IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSDistrict of Columbia Circuit

Appeal No. 14-5265

CONSUMER FINANCIAL ) PROTECTION BUREAL, et al., ) Plaintiff/Appellee/ ) On Appeal from ) Judge Rosemary M. Collyer ) Final Order 10/15/2014 v. ) Civil Action No. 13-2025(RMC) ) OCWEN FINANCIAL ) CORPORATION, et al., ) Defendants/Appellee/Respondents ) )CHRISTOPHER STOLLER )

Intervenor/Appellant/Petitioner )

NOTICE OF FILING

TO: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on the 14th day of December 2014, there was filed via FirstClass Mail with the Clerk of the Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit the attached 1)Petitioner’s Petition for Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt.

_______________________________

/s/ Christopher Stoller, Appellant/Petitioner 6045 W. Grand Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60639 312--834-9717 email Ldms4@hotmail.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Original electronically transmitted to the Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the DC

Appeals Court using the CM/ECF System for filing this 14tht day of December, 2014.

/s/Christopher Stoller /

Clerk of the Court SERVICE LISTE. Barrett Prettyman

U.S. Courthouse andWilliam B. Bryant Annex333 Constitution Ave., NWWashington, DC 20001

William C. Erbey, Executive Chairman, Ocwen Board of Directors Ronald M. Faris, Ocwen Board of Directors Ronald J. Korn, Ocwen Board of Directors William H. Lacy, Ocwen Board of Directors Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Ocwen Board of Directors Robert A. Salcetti, Ocwen Board of Directors Barry N. Wish, Ocwen Board of Directors Mitra Hormozi, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP James Sottile, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP Timothy Hayes, General Counsel Ocwen Financial Corporation 1661 Worthington Road, Suite 100 West Palm Beach, FL 33409

Ocwen Financial Corporation, related companies William Shepro, Legal Counsel and President ofof Altisource1 Portfolio Solutions S.A. And for888-255-1791Western Progressive2 – Arizona, Premium Title Services Inc.,

2002 Summit Blvd, suite 600 Altanta, Ga 30319 www.altisource.com/

Keven J. Wilcox, General Counsel Ocwen Financial Corporation related company,Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. Western Progressive – Arizona, Premium Title Services Inc.,

2002 Summit Blvd, suite 600 866-960-8299 Atlanta, Ga 30319

1 http://www.marketwatch.com/story/altisource-investigation-initiated-by-former-louisiana-attorney-general-kahn-swick-foti-llc-investigates-altisource-portfolio-solutions-sa-following-disclosure-of-department-of-financial-services-2014-08-10

2 Western Progressive, Premium Title Services Inc.,Altisource's wholly owned trustee subsidiaries, processes residential non-judicial foreclosures in California, Nevada and Arizona. Western Progressive-Arizona, Inc. 1150 E. University Drive Tempe, AZ 85281. Phone: 866-960-8299 · stephanie.spurlock@altisource.com

Robert R. MaddoxJ. Riley KeyBRADLEY ARANT BOULTCUMMINGS LLPOne Federal Place1819 Fifth Avenue NorthBirmingham, AL 35203(205) 521-8454Fax: (205) 488-6454Email: rmaddox@babc.com

Defendant/RespondentOCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC represented by Robert R. Maddox(See above for address) Patin, Douglas L. (Doug)

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP 1615 L Street, N.W.Suite 1350Washington, DC 20036P: 202.393.7150 dpatin@babc.com

Lumsden, Dana C.

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP Bank of America Corporate Center100 N. Tryon StreetSuite 2690Charlotte, NC 28202P: 704.338.6000 dlumsden@babc.com

Phil Bulter

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP RSA Dexter Avenue Building445 Dexter AvenueSuite 9075Montgomery, AL 36104P: 334.956.7700 pbutler@babc.com

Patterson, Robert S. (Bob)

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP Roundabout Plaza1600 Division StreetSuite 700Nashville, TN 37203 bpatterson@babc.com

P: 615.244.2582

•

Kimberly B. MartinBradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP 200 Clinton Avenue WestSuite 900Huntsville, AL 35801-4900

P: 256.517.5100 kmartin@babc.com

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP One Jackson Place188 E. Capitol StreetSuite 400Jackson, MS 39201P: 601.948.8000Managing Partner

Cupples, Margaret OertlingPartnermcupples@babc.com

General Counsel Alabama State Bar Center for Professional Responsibility 415 Dexter Avenue Montgomery, AL 36104 (800) 354-6154 (334) 269-1515 Fax: (334) 261-6311 Website: www.alabar.org

Chief Bar Counsel State Bar of Arizona 4201 North 24th Street, Suite 100 Phoenix, AZ 85016-6266 (866) 482-9227 (602) 252-4804 Fax: (602) 271-4930 Website: www.azbar.org

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA District of Columbia Office of Bar Counsel 515 5th Street, NW Building A, Room 117 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 638-1501 Fax: (202) 638-0862 Website: www.dcbar.org

FLORIDA Director of Lawyer Regulation The Florida Bar 651 East Jefferson Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 (800) 342-8060 (850) 561-5776 Fax: (850) 561-9403 Website: www.flabar.org GEORGIA General Counsel State Bar of Georgia 104 Marietta Street NW, Suite 100 Atlanta, GA 30303 (800) 334-6865 ext. 720 (404) 527-8720 Fax: (404) 527-8744 Website: www.gabar.org

MISSISSIPPI General Counsel Mississippi State Bar 643 North State Street Jackson, MS 39202 (601) 948-0568 Fax: (601) 355-8635 Website: www.msbar.org

NORTH CAROLINA Counsel North Carolina State Bar Post Office Box 25908 Raleigh, NC 27611-5908 (919) 828-4620 Fax: (919)834-8156 Website: www.ncbar.gov

U.S. Department of Justice950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20530-0001 AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSDistrict of Columbia Circuit

Appeal No. 14-5265

CONSUMER FINANCIAL ) PROTECTION BUREAL, et al., ) Plaintiff/Appellee, ) On Appeal from ) Judge Rosemary M. Collyer ) Final Order 10/15/2014 v. ) Civil Action No. 13-2025(RMC) ) OCWEN FINANCIAL ) CORPORATION, et al., ) Defendants/Appellee ) Respondents )CHRISTOPHER STOLLER ) Intervenor/Appellant Petitioner

PETITIONER’S PETITION FOR ADJUDICATION OF INDIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT

NOW COMES the Petitioner, Christopher Stoller, 65, sui juris, (“Stoller”), files Petitioner’s

Petition for Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt pursuant to Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure, against Appellee William C. Erbey, Executive Chairman of Ocwen Financial

Corporation, Ocwen Board of Directors3, Ronald M. Faris, Wiliam H. Lacy, Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Robert A.

Salcetti, Barry N. Wish, Mitra Hormozi, James Sottile, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, Timothy Hayes, General

Counsel Ocwen Financial Corporation, (“Ocwen”) , related companies, Altisource Portfolio Solutions

S.A., William Shepro, Legal Counsel and President of Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A.

3 3. The Appellant/Petitioner said property is located in Arizona as well known to the Respondents. TheArizona Supreme court has stated that equity denies title property “obtained through actual fraud,misrepresentations, concealment’s, or through undue influence, duress, taking advantage of one’sweakness or necessities, or through any other similar means or under any similar circumstances”).This case stands for an unexceptional rule: Principals may not benefit from the inequitable conductof their agents. (IVO Queiroz v. Daniel Harvey, Case No. CV-08-0308-PR. “We conclude that theagent’s inequitable acts may be imputed to the principal whether or not the principal knew ofthe agent’s misconduct.” Petitioner requests that this court take judicial notice of the IVOQueiroz v. Daniel Harvey, Case No. CV-08-0308-PR Exhibit A

,Western Progressive – Arizona, Premium Title Services Inc., Keven J. Wilcox, General

Counsel, Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. , Keven J. Wilcox, General Counsel Altisource

Portfolio Solutions S.A. BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP , Robert R.

Maddox, J. Riley Key, Douglass Patin, Dana C. Lumsden, Phil Butler, Robert Patterson

Firm LLC herein after referred to as “Respondents” and in support of his petition Petition for

Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt for violations of the consent judgment (Doc 12). All of the

respondents had prior actual and constructive notice of the consent judgment (Doc.12) and violated the

said consent judgment (Doc 12) outside of the purview of the Court4. states as follows:

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

1. Respondent all have actual and constructive notice of the Consent Judgment (Doc 12).

The Respondent either directly or through their agents have knowledge that Christopher Stoller

purchased a piece of property in Scottsdale Arizona known as 28437 N. 112th Way Scottsdale,

Az 85262-4725 Philip Stone, the prior owner, quit claimed his interest to Christopher Stoller

Pension and Profit Sharing Plan Limited (CSPPSP) on September 19, 2008 (Exhibit 15),

recorded in the Maricopa County Recorders Office 2008-0815422 on 09/22/08. The successor

trustee was divested of its power of sale after 09/22/08.

2. Respondents have knowledge that on September 19, 2008, Philip Stone transferred and

conveys to CSPPSP a Bahamas Corporation, and/or Christopher Stoller and/or Leo Stoller

(collectively, Assignees), under the Law of Assignments of Causes of Action(Exhibit 2),

4

5 Appellant asks the court to take judicial of its attached Exhibit(s) which are all public documents. A court may take judicial notice of facts that are “not subject to reasonable

dispute in that [they are] either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); see also Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 175 F. Supp. 2d 13, 16 (D.D.C. 2001) (quoting Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence). Furthermore, the Federal Rules of Evidence require a court to take judicial notice of a matter “if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(d); see also In re Ravisent Technologies, Inc. Sec.

Litig., No. 00-CV-1014, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13255, at * 2 (E.D. Pa. July 12, 2004)

insofar as permitted by law, forever, any and all causes of action, remedies, or claims, now or in

the future, that Assignor CSPPSP have against any party, not limited to financial institution,

contractors, builders, and their employees, affiliates, successors and assigns, et al., as well as the

right to prosecute such causes of action in the name of Assignor or Assignees or any of them ,

and the right to settle or otherwise resolve such causes of action as Assignees sees fit, regarding

the following real property in Maricopa County, State of Arizona:

3. Lot 3, Pinnacle Foothills, according to Book 398 of Maps, Page 50, and Affidavit of Correction

recorded in Document No. 96-0145582, records of Maricopa County, Arizona. Assessor's Parcel

Number: 216-74-044 , Commonly known as: 28437 N. 112th Way, Scottsdale, Az 85262.

4. Notice(s) of Liz Pendens was filed by the complainant, Christopher Stoller on the subject real

estate on 12/29/2008 2008-1090943 with the Maricopa Counter Recorders Office and again

another Lis Pendens was filed on 12/02/2013 2013-1025435.

5. As well known to the respondents, Philip B. Stone, as of 7/23/2014 did not owe a delinquency

payment of of $197,142.49. Nor does Philip B. Stone, as of July 25, 2014 owe unpaid

principle balance of $646,683.87,plus interest from 02/01/2008. As well known to the

Respondents, all of these debts were discharged in Philip B. Stone's Bankruptcy see Exhibit 3,

yet the Respondents are still attempting to collect on these said debts in violation of the

Bankruptcy Statutes, in clear violation of the Federal Fair Debt Collection Act, the Consent

Judgment(12).

6. Philip B. Stone's promissory note secured by a Deed of trust and the adjustable rate

note together with the deed of trust securing same was canceled as a result of the United States

Bankruptcy Case 10-11558-17, District of New Mexico and the debt discharge, July 19, 2010.

(Exhibit 3).

7. Complainant filed a full Release and Full Re-conveyance of said Deed of Trust and all

other debts in connection with same, including the Adjustable Rate Note secured by the Deed of

Trust was filed with the Maricopa County Recorder Office 2014-0512240 08/04/14. (Exhibit

4)

8. Notwithstanding the fact that Philip B. Stone was not the owner of record on July 23,

2014 and did not owe any monies including the said delinquency payment of of $197,142.49.

Nor does Philip B. Stone, as of July 25, 2014 owe unpaid principle balance of

$646,683.87,plus interest from 02/01/2008. Stone's debts were all discharged in

bankruptcy Exhibit 3.

9. The respondents caused to be file an unlawful Notice of Trustee's Sale under oath (false

swearing) and caused the fraudulent document Group Exhibit 5 to be recorded in the Maricopa

County Recorder's Office Document number Number 20140480249.

10. Complainant served a Objection to the Respondents via email and certified mail on 7-

23-14 the fraudulent Notice of trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) filed by the respondents, with

the Maricopa County Recorder's Office on 7/23/2014 Document no. 20140480249 announcing

that the Complainant's property known as 28437 N. 112th Way, Scottsdale, Az 85262-4725 will

be sold “at public auction to the highest bidder. At the main entrance of the Superior Court

Building 201 W. Jefferson, Phoenix Az 85003, on 11/12/2014 at 12:30PM of said day.” at ¶ 1,

Document 20140480249.

11. The said Notice of Trustee's Sale (Group Exhibit 5) filed by the Respondent's

represents a clear fraud on the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office, a clear fraud on the Florida

Bar Associations Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4 and a clear fraud on the Complainant for

the following reasons:

12. The Trustee in the Notice of Trustee Sale document (Group Exhibit 5) has no power

and/or authority to convey the deed of trust dated 05/02/2006 because Philip Stone quit

claimed his interest to Christopher Stoller Pension and Profit Sharing Plan Limited (CSPPSP)

on September 19, 2008, recorded in the Maricopa County Recorders Office 2008-0815422 on

09/22/08 (Exhibit 1) as well known to the Respondents.

13. The successor trustee was divested of its power of sale after 09/22/08. On September

19, 2008, Philip Stone transfers and conveys to CSPPSP a Bahamas Corporation, and/or

Christopher Stoller and/or Leo Stoller (collectively, Assignees), under the Law of Assignments

of Causes of Action (Exhibit 2), insofar as permitted by law, forever, any and all causes of

action, remedies, or claims, now or in the future, that Assignor CSPPSP have against any party,

not limited to financial institution, contractors, builders, and their employees, affiliates,

successors and assigns, et al., as well as the right to prosecute such causes of action in the name

of Assignor or Assignees or any of them , and the right to settle or otherwise resolve such

causes of action as Assignees sees fit, regarding the following real property in Maricopa

County, State of Arizona:

14. Lot 3, Pinnacle Foothills, according to Book 398 of Maps, Page 50, and Affidavit of

Correction recorded in Document No. 96-0145582, records of Maricopa County, Arizona.

Assessor's Parcel Number: 216-74-044Commonly known as: 28437 N. 112th Way, Scottsdale,

Az 85262.

15. The former Trustee, Reconstruct Co NA, was not registered as a loan servicer, broker

with the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions as of September 9, 2011 and pursuant to

their Notice of Trustee Sale Arizona recorded in the Maricopa Recorders Office 20110752511

on 09/09/2011 (Exhibit 6) and lacked the authority to transact business within the State of

Arizona. The Trustee Sale Arizona was void ab initio and canceled by the Trustee. The former

Trustee had thus no authority to assign any interest to the said Respondents in order to conduct

the current trustee sale (Group Exhibit 5) as well known to the respondents

16. The Respondent’s shell entities,ALTISOURCE PROFOLIO SOLUTIONS S.A

/Western Progressive Arizona Inc., Western Progressive LLC.,, herein after referred to

as(WPAI) (Substitution Trustee) are not registered either with the Arizona Department of

Financial Institutions and are not licensed as a broker or servicer of mortgages as of the date

July 23, 2014 that the respondents filed with the Maricopa Recorders Office its Substitution of

Trustee ( 20140433956). Group Exhibit 5 as well known to the respondents.

17. Christiana Trust, a division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Trustee of ARLP

Trust 3, not registered with the Arizona Department of financial institutions and is not

licensed as a broker or servicer of mortgages as of the date July 02, 2014. Nor are they

registered with the Arizona Corporation Division and they do not have a corporation certificate

of authority to transact business within the State of Arizona as well known to the respondents.

18. On July 23, 2014 the Respondents filed their fraudulent Notice of Trustee Sale and

Debt Validation Notice, Statement of breach and non performance, and these documents

(Group Exhibit 5) were fraudulently recorded with the Maricopa Recorders Offices on July

23, 2014 20140480249 out side of the purview of this court for which the respondents are

charged with the offense of Indirect Criminal Contempt.

19. As well known to the Respondents their successor Trustee WPAI does not qualify as a

Trustee of the deed of Trust in the Trustees capacity as an escrow agent as required by A.R.S. §

33-803 (A)(6) according to the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions. WAPI is not a

registered Trustee, they have no license no authority to do business as well known to the

respondents..

20. As well known to the Respondents the statement of breach or non performance ( Group

Exhibit 5)falsely claiming that Philip Stone is in “foreclosure because he is delinquent in

payments” is a false and misleading statement, because Philip Stone debts have been

discharged in Bankruptcy Case No. 10-11558-17 District of New Mexico. The Debt

discharge date was July 19, 2010. (Exhibit 3) as well known to the respondents.

21. As well known to the Respondents the beneficiary or substitute Trustee lacks the

authority under the Release and Full conveyance of the Trustee Deed (Exhibit 4) and the

cancellation of all of debts, including the adjustable rate note, secured by the Deed of Trust and

the Title of the Subject Property being in the name of CSPPHP and cannot not be sold under

the conveyance of the Deed of Trust as well known to the respondents. Notwithstanding, the

respondent have acknowledged that “the foreclosure sale will be set again”.( At page 8

Defendant-Appellee Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance Doc

1526546 filed 12/10/2014)

22. As well known to the Respondents pursuant to the Substitution of Trustee (Group

Exhibit 5) dated June 9th, 2014 Recorders Number 20140433956, Mel-Ling Mitchell, Contact

Management Coordinator, is not an Officer of Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC and is a

unauthorized “robo” signer. This is further evidence of the respondents clear fraud on the

Maricopa County Recorders Office, consumacious conduct and indirect criminal contempt..

23. As well known to the respondents the previous trustee (Exhibit 6) BAC Home Loans

Servicing, LP., (BAC) the successor to Countrywide Bank Na, was not registered with the

Arizona Corporation Division, was not registered as a Limited Liability Partnership as of April

9, 2009. BAC was not registered with the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions. BAC

had no authority to convey any assignment to RECONSTRUCT COMPANY, N.A. or Ocwen

Loan Servicing LLC afterwords that would give Ocwen Loan Servicing any authority to

conduct the current mortgage foreclosure of the Petitioner's said property as well known

to the respondents. Notwithstanding the consent judgment (Doc 12) the respondents have

acknowledge that they intend to conduct an unlawful foreclosure of the Petitioner's said

property. (Doc 1526546 at page 8)

24. The said respondents on June 3rd, 2014, the Maricopa Country Recorders Office

recorded a fraudulent assignment “The record beneficial interest under said Deed of Trust as a

result of the last (fraudulent) recorded assignment thereof is Christiana Trust, A Division of

Wilmington Savings Fund Society FSB, not in its individual capacity but as Trustee of ARLP

Trust 3, by an unlawful instrument Recorded on June 3, 2014, in Maricopa County Records at

Recorder's No. 14-360515 c/o Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC 5720 Premier Park Dr West Palm

Beach Fl 33407.”

25. A well known to the Respondents a representative of Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, who

claimed to be an agent, Chi rag Patel, on March 26, 20146, informed Christopher Stoller, that

he was required to have insurance for his property pursuant to a residential mortgage and since

Christopher Stoller has refused to provide a copy of the insurance, Ocwen was placing

insurance on the subject property and would be charging $3,000 annually, for a home owners

insurance policy that would generally cost about $300.00 per year in violation of the consent

judgment (Doc 12).

26. Chi rag Patel confirmed in a telephonic conversation Thursday, August 21, 2014. Chiral

Patel confirmed that the Notice of Trustee dated July 23, 2014 and recorded at the Maricopa County

Recorder's Office document Number 20140480249 was a fraud and violated the Fare Debt

Collection Act by attempting to collect a debt of Philip B. Stone that was discharged in a New

Mexico Bankruptcy proceeding. Chi rag Patel stated that Ocwen is aware of the Deed of Re-

Conveyance that they received by certified mail, that Ocwen has no lawful interest in the property

known as 28437 N. 112th Way Scottsdale, Arizona 85262 and Ocwen Loan and/or its agent Western

Progressive-Arizona, Inc., will immediately forward Notice to: 28437 N. 112th Way Scottsdale,

Arizona 85262 that the Notice of Trustee's Sale for November 12, 2014 (Exhibit Group Exhibit

5) is permanently canceled. See a true and correct copy of the email marked as Exhibit 7 (email

confirmation)

27. Notwithstanding,the Respondents knowingly and willfully are continuing to unlawfully

foreclose (Group Exhibit 5) on the Petitioner's property .( At page 8 Defendant-Appellee

Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance Doc 1526546 filed

6 Ocwen Loan Servicing had no authority to place an home owners insurance policy on the subject on March 26, 2004. Christopher Stoller that this was done primarily for the Respondents to receive a unlawful “kickbacks” in the form of commissions from the insurance company from whom policies were obtained and placed, which caused the rates and the amount of coverage to be excessive in violation of the law and the Consent Judgment (Doc 12).

12/10/2014)

28. Respondents are well aware that they are not not entitled to enforce the said note or

mortgage against Philip Stone, which has been discharged (Exhibit 3) A Released with a full

Re-conveyance of the Deed Trust and Cancellation of the Promissory Note and the Adjustable

Rate Note securing the Deed of Trust has been filed and recorded with the Maricopa County

Recorder Office 2014-0512240 08/04/14. (Exhibit 4) as well known to the Respondents.

29. The Respondents are in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the

Bankruptcy law, the consent judgment (Doc 12) by attempting to collect on a debt from Philip

B. Stone that is not owed that in an of itself is a violation of indirect criminal contempt. The

debt has been discharged Exhibit 3.

30. In Respondents fraudulent Substitution of Trustee Document (Group Exhibit 5)

Recording Requested by the sham title company, Premium Title Agency, Inc., filed in the

Maricopa County Recorder's office on July 2, 2014 20140433956, states that “The successor

trustee (Western Progressive -Arizona, Inc.) appointed herein qualifies as trustee of the trust

Deed in the trustee's capacity as an Insurance Company as required by ARS Section 33-803,

Subsection (A)(6). The above is a fraudulent statement as well known to the Respondents.

Western Progressive -Arizona, Inc., was not registered with the Arizona Department of

Insurance to do business in Arizona as an Insurance Company according to Ruth Oneida, an

employee with the Arizona Department of Insurance.

31. The Respondents have been notified by the Petitioner's complaint via email and

certified mail correspondence of its objection to the fraudulent Trustee Sale which is marked as

Group Exhibit 8. The Respondents stated in pleadings filed before this court that .( At page 8

Defendant-Appellee Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance Doc

1526546 filed 12/10/2014)have refused and failed to take any remedial action to with draw the

fraudulent Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the respondents stated they

intend to foreclose despite their lack of authority and despite their ongoing violations of

the Consent judgment (Doc 12).

32. On October 16, 2014 the Ombudsman from Ocwen Respondent, Nilekha Ghate, Consumer

Account Analyst, Office of the Consumer Ombudsman, Ocwen loan Servicing, LLC sent an

email ( Exhibit 9) correspondence to the Petitioner Christopher Stoller stating that “Ocwen

Loan Servicing's office of the CEO and President acknowledges receipt of your e-mail

correspondence dated October 1, 2014. As the Consumer/Customer Advocate, the Office of the

Ombudsman welcomes the opportunity to respond to your inquiry. Attached are copies of the

signed original Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) and Deed of Trust (Exhibit 11) signed by

Mr. Philip B. Stone indicating that the loan originated on May 2, 2006 with Countrywide Bank,

N.A. Ocwen commenced servicing this loan from Bank of America (BOA) on September 8,

2012 with the last payment satisfied on the loan being February 1, 2008 payment.” take Judicial

Notice of the Email marked as Exhibit 9.

33. The Original note that Respondent Ocwen refers to (Exhibit 10) is a forgery. When it is

compared to the actual true and correct copy of the original Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 12) a

copy of which was actually filed in the New Mexico Bankruptcy of Phil Stone .On page one

(Exhibit 12) of the actual true and correct copy of the Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 12), a copy

of which the court can take judicial notice is from the New Mexico Bankruptcy filing of Philip

Stone. The Philip Stone bankruptcy filing Case 10-11558 Doc 18 filed on 06/11/10. A close

examination of the actual note (Exhibit 12)caries a stamp at the upper right hand of the said

Adjustable Rate Note, “I do hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy of the original.

SECURITY TITLE. carrying a signature. The Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) that the

Respondents claim was a true and correct copy that Respondent emailed ( to the Petitioner

marked as Exhibit 10 is in fact a forgery. The Respondents manufactured note (Exhibit 10)

does not carry a certification of the top right page 1 of 6 (New Mexico Bankruptcy Case No.

10-11558 entered 6/11//10 at page 4 of 28) (Exhibit 12). Secondly, the forgery (Exhibit 10)

contains a stamp on page 5 of 5 which has a fraudulent stamp “PAY TO THE ORDER OF

WITHOUT RECOURSE COUNTRYWIDE BANK, NA BY Laurie Meder, Senior Vice

President. This endorsement is missing completely from the original note Exhibit 12. Secondly

the signature of Laurie Meder is not an original signature it is a forgery. A rubber

stamped “signature”. Which of course does not appear on the original note (Exhibit 12). It

is clear that the respondents are engaging in indirect criminal contempt, in violations of

the consent judgment (Doc 12) outside of the purview of the court and are continuing to

forge documents in order to effect fraudulent mortgage of the Petitioner's said property

foreclosures, which the Ocwen Respondents have no lawful right to foreclosure.

34. Respondent Robert R. Maddox for the Ocwen Respondents stated in Defendant-Appellee

Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance (Document 1526546

USCA Case 14-5265 filed on 12/10/2014 at page 8) “...the foreclosure sale will be set

again”. Despite the conditions that the respondents agreed to in the Consent Judgment

(Doc 12), the respondents are engaging indirect criminal contmacious conduct and on

going mortgage foreclosure fraud in violation of the consent judgment (Doc 12).

35. The Respondents are clearly in violation of Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of

Criminal Procedure Indirect Criminal Contempt in conducting the unlawful residential non-

judicial foreclosure marked as Exhibit Group Exhibit 5 in Arizona which is clearly

evidenced in this complaint.

DISCUSSION

Contempt of court is any act which is calculated to embarrass, hinder or obstruct a court in its

administration of justice, or to derogate from the court’s authority or dignity. People v. Campbell 123

Ill.App.3d 103 (1984). Criminal contempt is concerned with preserving the dignity of the court while

civil sanctions aim to enforce rights of private parties. In re Marriage of Wilde, 141 Ill. App. 3d, 464,

(1986).

Indirect criminal contempt is distinguished by the fact that it occurs outside of the presence of

the judge or as to matters of which he does not have personal or constructive notice. In re Marriage of

Betts 161 Ill.Dec. 892. The discussion most frequently arises where defendants are trying to classify

contempt as indirect rather than direct, because of the greater procedural protections afforded a

defendant who is accused of indirect criminal contempt including the requirement of proof beyond a

reasonable doubt. See e.g. Id.

Indirect criminal contempt encompasses a broad range of conduct, including: spitting on a

petitioner as the respondent exits the courtroom (where the judge did not witness the act), In re

Marriage of Madary, 519, NE 2d, 509 (1988), failure to return to court after a recess (where the court

did not have knowledge of the reasons for the defendant’s absence), In re Marriage of Slingerland, 347,

Ill. App. 3d, 707, the filing of the a civil law suit against a trial judge, People v. Kaeding, 192, Ill. App.

3d, 660 (1989), the presentation of a falsified transcript (where the judge did not have judicial notice

the defendant’s mental state). People v. Gerard, 146 N.E.2d 229 (1957), and other willful

misrepresentations People v. Penson, 557 N.E.2d 230. The filing of contemptuous documents can be

indirect criminal contempt. People v. Kaeding, 239 Ill. App. 3d, 851 (1993). Whether the contempt is

direct or indirect hinges on whether the judge has personal or constructive knowledge of all of the

elements necessary to prove the offense. Id.

When indirect criminal contempt is premised on the violation of a court order (Doc 12), Totten

explains the necessary elements. See People v. Totten, 118 Ill. 2d, 124, (1987). “To sustain a finding of

indirect criminal contempt for the violation of a court order, outside the presence of the court,” it must

be proved that there is a court order (Doc 12) and a willful violation of that order (Emphasis added).

Id. [People v. Wilcox, 5 Ill. 2d, 222, (1955)]. The case on which Totten relies elucidates the scope of

Totten. As the court explained in Wilcox, it is necessary to distinguish between two types of contempt,

contempt that “consists of unseemly conduct” and contempt that is contemptuous disobedience of an

order of the court. The existence of an order of the court (Doc 12) and proof of willful disobedience

are essential to a contempt of the latter type. Id. Totten places no restriction on the type of indirect

criminal contempt at issue in this case, which does not involve the violation of a court order.

ARGUMENT

The Respondents in this case created a contemptuous document(s) Notice of Trustee Sale

(Group Exhibit 5), the forged adjustable rate note (Exhibit 10) emailed7 The false Notice of Trustee

Sale (Group Exhibit 5), the forged adjustable rate note (Exhibit 10) was contemptuous because it

contained a willful misrepresentation(s) that were “calculated to embarrass, hinder, or obstruct the court

in the administration of justice.” The Respondents were acting with intent to obstruct the DC

Appellate Court in the administration of justice. The Respondents stated in pleadings filed before this

court that .( At page 8 Defendant-Appellee Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary

Affirmance Doc 1526546 filed 12/10/2014)have refused and failed to take any remedial action to with

draw the fraudulent Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the respondents stated they

intend to foreclose despite their lack of authority and despite their ongoing violations of the

Consent judgment (Doc 12).

The Respondents then, out side of the purview of this court, during the course of this litigation,

again submitted a forged Adjustable Rate Note, claiming that it was an original when the Respondents

knew or should have know that it was a forgery (Exhibit 10)

THERE IS PROBABLY CAUSE THAT THE RESPONDENTS ENGAGED IN INDRECT

CRIMINAL CONTEMPT

Probable cause is a level of reasonable belief, based on facts that can be articulated, that a

person committed the offense charged . Here, the actus reas is that a false representation was made in

7 Wire fraud in violation of the criminal Rico Statute.

the respondent email (Exhibit 9) stating that the attached adjustable rate note was a true copy of the

original when it was not see (Exhibit 12) The mens rea is that the misrepresentation was willful and

was calculated to hinder and obstruct the respondent from seeking justice before this court, during the

pendency of the on going litigation. The Respondents filed the false Notice of Trustee Sale (Group

Exhibit 5), the forged Adjustable rate Note (Exhibit 10) to thwart the administration of justice.

Now, on the record there are two conflicting Adjustable Rate Notes (Exhibit 10) and (Exhibit

12).

Given the respective motives of the Respondents and the fact that they have been sued by 49

State Attorney Generals and the Consumer Protection Bearu for identical offenses in the underlying

case, it is probable that the Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) is a forgery and contains the false

representations, as well as the Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5).

In light of the long history of Respondents, who have engaged in mortgage foreclosure fraud

and thwarting the administration of justice, there exists a reasonable belief that the alleged false

misrepresentation(s) contained in the Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the forged

Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) were made willfully, and not innocently. It is clear that the

Respondents, had the motive (along with the history of making false mortgage foreclosure documents)

to make the false Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the forged Adjustable rate Note

(Exhibit 10) in order to unlawfully foreclose on the Petitioner's said property, as the Respondents have

done thousands of times before. It is reasonable to conclude that the Respondents willfully made the

misrepresentation(s) in the said documents in order to hinder and obstruct the court in its administration

of justice. There exists a reasonable belief, based upon the facts which have been articulated, that

Respondents committed the offenses charged. The standard of probable cause has been met. The

respondents manufactured fraudulent documents a Notice of Trustee Sale (Group “Exhibit 5) and an

adjustable rate note (Exhibit 10) in order to justify their fraudulent foreclosure of the Petitioner’s said

property.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that the Court immediately assign this matter for

prosecution to the U.S. Attorneys office, that a date for hearing be immediately set, that the hearing be

conducted and that the Court make findings of fact, conclusions of law and a recommendation for such

contumacious conduct is warranted by its findings. Further that the Attorney/Respondents be

immediately suspended from the practice of law before the DC Appeals Court pending a full hearing on

this Petition for Indirect criminal complaint which contains prima facie and irrefutable evidence of the

Respondents violations of the Consent Judgment (Doc 10) and indirect criminal contempt.

For the foregoing reasons, the Respondents are properly charged with the offense of indirect

criminal contempt. The court is directed to issue an order to have this case re-assigned for a hearing on

Petitioner's Petition for Indirect Criminal Contempt. To permanently enjoy the Respondents from

foreclosing on the Petitioner's said property and from ever conducting a Trustee Sale of the said

property. To stay this proceeding pending a complete hearing on Petitioner's Petition for Indirect

Criminal Contempt and to grant the Petitioner any other relief that the court feels is right and just.

/s/Christopher Stoller, Appellant/Petitioner 6045 W. Grand Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60639 312--834-9717 email Ldms4@hotmail.com

CERTIFICATION

Under penalties as provided by law, the undersigned certifies that the statements setforth in this instrument are true and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be oninformation and belief and as such matters the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that heverily believes the same to be true. And if called to testify would testify to same. /s/ Christopher Stoller