INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY

ALFONSO MORAN and
BEATRIZ ESCOTTO
9328 HONEYSUCKLE AVE.
FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708
PHONE: (714) 422 7477
Email: amoran_2000@yahoo.com

ACTING PROPER

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE
CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

ALFONSO MORAN and
BEATRIZ ESCOTTO
Plaintiffs
Vs.
BABAK SINBARI
STEVEN R. KRUID
DANIEL TUSA
STRATMAN, SCHWARTZ & WILLIAMS-
ABREGO.
Defendants

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.
COMPLAINT ABOUT:
1. INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO
SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR
LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION
2. INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET
ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR
EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

DEPT.
UNLIMITED )
)

Plaintiff, ALFONSO MORAN, hereby complains and alleges as follows:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

1. Plaintiffs (“Plaintiffs”) are now, and at all times relevant herein were, individuals
and residents of the City of FOUNTAIN VALLEY, County of Orange, State of California.
2. Defendant Babak Sinbari (“Defendant”) is, and at all times relevant herein was, an
individual, residing in and doing business in the City of LAGUNA NIGEL, County of Orange, State of
California.
3. This court is the proper court for trial in this action in that the judgment being
sought to be vacated was entered, and the defendants are currently doing business within, this
Court’s jurisdictional area.
4. Plaintiffs are unaware of the true names or capacities, whether they are individuals
or business entities, of Defendant DOES 1 through 100, and therefore sues them by such fictitious
names and will seek leave of this Court to insert true names and capacities once they have been
ascertained.
5. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants, and each of them, inclusive of DOES
1 through 100, were authorized and empowered by each other to act and did so act, as agents of
each other, and all of the things herein alleged to have been done by them were done in the
capacity of such agency. Upon information and belief, all Defendants are responsible in some
manner for the events described herein and are liable to Plaintiffs for the damages they have
incurred.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE THE JUDGMENT FOR LACK

OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

(As against all Defendants)

6. Plaintiffs refer to, and incorporate by reference, the allegations of paragraphs 1
through 5 of this complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
7. On or about 10/25/2018, a complaint about BREACH OF CONTRACT, INJURIES,
ELDERS FINANCIAL ABUSE, FRAUDS, BREACH OF CONTRACTS, INJURIES, AMONG
OTHERS. was filed in the DEPT. C-42 of this Superior Court by Plaintiffs against defendants. Said
complaint was captioned as #2, Case Number 30-2018-01027910-CU-BC-CJC.
8 A First Amended Complaint increasing the number of cases was filed in this court by
Plaintiffs against defendants, captioned as ROA #81 Dated 07/25/2019.
9. On or about 12/06/2018 PROOF OF SERVICE WAS FILED with this Court by
Plaintiffs.
10. On or about 10/14/2021 a summary judgment was entered in that court finding in
favor of defendants and against plaintiffs. Said judgment does not order that plaintiffs are to pay
defendants any money as the TOTAL SUM OF THE JUDGMENT. A minute copy of said filed
judgment showing the date of entry of judgment that was filed with this Court is attached hereto
as Exhibit “3” and incorporated herein by reference.
11. Plaintiffs file this independent action in equity as a collateral attack on the judgment in
the prior action because it is void for lack of personal jurisdiction due to a FRAUD UPON THE
COURT committed months before and here denounced as well.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT DUE TO
EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE)

(As against all Defendants)

12. Plaintiffs refer to, and incorporate by reference, the allegations of paragraphs 1
through 14 of this complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
13. On or about a COMPLAINT WAS FILED, about BREACH OF CONTRACT,
INJURIES, ELDERS FINANCIAL ABUSE, FRAUDS, BREACH OF CONTRACTS, FINANCIAL
ELDER ABUSE, AMONG OTHERS. , ETC., was filed in this Court by Plaintiffs against
Defendants. Said complaint was captioned as, Case Number 30-2018-01027910-CU-BC-CJC.
14. Plaintiffs file this independent action in equity as a collateral attack on the
judgment in the prior action. After all, it is void because it was procured through extrinsic fraud as
stated in Bennett v. Hibernia Bank, (1956) 47 Cal.2d 540, 558; see also Carroll v. Abbott
Laboratories (1982) 32 Cal. 3d 892, 901-902, and Weitz v. Yankosky (1966) 63 Cal. 2d 849, 855 due
to the actions of defendants alleged herein and should be vacated by this Court as the alleged
service on plaintiffs by defendants in the prior action was defective and invalid as defendants
knew from their knowledge that was committing felonies as indicated ahead, to be able to reach
the results they planned.
15. Plaintiffs are pursuing and proving several Frauds upon the Court
committed thru the process, as are shown next:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

ELEMENTS OF THE BURDEN THAT PROVE THE FIVE ELEMENTS
OF FRAUD UPON THE COURT

I. Show the Fraud on the Court with clear and convincing
evidence.
II. The alleged Fraud was already known or discovered at the
time of settlement or entry of judgment.
III. Meet the burden of showing the five Elements necessary
for Fraud Upon the Court.
As next:
A. Conduct by an officer of the Court. (As a matter of fact, there was
participating, knowing, and supporting the conduct of the Attorneys at the
record all the attorneys, plus their supervisors, their managers, and in a world
all of the members of the Firm SCHWARTZ, HARTSUYKER, STRATSMAN &
WILLIAMS-ABREGO SANTA ANA, as well as the response in the part of the
Farmers Insurance, connected by supervising or receiving information or report
from the attorneys at the record in the case and with knowledge of the issues of
the illegality of the Insurance Company, including any directive and/or letting
pass on purpose an issue that could bring a great deal of money-saving for non
paid Ilegal faults/felonies to the PLAINTIFFS and the IRS, coming from the legal
results of the present process.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

B. That is directed towards the judicial machinery itself.
(Because it affected, the legal and complete knowledge of the court for benefit
of the Defendant and the Insurance Company)
C. That is intentionally false, willfully blind to the truth, or is in
reckless regard with the truth. (No necessary abundance of comments
because it is clear and shows by itself, but in the abundance of clarity, this
supports the reliance of the court in the whole machination and makes it easier
for the grade of trust from the institution into the defendants}.
D.That is positive concealment and tampering of evidence
when one is under a duty to disclose. (Of course, the duty to disclose is
the main reason to consider and the strict object of the discovery and as well leaves
in total blindness about the wrong to the Plaintiffs.)
E. That deceives the court. ( Naturally, it was the primary intention of the
Defendants and indispensable for the results of their plan).

I . FIRST COUNT. SHOWING THE FRAUD ON THE COURT WITH CLEAR
AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE.

A). This assertion from Defendants was taken from his ordinances
and his answers to his REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. Q.=question by
Plaintiffs. A.= Answers by Defendant by the way of his lawyers.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

FRAUDS UPON THE COURT COMMITTED DURING THE PROCESS BY
THE DEFENDANTS IN THE CASE, AGAINST THE PLAINTIFFS

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Plaintiffs filed suit against Defendant on or about 10/25/2018 alleging:
BREACH OF CONTRACT, INJURIES, ELDERS FINANCIAL ABUSE, FRAUDS, BREACH OF
CONTRACTS, FINANCIAL ELDER ABUSE, AMONG OTHERS. (EXHIBIT # 140)
Judgment was entered and an order from the judge of the cause was dictated
against Plaintiffs on or around 15/02/2022. (EXHIBIT # 141) Plaintiffs contend that
said order was procured through FRAUD ON THE COURT in that DEFENSE’S
ATTORNEYS SPOILED, TAMPERING, AND CONCEALED EVIDENCE BY ABUSES AND
MISUSES IN THE DISCOVERY AND FRAUDS, FINANCIAL ELDER ABUSES, AS WELL IN
DISCOVERY MADE FALSE DECLARATIONS, CHEATING OF THE COURT, AMONG
OTHERS.
(ELEMENT I)
FACTS OF ALFONSO MORAN AND EXHIBITS ATTACHED AS NEXT:

(ELEMENT I) the plaintiffs rented the house from defendant Babak sinbari from
10/01/2008 to 02/28/2019, more than 10 years divided into two contracts
(EXHIBITS#s 131 and 132) except defendant eliminated in the contract dated
10/22/2015 the clause of a discount of $45 for each rent monthly paid timely, as
well defrauding the IRS, defrauding the taxes he should be paid and using the
deceiving papers and information defrauded to create tampering or concealing the
evidence used to try to put these plaintiffs out the process by the way of lying to

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

the court make them guilty of an inexisting contempt (Rule 37 of Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, and Title 18 United States Code.) which was planned as said before concealing
the evidence (ELEMENT III-D) of the monthly rent receipts non delivered to the
plaintiffs since the beginning of the leasing to the last month paid because he was
evading the import of the rents paid by the plaintiffs non accumulating it in his tax
returns at all and after that in concert and under a CONSPIRACY with his attorneys
at the record, steven kruid, daniel Tusa and Stratman, Schwartz & Williams-Abrego
Santa Ana. (ELEMENT III-A) et al.

(CONSPIRACY: A conspiracy is an agreement by two or more persons to commit a wrongful act.
Such an agreement may be made orally or in writing or may be implied by the
conduct of the parties.
A conspiracy may be inferred from circumstances, including the nature
of the acts done, the relationships between the parties, and the interests
of the alleged coconspirators. Plaintiff ALFONSO MORAN is not required to prove
that BABAK SINBARI, STEVEN KRUID, or DANIEL TUSA, personally committed a wrongful act or
that he knew all the details of the agreement or the identities of all the other participants.

constructed the fraud by the way of demanding the plaintiffs to give all the
information about the correspondent rent payments from the start to the finish of
the rent last, (more than 10 years), when they never had given that physical
information despise their asking and constant rogatory (ELEMENT III-C) (EXHIBITS #s
141 in a group of five letters sent to DEFENDANT in different dates, asking to
provide to plaintiffs with all the rent receipts corresponded to the whole time the
house was leased that was indispensable as a piece of basic evidence in the case).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

but the accused here made a real conspiracy when to act together among the
defendant and the two attorneys in the record and for sure with the knowledge and
so the automatic authorization coming from another person in the supervision of
the lawyers-employees in the record and the chain connected with those
authorizations could go back to the whole mandataries of the law firm Stratman,
Schwartz and Williams-Abrego Santa Ana,(ELEMENT III-A and III-C) which at this
moment these plaintiffs are making participants of the whole case as john does and
will follow the investigation until would be set clear the name and way of
participation because it is without a doubt and under the most unfair of the law on
any process, to make such a conspiracy against among many legal experts and his
adjutants against a couple of proper, non-lawyers, elders, with no great dominion
of the English language, strong ill and, broken for not being able to work, but living
from a scarce part help of the state.
FACTS

1. (ELEMENT-1) The PLAINTIFFS leased the house located at 11102 Songish St,
Garden Grove, Ca. 92840 for more than 10 years, from 10/2008 to 2/2019
(THE HOUSE) (E [exhibit] 130, 131)
2. All the monthly rent payments during that term were paid timely.
3. There was a way of paying the rent instituted by Defendant (BABAK SINBARI),
which consisted in depositing each month the import of the rent in only and
only bank account and only in the same bank by the name “UNION BANK”
always, the account was to the name of (BABAK SINBARI) only. (ELEMENT III-
C. When paying the rent we receive a deposit slip from the UNION BANK
which contained: the name of the Bank, the date, import deposited, time,
number of the deposited, and the 4 last numbers of the checks

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

10
4. (E 136) number 136-1 to ET AL
5. The checks account never change, was in the name of BABAK SINBARI IN THE
UNION BANK, BRANCH OF BROOKHURST ST, GARDEN GROVE WITH NUMBER
2072195999. (ELEMENT II-E)
6. Defendant never gave me a receipt of the deposit, (ELEMENT III-A
7. and III D) despite we were asking many times mostly because we use to
make an authorized by Law deductible monthly amount of the tax due to the
use I made of the House as the address to my business as well.
8. Plaintiff BEATRIZ ESCOTTO inclusive, sent a letter in certified mail with accuse
of receipt asking for the rent receipts, and BABAK did not even answer (E
102). This certified letter is the only proof that the Plaintiffs have as evidence
of the TAMPERING committed by the defendants, but currently, the plaintiffs
are working with the IRS to get the information about the tax evasion from
the defendants.
9. We notice with worrisome that Defendant has denied all the time and was in
no way willing to deliver any legal monthly rent payment receipt, only at that
time we didn’t explain ourselves why.
10. On or around the early 2020 year, Defendant’s attorney at record sent us
their proposals for the discoveries giving us 30 days to answer, we asked
some more days and were accepted, Attorneys made the same and in time
we sent our answers, and as well attorneys sent the correspondent answers
of Defendant.
11. I started checking one by one the answers of attorneys to my proposals and
(ELEMENT III-A) immediately realized they were incomplete and with a lot of
untruths, falsities, and unreasonable pretexts for not answering many

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

questions,(ELEMENT III-B) (EXHIBITS SUPLEMENTS A, B, C ) so I started
marking, separating, classifying, and checking if there were reasons on the
Defendants attorneys side in order to proceed to correct, but with a big
surprise when checking was finding that the great majority of the Defendants’
objections were no truth but only pretexts for not-answering but based on
unfounded arguments and so, the only objective them pretending was to
JUST NOT ANSWER (ELEMENT III-C) the questions for which they had not a
real valid response and so, denying the correction of the text they let that
proposals without answers (ELEMENT II-D)
that could have them compromised in some way or having to accept
something against themselves and that way of doing take us again to the
SECOND COUNT OF THIS FRAUD UPON THE COURT, TAMPERING WITH THE
EVIDENCE, and that is added in everything concerning to the second count
and could be considered as a complement as well. (ELEMENT III-D).
12. After the delivery of the Discoveries of each side, these PLAINTIFFS received
with a big surprise a letter from the attorney Tusa, where he was complaining
about not having received the full answers corresponded to his Request for
Admissions, affirming these PLAINTIFFS haven’t answered the questions
numbered 1 to 126 which corresponds precisely to the documents of the 126
months of leasing of THE HOUSE and that the Defendant never want to
deliver to us. (ELEMENT III-E)
13. At that moment we were not sure if we had the documents or at least a copy
or something about to be able to answer the lack of the discovery questions
and we started a crazy and very difficult searching among all of our papers
that were not very ordered so we start looking one by one and in every place,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

we have copies and originals of Motions, oppositions, Rules, and every sort of
papers that conform our expedient of the process to that time and after put
in order and archive correctly we didn’t find anything about the rent receipts,
except copies of letters sent to Defendant’s attorneys explaining that we
have not anything of those papers because they never wanted to give us, but
we took a lot of time more than normal because we want to find some
related papers to probe. (EXHIBIT # 102)
14. We finally found a letter dated 05/01/2018 (E 102) which is a date when we
haven’t yet received the letters of the proposal from the discovery of the
Defendants including the Attorneys on the record and didn’t even imagine we
will receive the proposal of the same information by defendants.
15. Since Defendants start to ask and then demand the delivery of the receipts
and their information they started a very heavy storm of all kinds of petitions
and even threats about what will they do if we don’t deliver the information
and we were in despair because we have nothing and the only answer to
their motions to sanctions and even termination of the process for Sanctions
they asked the Hon Judge was always that we have nothing and we couldn’t
give them something we didn’t have and then the Hon Judge started
monetary sanctions against us and after several petitions from the
Defendant’s lawyers the Hon. started to threaten us with the possibility of
termination if we don’t compliment the orders of the court and deliver the
information from Discovery. (EXHIBIT # 142. SUPPLEMENT A)
16. But at the moment Defendant and his attorneys filed the Motion to deliver
further responses for the discovery for admissions related to the monthly
rent receipts we understood all the game Defendant and must of all his

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

attorneys in the record, DANIEL TUSA, STEVEN KRUID and STRATMAN,
SCHWARTZ & WILLIAMS-ABREGO SANTA ANA were playing,(never had
delivered those papers and we start looking for proofs to fix that truth and
from there start our defense with base in a Fraud Upon the Court, because
the Judge was acting as being supporting the Defendants and never gave us a
direct answer, inclusive given the reason of the non delivering of the
information and threatening us with sanctions and inclusive sanctioning
based in false accusing these PLAINTIFFS have not offered anything to refer
to the possibility of that happening, and never mentioned, less listened nor
asking at all the proof of Defendant and his Lawyers about when , how,
where did them had delivered the information about the Rent Receipts to
understand the real issues like the TAMPERING or SPOILING OF THE
EVIDENCE, THE CONCEALMENT OF THE SAME AND/OR THE DECEIVEMENT
THAT CONFORMED THE PLAN OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS.
17. This was a sure shoot for the Defenses because they knew all the time that
these PLAINTIFFS didn’t have the papers and pieces of information at their
hands, just because the defenses themselves had not delivered and so
Plaintiffs couldn’t have it in no way, so, (ELEMENT III-B and III-E) his objective
was to bombard as much as possible the court and the Hon Judge to make
him Rule the termination of the case for contempt of the PLAINTIFFS, which
they are still asking even now in their last motions and papers and even to file
a Summary Judgment based in a mistake based in the inadvertence of the
PLAINTIFF MORAN, which has no value because it was an error of a PROPER
very pressured under a heavy bombard, and PLAINTIFFS just as a matter AD
CAUTELAM come up now by this Plaintiff ALFONSO MORAN TO BEG YOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

HONOR to overrule that mistake, based on RULE 60 (1) to vacate that mistake
not taken in count such a wrong, inadvertence, nor mistake committed by
this simple PROPER with a very pushing task.
18. There is one proof that is a pendant and it is being transacted with the IRS
and is the official information about the tax evasion of the defendant taxes
for the lack of accumulation of all the income of all the rents paid by these
plaintiffs during the more than ten years of renting the house. (though it is
proof with the number of times asked and arguments during the related
motions in the process and determinantly by the letter sent by certified mail
dated 05/01/2018 (Exhibit 102) and never answered by defendants, I am
looking for the participation of the IRS to have it confirmed and reaffirmed
and as an indubitability truth.) (e-102) ( ELEMENT III-B) e because the
defendant never since the beginning of the contracts wanted to deliver that
papers and information, trying not to show his tail to the IRS and be launched
under the bus, as it surely will be. (ELEMENT III-E)
19. this filing of the fraud upon the court now denounced is filed on the grounds
of section 60 (d) (3), 60 (a) 1, (rule 60), as said before.
20. this alleged fraud was already known and was discovered before the time of
the entry of judgment of this process but after several rules and orders given
by the hon. judge during the development of the case, obtained by moving of
falsities in the discovery, false actions, petitions, and motions filed by the
defense and his attorneys in the record to get sanctions and to try the
termination of the case there was wrongly not accepted by the hon. Judge
before this pledge.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

21. being all fraud upon the court (ELEMENT I) there are no statutes of limitations
and in case of some difference of opinion, there is the opportunity to repeat
and prevail inclusive after the pronunciation by the authority of a final
judgment against.

II
LEGAL ARGUMENT

A. THE COURT HAS THE POWER TO VACATE THE JUDGMENT THAT WAS
ENTERED AGAINST THE DEFENDANT FOR FRAUD ON THE COURT
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d)(3) states in pertinent part that nothing in
Rule 60 limits a court’s power to set aside a judgment for fraud on the court
PLAINTIFFS contends that attorneys at the record (ELEMENT III.A) DANIEL
TUSA, STEVEN KRUID and STRATMAN, SCHWARTZ & WILLIAMS-ABREGO including
the directive and the supervisors committed fraud on the court by the following
actions and deliberate omissions that harmed the integrity
of the judicial process and with the knowledge and acceptance of Defendant Babak
Sinbari:
under next felonies: tampering, concealing evidence (ELEMENT III.A), fraud,
financial elder abuse, breach of contract, injuries, misuses, abuses of discovery, and
fraud upon the court. (ELEMENT I)
One species of fraud upon the court occurs when an "officer of the court"
perpetrates fraud affecting the ability of the court or jury to impartially judge a
case. See In re Intermagnetics America, Inc., 926 F.2d 912, 916 (9th Cir. 1991); see
also Alexander v. Robertson, 882 F.2d 421, 424 (9th Cir.1989).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

"Fraud upon the court includes both attempts to subvert the integrity of the
court and fraud by an officer of the court." Intermagnetics, 926 F.2d at 916.
In all adversarial proceedings, litigants have a duty of full disclosure and honesty
with the court. (ELEMENTS III-C and D) Typically, where a party obtains a judgment
through fraudulent conduct, the only way to overturn that judgment is through a
motion to vacate according to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3).
“Fraud on the court is generally limited to instances where “the integrity of the
judicial process ha[s] been fraudulently subverted” and does not include fraudulent
conduct that only affects a party to the action. Fraud on the court is typically limited
to the most egregious conduct that implicates an officer of the court.” (Cites as More
Than Fraud: Proving Fraud on the Court, 10 ST. JOHN’S BANKR. RESEARCH LIBR. NO. 24 (2018).
“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 sets forth the grounds under which a judgment
may be set aside, but Rule 60(d)(3) states Rule 60 does not limit a court’s power to
set aside a judgment for fraud on the court. Rule 60(d)(3) is the codification of a
court’s inherent power to investigate whether a judgment was obtained by
fraudulent conduct”.
The Ninth Circuit has also stated that fraud on the court is “an
unconscionable plan or scheme which is designed to improperly influence the court
in its decision." Abatti v. Commissioner, 859 F.2d 115, 118 (9th Cir.1988) (internal
quotation omitted).
The United States Supreme Court has stated that lawyers are an officer of the
Court. See In re Snyder, 472 U.S. 634, 643(1985) (courts have inherent authority to
discipline lawyers which "derives from lawyer’s role as an officer of the court which
granted admission.”) (ELEMENT III.A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

The requisite fraud on the court occurs where “it can be demonstrated, clearly and
convincingly, that a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme
calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a
matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the
presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.” (ELEMENT III.B))
. “Abuse occurs when a material factor deserving significant weight is ignored when
an improper factor is relied upon, or when all proper and no improper factors are
assessed, but the court makes a serious mistake in weighing them.” (In re Roussos, 541
B.R. at 729) (ELEMENT III.C)
An attorney, as an officer of the court, has a duty of honesty towards the court.
Where an attorney neglects that duty and obtains a judgment based on conduct
that actively defrauds the court, such judgment may be attacked, and subsequently
overturned, as a fraud on the court. Fraud on the court can be found when the
debtor’s attorney proffers a material misrepresentation to obtain a judgment.
(ELEMENT III.E)

B. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT THE FAILURE OF A LAWYER TO DISCLOSE
EVIDENCE DURING DISCOVERY CONSTITUTES FRAUD ON THE COURT (ELEMENT
III.D)
AND THAT THERE IS NO TIME LIMITATION FOR VACATING A JUDGMENT FOR
FRAUD ON THE COURT.
Fraud on the court is distinct from other types of fraud in that it is generally
applied only in the most egregious cases. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
stated in Toscano v. Comm’r, 441 F.2d 930, 933-34 (9th Cir. 1971) that the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

term “fraud upon the court” must be construed narrowly in connection with
Rule 60.
However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Pumphrey v. K.W.
Thompson Tool Co., 62 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir. 1995) held that a lawyer’s failure to
disclose evidence during discovery constituted fraud upon the court.
And the key issue is NOT where the alleged fraud prejudiced the defendant,
the issue is whether the fraud harms the integrity of the judicial process.
“…the inquiry as to whether a judgment should be set aside for fraud upon
the court under Rule 60(b) focuses not so much in terms of whether the alleged
fraud prejudiced the opposing party but more in terms of whether the alleged fraud
harms the integrity of the judicial process." Pumphrey v. K.W. Thompson Tool Co.,
62 F.3d at 1133 (citing text).
It is well settled that courts have inherent equity power to vacate judgments
obtained by fraud. Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44 (1991); see also In re
Levander, 180 F.3d 1114, 1118-19 (9th Cir. 1999).
Rule 60(b), which governs relief from a judgment or order, provides no time
limit on courts’ power to set aside judgments based on a finding of fraud on the
court. 11 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure §
2870 (2d ed. 1987).
We exercise the power to vacate judgments for fraud on the court "with
restraint and discretion," Chambers, 501 U.S. at 44, and only when the fraud is
established "by clear and convincing evidence," England v. Doyle, 281 F.2d 304, 310
(9th Cir. 1960).
And while courts are in general cautious about vacating a judgment under
their inherent equity power it has also been settled for over 100 years that in cases

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

where the occasion has demanded, where enforcement of the judgment is
"manifestly unconscionable, they have wielded the power without hesitation.”
Pickford v. Talbott 225 U.S. 651, 657 (1912), see also Hazel-Atlas Co. v. Hartford Co.,
322 US 238, 244-245 (1944).
When all of the relevant circumstances of this case are taken into account the
only clearly equitable determination is that the motion of Plaintiff to vacate
Judgment for FRAUD UPON THE COURT under Rule 60(d)(3) should be granted and
the felonies committed by Defendants should produce the dismiss of the process
with prejudice and the sentence given in favor of Plaintiffs, with all the
punishments, fees, interests, etc. including the punish damages and an extra-
general charge for the faults of Defendants against Plaintiffs were done being these
Elders.

II. FRAUD UPON THE COURT FOR TAMPERING WITH THE EVIDENCE
CONSTRUCTED FRAUD USING SPOLIATION AND TAMPERING OF
EVIDENCE IN THE DISCOVERIES FOR ADMISSIONS AND PRODUCTION

OF DOCUMENTS.

THIS COUNT NUMBER II IS REFERRED TO THE USE OF TAMPERING AND

CONCEALING AS THE WAY TO GET THE FRAUD.

the plaintiffs rented the house from defendant babak sinbari from 10/01/2008 to
02/28/2019, more than 10 years divided into two contracts except defendant
eliminated in the contract dated 10/22/2015 the clause of a discount of $45 for
each rent monthly paid timely, as well defrauding the irs, defrauding the taxes he
should be paid and using the deceiving papers and information defrauded to create
tampering or concealing the evidence used to try to put these plaintiffs out the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

process by the way of lying to the court make them guilty of an inexisting contempt
which was planned as said before concealing the evidence of the monthly rent
receipts non delivered to the plaintiffs since the beginning of the leasing to the last
month paid because he was evading the import of the rents paid by the plaintiffs
non accumulating it in his tax returns at all and after that in concert with his
attorneys at the record, steven kruid, daniel tusa and stratman, schwartz &
williams-abrego, constructed the fraud by the way of demanding the plaintiffs to
give all the information about the correspondent rent payments since the start to
the finnish of the rent last, (more than 10 years).
but the accused here made a real conspiracy to act together among the defendant
and the two attorneys in the record and for sure with the knowledge and so the
automatic authorization coming from another person in the supervision of the
lawyers-employees in the record and the chain connected with those authorizations
could go back to the whole mandataries of the law firm Stratman, Schwartz and
Williams-Abrego, which at this moment these plaintiffs are making participants of
the whole case as john does and will follow the investigation until would be set
clear the name and way of participation because it is without a doubt and under the
most unfair of the law on any process, to make such a conspiracy against among
many legal experts and his adjutants against a couple of proper, non-lawyers,
elders, with no great dominion of the English language, strong ill and, broken for
not being able to work, but living from a scarce part help of the state.
AND STILL, MAKE THE WHOLE BUNCH OF SAY “SILLIES” SUED AND FAIL PITIFULLY
FACING THE BIGGEST FELONY OF MAKING THE COURT FAIL BY CHEATING HER AND
HERE BEING CAUGHT!!!!!!
FACTS

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

22. The PLAINTIFFS leased the house located at 11102 Songish St, Garden Grove,
Ca. 92840 for more than 10 years, from 10/2008 to 2/2019 (THE HOUSE) (E
[exhibit] 130, 131)
23. All the monthly rent payments during that term were paid timely.
24. There was a way of paying the rent instituted by Defendant (BABAK), which
consisted in deposit each month the import of the rent in only and only bank
account and only in the same bank always, the account was to the name of
(BABAK SINBARI) always.
25. When paying the rent we receive a deposit slip from the UNION BANK which
contained: the name of the Bank, the date, import deposited, time, number
of the deposited, and the 4 last numbers of the checks account.
(E 136) number 136-1 to 136-26
26. The checks account never change, was in the name of BABAK SINBARI IN THE
UNION BANK, BRANCH OF BROOKHURST ST, GARDEN GROVE WITH NUMBER
2072195999. (ELEMENT II-E)
27. Defendant never gave me a receipt of the deposit, despite we were asking
many times mostly because we use to make an authorized by Law deductible
monthly amount of the tax due to the use I made of the House as the address
to my business.
28. Plaintiff BEATRIZ ESCOTTO inclusive, sent a letter in certified mail with accuse
of receipt asking for the rent receipts, and BABAK did not even answer (E
102).
29. We notice with worrisome that Defendant has denied all the time and was in
no way willing to deliver any legal monthly rent payment receipt, only we
didn’t explain ourselves why.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

30. On or around the early 2020 year, Defendant’s attorney at record sent us
their proposals for the discoveries giving us 30 days to answer, we asked
some more days and were accepted, Attorneys made the same and in time
we sent our answers, and as well attorneys sent the correspondent answers
of Defendant.
31. I started checking one by one the answers of attorneys to my proposals and
(ELEMENT III-A) immediately realized they were incomplete and with a lot of
untruths, falsities, and unseasonable pretexts for not answering many
questions,(ELEMENT III-B) so I started marking, separating, classifying, and
checking if there were reasons on the Defendants attorneys side in order to
proceed to correct, but with a big surprise when checking was finding that the
great majority of the Defendants’ objections were no truth but only pretexts
for not-answering but based on not founded arguments and so, the only
objective them pretending was to JUST NOT ANSWER (ELEMENT III-C) the
questions for which they had not a real valid response and so, denying the
correction of the text they let that proposals without answers that could have
them compromised in some way or having to accept something against
themselves and that way of doing take us again to the SECOND COUNT OF
THIS FRAUD UPON THE COURT, and that is added in everything concerning to
the second count and could be considered as a complement as well.
(ELEMENT III-D).
32. After the delivery of the Discoveries of each side, these PLAINTIFFS received
with a big surprise a letter from the attorney Tusa, where he was complaining
about not having received the full answers corresponded to his Request for
Admissions, affirming these PLAINTIFFS haven’t answered the questions

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

numbered 1 to 126 which corresponds precisely to the documents of the 126
months of leasing of THE HOUSE and that the Defendant never want to
deliver to us. (ELEMENT III-E)
33. At that moment we were not sure if we had the documents or at least a copy
or something about to be able to answer the lack of discovery questions and
we started a crazy and very difficult searching among all of our papers that
were not very ordered so we start looking one by one and in every place, we
have copies and originals of Motions, oppositions, Rules, and every sort of
papers that conform our expedient of the process to that time and after put
in order and archive correctly we didn’t find anything about the rent recipes,
except copies of letters sent to Defendant’s attorneys explaining that we
have not anything of those papers because they never wanted to give us, but
we took a lot of time more than normal because we want to find some
related papers to probe.
34. We finally found a letter dated 05/01/2018 (E 102) which is a date when we
haven’t yet received the letters of a proposal from the discovery of the
Defendants including the Attorneys on the record and didn’t even imagine we
will receive the proposal of the same information from the defendants.
35. Since Defendants start to ask and then demand the delivery of the receipts
and their information they started a very heavy storm of all kinds of petitions
and even threats about what will they do if we don’t deliver the information
and we were in despair because we have nothing and the only answer to
their motions to sanctions and even termination of the process for Sanctions
they asked the Hon Judge was always that we have nothing and we couldn’t
give them something we didn’t have and then the Hon Judge started

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

monetary sanctions against us and after several petitions from the
Defendant’s lawyers the Hon. The judge started to threaten us with the
possibility of termination if we don’t compliment the orders of the court and
deliver the information from Discovery.
36. But at the moment Defendant and his attorneys filed the Motion to deliver
further responses for the discovery for admissions related to the monthly
rent receipts we understood all the game Defendant and must of all his
attorneys in the record, DANIEL TUSA, STEVEN KRUID and STRATMAN,
SCHWARTZ & WILLIAMS-ABREGO were playing, because we never had
delivered those papers and we start looking for proofs to fix that truth and
from there start our defense with base in a Fraud Upon the Court, because
the Judge was acting as being supporting the Defendants and never gave us a
direct answer, inclusive given the reason of the non delivering of the
information and threatening us with sanctions and inclusive sanctioning
based in false accusing these PLAINTIFFS have not offered anything to refer
to the possibility of that happening, and never mentioned, less listened nor
asking at all the proof of Defendant and his Lawyers about when , how,
where did them had delivered the information about the Rent Receipts to
understand the real issues like the TAMPERING or SPOILING OF THE
EVIDENCE, THE CONCEALMENT OF THE SAME AND/OR THE DECEIVEMENT
THAT CONFORMED THE PLAN OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS.
37. This was a sure shoot for the Defenses because they knew all the time that
these PLAINTIFFS didn’t have the papers and pieces of information at their
hands, just because the defenses themselves had not delivered and so
Plaintiffs couldn’t have it in no way, so, his objective was to bombard as

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

much as possible the court and the Hon Judge to make him Rule the
termination of the case for contempt of the PLAINTIFFS, which they are still
asking even now in their last motions and papers and even tried filing a
Summary Judgment based in a mistake based in the inadvertence of the
PLAINTIFF MORAN, which has no value because it was an error of a PROPER
very pressured under a heavy bombard, and PLAINTIFFS just as a matter AD
CAUTELAM come up now to the RULE 60 (a) 1 to vacate that mistake but now
it has nothing to influence the case because the Fraud upon the process VOID
all the motions and rules that could affect to the PLAINTIFFS.
38. There is one proof that is a pendant and it is being transacted with the IRS
and is the OFFICIAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE TAX EVASION OF THE
DEFENDANT TAXES FOR THE LACK OF ACCUMULATION OF ALL THE INCOME
OF ALL THE RENTS PAID BY THESE PLAINTIFFS DURING THE MORE THAN TEN
YEARS OF RENTING THE HOUSE.
39. and this was the main cause because the defendant never since the beginning
of the contracts, wanted to deliver that paper and information, trying not to
show his tail to the IRS and be demanded to present, as it surely will be, so
far the only, but the good proof is the letter offered as a certified mail
document with the NUMBER 102.
40. this filing of the fraud upon the court now denounced is filed on the grounds
of section 60 (d) (3), 60 (a) 1, (rule 60)
41. this alleged fraud was already known and was discovered before the time of
the entry of judgment of this process but after several rules and orders given
by the hon. judge during the development of the case, obtained by moving of
falsities in the discovery, false actions, petitions, and motions filed by the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

defense and his attorneys in the record to get sanctions and to try the
termination of the case there was wrongly not accepted by the hon. the judge
before this pledge.
42. being all fraud upon the court there are no statutes of limitations and in case
of some difference of opinion there is the opportunity of repeat and prevail
inclusive after the pronunciation by the authority of a final judgment against.
43. the burden of showing the five elements necessary for fraud upon the court
was satisfied in the case as showed in the shady notations throughout each
fraud upon the court denounced, but it’s been explained and put clear at the
best of the plaintiff’s capacity.

COUNT NUMBER III.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

MAINLY: THE TOTAL OF THE RESPONSES FAIL TO ADHERE
TO RULE 34 of THE AMERICAN BAR.

Answering by DEFENDANT PARTY. BABAK SINBARI and ATTORNEYS
In this Answering produced by THE DEFENDANT, by the way of his Attorney at
record DANIEL TUSA and after this date confirmed by another attorney in the
case STEVEN R. KRUID who signed the responses proposed, but it contains
another sheet which is supposed to be a VERIFICATION made by defendant
BABAK SINBARI, but has some elements that devalued the so-called
“verification” and that is only a try to make guilty to BABAK SINBARI of all the
lies and wrongdoings contained in the RESPONSE FOR PRODUCTION OF

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

DOCUMENTS, which is full of Lies and falsities, all that will be mentioned and
explained as next:

FALSE
1. The RESPONSE TO PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (EXHIBIT 137)
comes with a date of 11/26/2019, while the fake verification has a date of
11/11/2019, besides is numbered “page 3”, while there are not any other pages,
not 1, not 2, so it is a fake issue. Besides, because of the format of the end of the
document, it is clear that the only intention of The attorney TUSA was to cover
himself from the bunch of lies thrown across the discovery responses.
FALSE FOR CONTRADICTION
2. The first paragraph of the answer document (EXHIBIT 137) is a complete
trap because there THE DEFENDANT’S LAWYER is only covering himself
in advance from the chance of being accused because of the lies and falsities,
but it is not possible to be accepted seriously because what he affirms is a
contradiction, non-acceptable as a pretext to lie and to cover himself from
lying and falsification, only as an excuse in advance when he knew about all
the number of faults or pretenses used in the discovery.
In the first place, due to the failure to adhere to RULE 34 of THE AMERICAN
BAR, These PLAINTIFFS did not receive a great number of answers proposed to
the defendant in this, and all the Discover questions made during the process,
PLAINTIFF must say that he never gets the much valuable information he
needed to be able to make a surrounding of the case which would be allowed to
get the truth of all the main hide or truth facts, all depends on that answers and
information, besides going this against the way that the process must be
developed, the lack of very important information makes it grows the work of

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

investigation from the PLAINTIFFS if it would be possible to find out the real
thing about every fact in the case. Nevertheless, and given his plain lack of
responses and so his lack of interest in the questions, from here, based on the
Law, the facts omitted are considered accepted by the PLAINTIFFS and this way
will be treated, according to by Law.
It must be said in a very first and important case, that the documents sent by the
DEFENDANTS in his big number of pages consist basically in TWO different
kinds of documents, which will be explained as next:
I. ANSWERS TO DISCOVERY PROPOSALS BY THE PLAINTIFFS WERE USED IN
THE ANSWER AND APPROPRIATED AS HIS OWN.
II. PHOTOSTATIC COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT THE PLAINTIFFS HAVE
ALREADY SENT IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S REQUEST, BUT THAT IN
AN ANY MATTER WERE PRODUCED BY THE DEFENDANTS AT ALL, BUT
TAKEN FROM THE PLAINTIFF’S ANSWERS.

This Document contains embedded when it is possible, at the end of each
Requesting for Production of Documents the comments that prove when one of
this constitutes a falsity or falsification from the DEFENDANT’S counsel and
that proves as well this is contaminated documents, full of falsities and also half-
trues or ascertains used in a way that hides the real or true significance, in a word
fallacies, all the time, which at the end are falsifications, sometimes the
DEFENDANTS LAWYERS didn’t even have the minimum respect for the legal
request made by THE PLAINTIFFS and only IGNORED IT, OR JUST
ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS THAT DIDN’T COMPROMISE THEM AND
IGNORE THE REST, (ELEMENT II-C), by instance the non response of the
questions about the rent receipts, the deny of show their tax returns to have the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

accumulation of those monthly rent receipts, and all the proposals related to that
matter, which was delivered and absolute tampered or spoiled the inculpatory
evidence which is a shameful and a total lack of respect for the process,
concerning the Discovery stage and that cheat the Judge and the Court without a
chance of them to know the truth of that mechanism.
The mechanic of the job is to put embedded into each paragraph the real thing
about each fallacious assert in Uppercase and with a different font to be
highlighted as clear as possible and have this illegal and unlawful behavior being
able to notice in this number as well as in its frequency and so, to show the
contamination of each written and how invalid they are for the purpose they
should be used, after finished the analysis there will be a separate file that will
contain more detailed real issues about each correspondent answer and so it can
be seen the difference and the truth against the untrue of each number of
question.
The Discovery analyzed is the correspondent to:
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

Answering by DEFENDANT PARTY. BABAK SINBARI and ATTORNEYS in the record:
In this Answering produced by THE DEFENDANT, by the way of his Attorneys
at record DANIEL TUSA AND STEVEN R. KRUID who signed the responses
proposed, but it contains another sheet which is supposed to be a
VERIFICATION made by defendant BABAK SINBARI, but has some elements
that devalued the so-called “verification” and that is only a failed try to make
guilty to BABAK SINBARI in a failed attempt to get rid of their responsibility in
the machination and falsehood that anyway is already signed before by the
lawyers and included in the Rule of Law that specifically states said that these
lawyers are jointly and severally liable for all kind of breaches of laws,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

regulations and above all to their violations, however this kind of attempts to
evading their responsibilities by moving apart on a gross way to hide the
participation and even the sign of all the lies and wrongdoings contained in the
RESPONSE FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, in the way they are doing
demonstrate without a doubt the low class and morality with which they act by
ridiculously trying to throw the defendant under the bus in order to cover their
OWN faults, because in this and in all cases Defendant has no even idea of what
he is signing nor the consequenses of what it could means to him, because there
are a lot of untruths and falsities, that will be mentioned and explained as next:
3. The RESPONSE TO PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS comes with a date
of 11/26/2019, while the fake verification has a date of 11/11/2019, besides is
numbered “page 3”, while there are not any other pages, not 1, not 2, so it is
a fake issue. Besides, because of the format of the end of the document, it is
clear that the only intention of The attorney TUSA was to cover himself
from the bunch of lies thrown across the discovery responses.
4. The first paragraph of the answer document is a complete trap because
there THE DEFENDANT is only covering in advance the chance of being
guilted because of the lies and falsities, but it has not any validity in the
body of this case because it is just a saying without a foundation.

FALSITIES LOCATED IN THE DISCOVERY ANSWERS FOR PRODUCTION
OF DOCUMENTS FROM THE DEFENDANT AND DEFENDANT’S
ATTORNEYS AT RECORD AGAINST THE RULES OF THE AMERICAN BAR
When the plaintiffs answered the proposal for production of documents he sent to
the DEFENDANTS every photograph in his power and it results that the
majority of them pertain to the real proof which corresponds and form the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

burden of the proof, from the PLAINTIFFs to present once validated to be the
base of the sentence awaited in the Trial. THE PLAINTIFFS sent all these
documentary proves because they have nothing to hide and all the facts they had
presented and mentioned are the whole truth of the case this way the same
DEFENDANTS could know they have no defense and elements to counter-attack
and besides, THE PLAINTIFFS suspected in advance that being and now
knowing the real nature of the DEFENDANTS attorneys, and when they realize
they have not a real defense they would without any shame and with all disrespect
for the Rule of Law, may try desperate measures, something like what they made
when they committed the FRAUD UPON THE COURT, and it was as THE
PLAINTIFFS suspected and DEFENDANTS, despite the big felony of going
against the PLAINTIFFS did not repair in anything and passed over the Court,
with the worst illegal move they could intent, something PLAINTIFFS did not
even imagine was taken them so far.
Besides, all said before, THE PLAINTIFFS WANT TO LET THE Court know
they DENOUNCE THAT IN THIS SPACE AND OFFICIALLY ARE MAKING
RESPONSIBLE THE DEFENDANTS FOR THE FALSITIES AND
FALSIFICATIONS AND FORGERY OF DOCUMENTS, and some of the other
illegal felonies the DEFENDANTS LAWYERS (ELEMENT II-E) made and that
was discovered by THE PLAINTIFFS in theirs checking of the papers presented
(and as well those not presented, on purpose, of course) during their “answers” to
THE PLAINTIFFS proposal to discovery:
1. During the delivery of documents for the Discovery, as PLAINTIFFS say
before, they sent all or almost all the documents, the answers produced by
the DEFENDANTS under oath, contain a majority of falsities, which
becomes FALSE in the Law.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

2. (ELEMENT II-C) There are two kinds of falsifications because some of
them were cosmetically modified, altered to make it look much better than
were first is when got a new photo, different from that originally sent by
THE PLAINTIFFS and little modified to make it looks better or reshaped
and try to like saying, (look it was not so damaged), but they are not the
real issue, these photos are faked.
3. There are another in a major number which is falsifications “by
exemption” meaning they have the photographs, that I sent to them when I
answered the production of documents but these images are so clearly
showing the grade of damages and the big number of them, that THE
DEFENDANTS were chosen not to include and avoid the images which
would result in a graphic prove against them. (ELEMENTS II-C)
4. There is Perjury committed by the lawyer of the DEFENDANT which
corresponds to clause 4 th . Of the leasing contract dated /09/2008 when
admission number 11 is asked: “admit the content of the 2008 leasing
contract has a clause 4 th . You and only you offered to give us $45. US
Dollars for each month of rent paid timely. The DEFENDANT under the
correspondent Oath denies that offer and faults the truth when he affirms:
“Paragraph 4 of the 2008 contract referred to a $45 late charge that would
apply if plaintiffs failed to pay the rent by the 4 th of each month”, which is
lie declaring the same but on the contrary sense and in his favor. This is
clear perjury. (EXHIBIT # 131)
5. There are some examples of the really enormous quantity of felonies
against the truth and so, against the court and the Rule of Law, because
each falsity in any way it is used by the Defendant thru his lawyers is an
attack on the fundaments of the justice, breaking the Law and impeding the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

knowing of the truth which is illegally being used by Defendants on their
favor undoubtedly.
6. Next, I am going to use AS REFERENCE PARTS OF THE doctrine that
corresponds to Jonathan Tycko spread into this memorandum (copied
from a publication and published in the site of this most important legal
reference besides his big influence, the ABA MAGAZINE) taking some
parts very important concerning this theme and that should be completely
followed and attended in all cases when the litigator wants to go to a fair
and clean fight against his counterpart :
“Responding to Falsification by an Opposing Party. Falsification is often a crime,
but it rarely is prosecuted. So, a litigant faced with falsification by an opposing
party is left to seek remedies directly from the courts.”
BASED ON BEFORE AND MUST OF ALL COMING FROM THE
AMERICAN BAR AS A CLEAR AND PRESENT COUNCIL OFFERED BY A
FAMOUS LAWYER AND RENOWNED AUTHOR, OWNER OF A MORE
THAN PROVEN WISDOM SEEK DISMISSAL OR DEFAULT IF AN
OPPOSING PARTY HAS ENGAGED IN FALSIFICATION, ASSERT: ONE
POTENTIAL RESPONSE IS TO ASK THE COURT TO THROW THE PARTY
OUT OF COURT IN THIS CASE.
Courts have long recognized their INHERENT POWER to protect themselves
and other parties from various forms of bad faith litigation, including the
FALSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE. As the Supreme Court emphasized in
HazelAtlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., this inherent power is a crucial
mechanism for protecting the integrity of the judicial process: Tampering or with
the administration of justice in the manner indisputably shown here involves far
more than an injury to a single litigant. It is wrong against the institutions set up

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

to protect and safeguard the public, institutions in which fraud cannot
complacently be tolerated consistently with the good order of society (Exhibit –
102) public welfare demands that the agencies of public justice be not so impotent
that they must always be mute and helpless victims of deception and fraud. The
inherent power to “fashion appropriate sanction[s] for conduct which abuses the
judicial process” was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Chambers v. NASCO,
Inc. Where falsification occurs in the midst of ongoing judicial proceedings and is
specifically directed at affecting those proceedings, it is termed “fraud on the
court.” A court, as an exercise of this inherent authority, may sanction fraud on
the court through default (if the falsifier is the defendant).”
( ELEMENT-1)And it is difficult to find in a case such violation of the
wrongdoing against a Court and other Institutions, where Defendants went on an
indiscriminate way against all the Rules normed by the Institutions than exist
precisely to protect the illegal behavior and the rupture of any norm in a way to
find the manner to impose his faulty will, used against the Institutions as a way to
go against the Law on a hide manner, faking, and cheating and giving to his
“legal” interpretations a twisted and obviously wrong way trying to deceive and
involve in a fallacy his false arguments as a rightful interpretations but without
legal basis but only at its convenience, which uses as correct without being so, due
to several untruths but needed to disguise the real cause or motive which is the
elaborated and fabricated Fraud Upon the Court, to cheat the Court to present
the lack of information demanded to Plaintiffs and never fulfilled, only because
the paper and information corresponded to its have never been delivered in no
way to their legal owners on a willful and conscious way to this to what was
obliged because it corresponds to a legal proposal in the Discovery for Admissions
and that never answer, nor in the Discovery, number….. or any other way asked

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

which included other proposal in the Discover for Production of
documents,number… nor in the several and incounted telephone calls, and which
of course never answered neither mention or anything just because it would have
discovered their plan and, of course would have presented the reality of their tax
fraud when non accumulating nor paying the corresponded taxes to the IRS
coming from the income tax corresponded to the rent of the house rented to these
Plaintiffs all by the way of a previous planned fraud and now this tampering of
the monthly rent receipts became an impediment to fully prove the Fraud Upon
the Court committed by these defendants by concealing this documents and make
a double hit of a Felony, because when tampered the receipts was because they
were evading the tax coming from that income and besides hiding it cover the
prove of his Fraud, cheating the Court, denying the Fraud based in the tampering
what constitutes a falsification or taking the form of Concealing or deceiving the
court hiding, desappearing or denying the Evidence.
courts may also have the authority to impose the sanction of dismissal under
various procedural rules. For example, Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure provides an alternative basis for a court’s authority to impose the
sanction of default, where the falsification amounts to a “failure to comply with
the rules of discovery or with court orders enforcing those rules.” And Rule 11 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides similar authority where a party’s
falsification manifests itself as false allegations or denials in the party’s pleadings.
“Accordingly when faced with falsification in ongoing civil litigation.
SEEK AN ADVERSE INFERENCE INSTRUCTION OR ISSUE PRECLUSION
WHERE FALSIFICATION TAKES THE FORM OF INTENTIONAL
DESTRUCTION OR ALTERATION OF EVIDENCE (“spoliation” of evidence)
then a court may decide to punish the wrongdoer and to hold a party or witness

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

in contempt, the court must have judicial knowledge of the perjury”. •(
Committee on Corporate Counsel Newsletter • American Bar Association •
Winter 2006 • Volume 20 • Number 2 “Responding to Falsification of Evidences”
by Jonathan K. Tycko, published in Committee on Corporate Counsel
Newsletter, Volume 20, No.2, Winter 2006 © 2006 by the American Bar
Association. provide a remedy for the opposing party by altering how the trial
will be conducted.) (ELEMENTS II-D and E)
PRECLUSION is a type of sanction specifically contemplated by Rule 37 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; therefore, as in the case, where the falsification
also amounts to a violation of a party’s discovery obligations, this rule (or
equivalent state court rules) permits the issue preclusion. Courts also have
recognized that the sanction of issue preclusion can be imposed as an exercise of
inherent power, making that sanction available even where the falsification does
not fall within the scope of Rule 37, this aggregated paragraph includes and
globalized any possible lack of elements to punish the offense.
“Use the Other Side’s Falsification to Undermine Its Position The last potential
response is the most common and the most powerful. If a lawyer believes that it is
possible to catch the other side in a lie, the lawyer can do just that, and thereby
destroy the other side’s credibility. An oft-quoted passage from one of the leading
evidence treatises explains: It has always been understood—the inference, indeed,
is one of the simplest in human experience—that a party’s falsehood or any fraud
in the preparation and presentation of his cause, his fabrication or suppression of
evidence by spoliation, and all similar conduct is receivable against him as an
indication of his consciousness that his case is a weak or unfounded one; and from
that consciousness may be inferred the fact itself of the cause’s lack of truth and
merit. The inference thus does not necessarily apply to any specific fact in the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

cause, but operates, indefinitely though strongly, against the whole mass of
alleged facts constituting his cause. In other words, if you catch the other side
engaged in falsification, you can use that catch to argue that the other side’s
entire position lacks merit. And even more fundamentally, judges and juries
shouldn’t be tricked.” (ELEMENTS II-D and E) If a judge or jury agrees that
your opponent has engaged in falsification—even falsification relating only to one
of several issues in the case—it will hold this If you catch the other side engaged
in falsification, you can use it to argue that it entire position lacks merit. •
Committee on Corporate Counsel Newsletter • American Bar Association •
Winter 2006 • Volume 20 • Number 2 “Responding to Falsification of Evidences”
by Jonathan K. Tycko, published in Committee on Corporate Counsel
Newsletter, Volume 20, No.2, Winter 2006 © 2006 by the American Bar
Association. Reproduced by permission.
About all before, these PLAINTIFFS have started doing a very detailed job of
checking all possible about the FALSIFICATIONS in all possible forms
committed by the DEFENDANTS and here, attached as
(EXHIBITS/ELEMENTS) are included some found so far, and ask to the court to
have it in the count to consider the due punishment in a way of not to let it go
unnoticed.
The general first examination of the generalities of the checking of the answers
provided by the DEFENDANTS AND HIS LAWYERS lets observe that they
throw an incredible number of falsities in all their kinds and ways that the
DEFENDANT AND HIS LAWYERS materially dump into the process by the
way of his false assertions, maneuvers, statements, etc.,
Which let nothing to the proposal of the discovery on the side of THE
PLAINTIFFS, because nothing important is true, neither corresponds to the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

reality, so the whole discovery is spoiled and it can’t be taken in count seriously to
know things that could help THE PLAINTIFFS to have facts, data or any other
useful thing to be useful in the process, so, based on all before, these
PLAINTIFFS ask in a very respectful way to the Court to default with prejudice
the process in favor of the PLAINTIFFS, based in the FRAUD UPON THE
COURT and completed with all the FALSITIES that contains the total body of
the discovery presented in their answers will make very difficult to get to a sure
way and will come to doubt the validity of everything the defendant says and
claims knowing the truth and to be sure of all THE DEFENDANTS could have to
say or affirm or prove in the next stages of the case.
These PLAINTIFFS make ECO and underscore part of the enunciation of the
paragraph before considering valid that: “…if you catch the other side engaged in
falsification, you can use that catch to argue that the other side’s entire position
lacks merit. And even more fundamentally, judges and juries shouldn’t be
tricked.”

III.
CONCLUSION

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

Based on the above, PLAINTIFF ALFONSO MORAN respectfully requests that
the Court set aside the Judgment that was entered against them and, as the Law
favors dismiss the case with prejudice against the with all the punishment as will be
prayed.

Dated_________________________

ALFONSO MORAN
ATTORNEY AS PLAINTIFF

DECLARATION OF ALFONSO MORAN
I, ALFONSO MORAN, declare as follows.

1. I am over the age of 18 years and am a party to this action. I have
personal knowledge of the facts stated in this declaration, and if called
as a witness, could and would testify competently to the truth of the
facts as stated herein.
2. I make this declaration in support of my motion to vacate the judgment
entered on 02/15/2022 because the said judgment was procured
through fraud upon the court.
3. ABOUT BABAK SINBARI, I AM PROVING THAT OBEYING COMPLETELY
AND WITHOUT SAYING A WORD, UNDER THE COUNCIL OF STEVEN R
KRUID, DANIEL TUSA, and STRATMAN, SCHWARTZ & WILLIAMS-
ABREGO SANTA ANA, ATTORNEYS AT RECORD in the present process,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

acting as mandataries, and employees of the INSURANCE COMPANY:
FARMERS
INSURANCE EXCHANGE MADE A CONSPIRACY TO commit fraud upon
the court by the following actions and deliberate omissions that
harmed the integrity of the judicial process.
4. Attorneys at the record produced the Fraud Upon the Court when THEY
KNEW ABOUT THE NON DELIVERED MONTHLY RENT RECEIPTS PAID BY
PLAINTIFFS, HAD THE “SPARKY” IDEA OF tampering and spoiling the
rent receipts non-delivered to the Plaintiffs each time they made a
monthly payment used by the defendant to hide one before planned
and current tax evasion managed by not declaring the income to the
IRS of the monthly rents coming from the payment to the Defendant,
but in a given moment the before mentioned counselors decided to use
in the DISCOVERY for ADMISSIONS of the case, asking as a propounded
question for the number 1 to 126 of the REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS
signed by the Attorney at the case DANIEL P. TUSA, declaring under
penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing asked is true and correct, signing DANIEL P TUSA dated
08/22/2019. These spoiled receipts to falsely ask Plaintiffs for this
information as if they had delivered all those receipts, knowing it
became impossible, then they decided to pretend that they had been
turned in and asked for a Motion for discovery proposal for admissions
to be provided this to them, which defendants knew the Plaintiffs could
not do since they had never received it and defendants began an undue
MOTION OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT by the way of motions to ask for

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

sanctions continuously, pretending to convince the Hon Judge that
Plaintiffs were refusing to obey those orders, seeking to cause the
dismissal of the process based on the repeated failure to comply with
an order of the Judge, all based in the cheating to the Judge who
believed that Defendants had indeed delivered said information and
her behavior in this regard which was erroneous caused by his reliance
on the laying attitude of the defense who managed to provoke him by
acting in an extremely brazen and shameless manner to achieve their
illicit objective by deceiving the Hon. Judge who must now realize said
deception and act consequently declaring the default of the process
and signing a final order that declares all the proceedings and acts of
the defense in the case VOID with all the now real consequences due
against said Defense and in favor of the Plaintiffs without any excuse or
pretext and including the damages claimed and the strictest punitive
damages of law.
5. I respectfully request that the Court vacate with prejudice
the judgment that was entered against me, allows this case to be
retried again on its merits, as the law favors, only this time all the
DEFENDANT’s actions and motions be judged in JUSTICE AND UNDER
THE LAW, and the whole actions and motions of the DEFENDANTS
during the Process be declared VOID as regulated by the Law and the
jurisprudence and all the Doctrine related to the case.
As well this PLAINTIFFS pledges the whole and maximum damages
appearing in both cases, numbers 30-0102709710 of the Department
42 of the Superior Court of the State of California, in Orange County

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

and in the respective Department that will be sent to resolve and that
will be mentioned as soon as it would have to be produced by the
respective high Authorities of the corresponding ………FEDERAL
AUTHORITIES have to be conceded without limitations and including
Punish Damages, all and all deserved by a so total prevail, under
circumstances so against which included cheating, teasing, scorn,
betrayal, falsehoods, and lonely fighting.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States
of America and the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct
and that this Declaration was executed in Fountain Valley, California, on
……………………… 2022.

ALFONSO MORAN

BEATRIZ ESCOTTO
PLAINTIFFS IN PROPER

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ACTION IN EQUITY TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE JUDGMENT FOR

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FOR EXTRINSIC FRAUD OR MISTAKE

43
PRAYER

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them as follows:

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:

1. For an order of this Court setting aside and vacating the judgment entered on
04/28/2022 in the prior action because said judgment is void on the grounds of lack of personal
jurisdiction;
2. For costs of suit herein incurred; and
3. For such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

1. For an order of this Court setting aside and vacating the judgment entered on
04/28/2022 in the prior action because said judgment is void because it was procured due to
extrinsic fraud;
2. For costs of suit herein incurred; and
3. For such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

Dated:

ALFONSO MORAN

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )

Recent Posts

Quick Links

Legal Info

Services

Contact Us