This means that while the response of Orly Tatiz, DDS is apparently incomplete, it must stand. The umpteenth harmful error by Taitz? Merely a set of errors, or worse?
This is separate from the response given by Gary Kreep, the attorney for Markham Robinson and Wiley Drake in this same case.
Judge Carter's order is linked, here. I.O. hopes to have time to further address this mess, today.
Update ~ Do you think these concerns are wrong? Do you think that Tatiz' response hit the nails on the head, or that it addressed the motion to dismiss weakly, point for point?
Feel free to compare Orly Taitz' response, to that of Gary Kreep, to Obama's motion to dismiss -- documentation:
9/23, KEYES v OBAMA - 70 - MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS ORDER by Judge David O. Carter: DENYING REQUEST TO FILEUpdate 2/25 - This comment received. Let deciders decide.
9/21, KEYES v OBAMA - 69 - OPPOSITION to MOTION to Dismiss Case AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES (from Orly Taitz)
9/18, KEYES v OBAMA - 67 - OPPOSITION to MOTION to Dismiss Case AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES (from Gary Kreep)
9/4, Keyes|Barnett GOV MOTION TO DISMISS - 56
And, if you would like to hear why Markham Robinson fired Orly Taitz, listen to the first hour of "The Awakening," this past Monday. It is archived and available by clicking here.