fair trial. The case was therefore sabotaged when Stewart unknowingly failed to appear in a California court. This could result in future criminal charges against the attorneys.

According to the FBI’s investigation, explained Stewart, “The Terminator” was also derived from “The Third Eye,” bringing the total sum that Warner Brothers and Fox made up to an estimated $8 billion for both trilogies from combined sales of merchandise, games, and DVDs. With so much at stake, Warner Bros. and Fox have a lot to lose.

Judge Kimball rendered an opinion on August 28 this year, finding all four seasoned attorneys liable for malpractice, conspiracy, and fraud. The FBI told Stewart that any form of fraud committed in the original case automatically constitutes a new trial. At the same time, Stewart has filed complaints with three different Bar Associations alleging a newly coined term, “Industrial Copyright Infringement Espionage.” This process will reopen the case for a new trial.

Stewart, who holds a bachelors degree from the City University of New York in journalism with a minor in law and psychology, and who later studied writing, spoke with me at length in September in a persuasive and intriguing conversation. We talked about the first trial, her inspiration for “The Third Eye,” and the unusual event that precipitated it all.

The Inspiration for Her Writings

The personal story of Stewart’s “The Third Eye” and the gifts it yielded was most fascinating to me. According to Stewart, her third eye (referred to in Eastern religions as being located between the eyebrows leading directly to the pineal gland in the brain and thought to enable powers of higher cognition) opened at 3-years-old when her older brother accidentally shot her with a bow and arrow, piercing her skin squarely between her eyebrows. She said this resulted in this long-known spiritual phenomenon.

It wasn’t until years later that she read that Tibetan Buddhists do this intentionally after years of rigorous training in spiritual mastery. This supernormal ability—which purportedly allows one to see into other dimensions and access information such as various time-spaces, retrocognition, and precognition—supports certain motifs, themes, and images found in “The Matrix.”

The Oracle, a pivotal character in “The Matrix,” Stewart points out for example, was modeled after herself, an African-American woman who has visions and expansive spiritual consciousness. The elements of numbers and codes prevalent in the film can also be linked to Stewart’s unusual skills in mathematics. “I did taxes when I was 11 years old. I got paid to do adult’s taxes,” she says.

“I have the ability to separate and actually go in my astral body,” says Stewart. The aspect of the storyline from “The Matrix” that she refers to as “how the people would be able to be on the ship and their spirit bodies are fighting somewhere else,” was based on a technique she describes as “separating.” She says, “That’s how the virtual figures were created.”

“I am so well versed in history and knowledge of ancient history and people,” Stewart remarks that many wonder how she knows what she does. “I can’t explain to you, I just know this stuff. It was like I was there witnessing history when it was being made, so I have intimate details of it. It goes beyond any books or reading of it.”

Stewart says that these abilities used to be commonplace for everyone but have since atrophied, though hers are intact. “People started to forget and not believe; that’s basically how they failed because they didn’t have faith anymore.”

“When we trusted in the Father,” continued Stewart, “we had these gifts from Heaven.” Later she adds, “Man started to lie and said that God didn’t exist and took other people away in their beliefs of God.”

Asked how she would describe the theme of “The Matrix,” Stewart referred to the Bible, sighting Revelations and the second coming of Christ. Matrix is the Latin word for womb, and the text reveals that Christ has to come through the womb.

“Machines dominate, then humans are kept in la-la land, keeping them in ignorance, keeping them in fear and bondage. They will never, never go though evolution to evolve spiritually into their fourth dimensional body. They will keep coming back over and over again stopped by ignorance instead of enlightening.”

Next for Stewart, “I’m a writer” she says, and is eager to make the already written prequels to “The Matrix” called “When Gods Walked the Earth” and “Soulless.”

While I am listening to Stewart, she not only seems to be The Oracle, but now embodies Neo as well, battling a daunting system for her truth as a victim of plagiarism to be revealed.

All Eyes On Me!

2008-10-23T02:58:00.000-07:00

All Eyez On Me, in reference to God. I wrote The Third Eye to wake people up, to remind them why God put them here.

There's more to life than money.

As I has confronted skepticism on all sides, much of which comes from Matrix fans, who are strangely loyal to the

Wachowski Brothers. One on-line forum, entitled Matrix Explained has an entire section devoted to me. Some who have

researched my history and writings are open to my story. Others are suspicious and mocking. It doesn't bother me,

I always knew what was true.
The reason you have not seen any of this in the media is because Warner Brothers parent company is AOL-Time

Warner... this GIANT owns 95 percent of the media... let me give you a clue as to what they own in the media

business... New York Times papers/magazines, LA Times papers/magazines, People Magazine, CNN news, Extra, Celebrity

Justice, Entertainment Tonight, HBO, New Line Cinema, Dreamworks, Newsweek, Village Roadshow... many, many more!...

They are not going to report on themselves. They have been suppressing my case for years... Fans who have taken

my allegations seriously, have found eerie mythological parallels, which seem significant in a case that

revolves around the highly metaphorical and symbolic Matrix series. Sophia, the Greek goddess of wisdom has been

referenced many times in speculation about me. In one book about the Goddess Sophia, it reads, The black

goddess is the mistress of web creation spun in her divine matrix.Now because of divine nature which can't be

reverse by no man as we continue to see what the signs reveal and pay attention we all will see his bless favor come to pass.

THE MATRIX BATTLE CONTINUES!

2008-10-09T01:24:00.000-07:00

What does Sophia Stewart, Patricia Bohanan, Shirley Slesinger Lasswell, and George Newberry all have in common? These prophetic authors and intellectual property right owners are known to be unrelenting in their pursuit to obtain credit for their work as Sophia Stewart (“The Mother of Matrix & Terminator”), Shirley Slesinger Lasswell (“Winnie the Pooh”), Patricia Bohaonon, (“NBA Animation Rights Owner”), George Newberry (“End of Days”) will not allow judicial hypocrisy to prevent them from gaining justice. Stewart contends she will prevail in court irrespective of the United States misogynist judiciary operating to deprive people of color their civil rights to be heard before jury trials, while judges and attorneys concealing their conflicts of interest to “aid and abet” plagiarist that have operated with utter contempt as if all parties involved were paid off under the table to obstruct justice.

In November of 2006, Governor Arnold Swartzenegger maintaining 5% ownership of the Terminator trilogy offered Sophia Stewart a $5 million dollar payment under the table to keep quite. Although, Ms. Stewart refused to accept the Governor’s crumbs from the table of kings it’s historically apparent the integrity of the U.S. judicial system is easily compromised when the blind fold comes off with a minority standing before the court and money is involved. Immediately, after Ms. Stewart refused to accept any settlement offer, why did Warner Bros. copyright the sequel to Matrix Reloaded while the film was already being distributed in the market? To date, Ms. Stewart is unwavering in her pursuit and demand for 25% ownership of Warner Bros. Studios, and 25% ownership of Twenth Century Fox with stipulations to hire 10% African Americans into the workforce by a certain date, and to hire 10% of multiple ethnic groups, including mandates to produce at least 3 positive Black films of historical figures over the intervals of three years. Ms. Stewart asserts her demand for a percentage of ownership in both studios will increase up to 38% in the event the studios fails to timely meet the milestones to hire people of color to offset the misappropriation of money out of the Black community. Ms. Stewart believes that such remedies are necessary to repair the unjust enrichment resultant from Criminal Copyright Infringement Espionage.

Many in America want to forget the brutal history of racism. From 1619 up to present, very few meaningful inroad between the Black community and Jewish community have been made in light of the historical fact that the Jewish community financed the Black Holocaust with many of the slave ships such as the Abigail, Crown, Nassau, Fours Sisters, Anne & Hizm, Fruedem Beny, Hover, Elizabeth, Antigun, Betsy, Polly, White Horse, Expedition, Charlona, Caracoe, etc.

Ms. Stewart demands an investigation to see exactly which groups actually financially benefited the most from the theft of her 1981 copyright for the Terminator Franchise and the Matrix Trilogy? The misappropriation of her 1981 copyright corresponds to a loss over $3.5 billion dollars directly to Ms. Stewart for all six films, and the loss of numerous jobs for minorities equating to more than $1 billion dollars due to Racism, Greed and Economic Espionage. In essence more than $4.5 billion dollars was funneled out of the African American community for the enrichment of other groups. Ms. Stewarts asserts over 95% of Caucasians Community, and the Jewish Community, in front of the camera, and behind the camera financially benefited and were employed by the Terminator Series and the Matrix Trilogy. Furthermore, Ms. Stewart proclaims members of the Church of Scientology were unjustly enriched from the theft of her Copyright equating to Economic Espionage.

In 1999, the Church of Scientology and Warner Bros co-produced a film called “Battle-Field Earth”. Stewart did not know at the time she entered Ron Hubbard’s “Writers at the Future Contest” that the Church or Scientology pilfered core elements of her book. Stewart did not learn about their incestuous relationship until after the Defendants knowingly and willfully sabotage her judicial proceeding by violating her civil rights by obstructing her from proceeding before a judiciary, concealing depositions, and refusing the enter any of her evidence into court record for discovery. At the time, Stewart did not know, Judge Morrow on her case was the lead counsel for the Church of Scientology, and remained collusively silent. Judge Morrow is considered to have formerly represented the Church of Scientology, which benefited from Reed Slatkin's $600 million Ponzi scheme. Indeed, Judge Morrow's other senior partner John J. ("Jack") Quinn was often lead counsel for the Church of Scientology International and other of its affiliated corporations and enterprises. Furthermore, Stewart’s lawyers failed to disclose their conflicts of interest by also representing the Church of Scientology for the Film “Battle-Field Earth.” Judge Morrow had a legal obligation to maintain an impartial court with candor, and failed to disclose her conflicts of interest, or exercise her ethical obligations pursuant to the Canons of Judicial Conduct to recuse herself. Judge Morrow knew that Stewarts attorneys’ were depriving her of civil rights under the color of law, while obstructing proceeding before a judiciary, and failed to intervene because she knew that a conflict of interest existed by representing the Church of Scientology.

In this case, even the devil would have been a little bit more inconspicuous in a court knowing the tone of Ms. Stewart’s scathing condemnation in light of the implications for the “Appearance of Impropriety.”

Ms. Stewart believes irrespective of a lackadaisical attitude on behalf of the Justice Department to not honor her copyright by arresting the plagiarists; she is appalled by the governments’ refusal to protect 20^th Century Fox Stock Share Holders from corporate espionage. When Susan Merzbach the Vice President of Creative Affairs for 20^th Century Fox, misappropriated Ms. Stewarts’s 1981 copywritten Third Eye Movie Treatment which became the Terminator series under a dummy company called Pacific Western, along with her buddy Gale Ann Hurd, it became corporate espionage while cheating Fox Stock Holders out of billions in royalties for the movie and all sequels, videos, computer software, and other merchandise.

Many Americans have forgotten that the civil right movement and every word of the constitution is based upon the blood of maters. In New Orleans, the United States judiciary took the 10 commandments out of the Courthouse and buried the word of God underground reflecting their true allegiance. Judge Moore told CNN's Paula Zahn, “Without acknowledgement of God, we have no justice system, according to the Constitution. And that, I'm sworn to uphold.” Many believe the United States has moved from a democratic society to be dictated by a fascist regime. Ms. Stewart believes the U.S. judiciary is infested with Latent Racist and misogynist who operate with utter disdain and contempt towards people of color by maintaining a two tiered backhanded justice system that consistently defrauds people of color out of their constitutional rights equating to Judicial Hypocrisy and indicative of an overt campaign of “Economic Warfare.” (See: Reports by the Sentencing Project and Human Rights Watch)

Ms. Stewart believes this form of Judicial Hypocrisy perpetrated by the U.S Courts to deprive people of color of their civil rights, Due Process and Equal Protection of law, while obstructing many of the opportunity to appear before Jury trials in criminal and civil proceedings, thus leads many people of color to believe the system is corrupt to the core. Ms. Stewart believes this mischievous conduct perpetrated by America is prophesied by the scriptures.

Ms. Stewart professes there to be a brainwashing movement to persuade the general public to believe that racism no longer exists in America, while systematically programming White children to harbor an aversion towards Black people (i.e. Spiderman III). Ms. Stewart believes God is the discerner of the hearts and mind. Ms. Stewart has stated on several occasions, “When God sees racism perpetrated upon His people, the hearts of the perpetrators BURN with SHAME.” Ms. Stewart says, “The reason America does not want to hear the race card played is because their Hearts Burn with Shame.”

This thorn in the moral foundation of America reflects of adversarial judicial system against people of color that operates as an active participant to defraud billions of dollars ear marked for the infrastructure and economic prosperity of minority communities, thus amounting to “Economic Warfare.” At this juncture, you can take the Blue Pill the story ends you wake up in your bed, and believe whatever you want to believe. You can take the red pill, you stay in wonderland, and I’ll show you how deep the rabbit whole goes. To have attempted to steel the legacy of Ms. Stewart’s copyright surmounts to the “Matrix System of Oppression and Enslavement.”

Spencer, Susan, Black Enterprise

Assemblyman Bernie Richter,

Frederick E. Jordan, California Business Council of Organizations for Equal Opportunity

Robert Matsui (D-Sacramento).

Kanter, Larry, Los Angeles Business Journal