Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

MOHAN A. HARIHAR, )
)
Plaintiff/Appellant, )
) Case No. 17-1381
v. )
)
US BANK, et al )
)
Defendants/Appellees. )

REPLY TO NOTICE OF INACCURACIES IN DOCKETING STATEMENT

The Appellant, Mohan A. Harihar, filed with this Court a Docketing Statement on May 2,

2017, even though he was not required to do so as a pro se litigant. There are a number of

complex legal issues which must be addressed in this appeal. Some of these very serious issues

include (but are not limited to): Treason, Fraud on the Court, Judicial Misconduct, and

Economic Espionage. They also include civil and criminal claims believed to impact precedent,

potentially matters of National Security, and involve parties representing both the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the United States. The Court is aware that official

requests have been filed with the Executive branch of government, requesting: 1. the

assignment of a federal/special prosecutor, 2. the assembly of a grand jury, and 3. the

opening of a full criminal investigation.1 While the efforts to secure the assistance of counsel

1
Referenced requests to assign a federal/special prosecutor, assemble a grand jury, and initiate a
full criminal investigation were delivered via certified mail to: President Donald J. Trump, and
US Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Parties additionally informed include: The Judicial Council
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

are still pending, the Appellant found it appropriate to file a Docketing Statement, to better

inform the Court of these serious issues. Now, the Appellant finds it necessary to file this

REPLY to the Response/Notice of inaccuracies in his docketing statement, filed May 10, 2017:

A. Timeliness of Appeal The Appellant clarifies that there are three (3) motions, not two

(2) as suggested by opposing counsel, which have been filed since the judgment entered

on March 31, 2017:

1. Waiver of Fees (IFP) filed in the District Court on April 20, 2017, and is still

pending;

2. Request for assistance with the appointment of counsel filed with this Court

on April 25, 2017, and is still pending;

3. STAY/ Injunction to temporarily cease collection activity filed with this

Court on April 26, 2017, and is still pending.

IF the Appellant has misinterpreted the definition of post-judgement motions which toll

time, it further underscores reasons for the Court to assist with the appointment of

counsel.

B. Finality of Order or Judgement The Appellant respectfully disagrees with the

Appellees/ Defendants response here for a number of reasons:

1. First, the Defendants/Appellees are in no position to say that the Appellants

claims are inaccurate or unfounded. The overwhelming amount of documented

evidence supporting judicial misconduct (now under review before the Judicial

Council of the First Circuit) impacts jurisdiction in the lower court. Once validated

of the First Circuit, The US Inspector General, The House Judiciary Committee, Governor
Charles Baker (R-MA), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

by the Judicial Council, the judgement entered on March 31, 2017 will be

considered VOID, along with ALL related orders issued prior to dismissal. That

includes the April 27, 2016 dismissal order of Fialkow and Patterson. For nearly

one (1) year, the record will clearly show that NO Defendant/ Appellee has

made ANY attempt to file a single piece of opposition challenging judicial

misconduct and fraud on the court claims (Judicial AND Defendant). Therefore,

they have NO STANDING to do so here, and their attempts to do so should be

stricken from the record. The Appellant respectfully requests that the Court caution

Appellees against future attempts to wrongfully discredit the Appellant.

D. Related Cases Under penalties of perjury, the Appellees/ Defendants collectively

state that they DO NOT BELIEVE there to be other related cases involving foreclosure

or allegations similar to this case. The Appellant respectfully disagrees. Such a statement

shows a continued pattern of corrupt conduct, and the clear intention to purposefully

mislead and deceive this Court. According to their response, Appellees/Defendants are

collectively unaware of the 2008 US Foreclosure Crisis, resulting damages caused, and

ANY related litigation. Their sworn statement shows cause to bring charges of perjury,

AND either expand upon, or add new - Fraud on the Court claims against ALL

Appellants/Defendants.

Now, to put this in full perspective and to understand the gravity of the Defendants/

Appellees sworn statement, the following must be considered:

1. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and former AG Martha Coakley

Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 4 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

a. Secured a reported $318M in relief as part of a State-Federal Agreement

over Unlawful Foreclosures and Loan Servicing.2 Wrongfully foreclosed

homeowners including the Appellant, received less than $2,000 from that

relief. Defendants from the $25B settlement included Appellees Wells

Fargo NA and US Bank NA. Here, the DOJ and Commonwealth identified

the Appellants property as 1 of 4.2M illegal foreclosures.

b. Secured an additional settlement from a separate settlement initiated by

the Commonwealth that also included Appellee Wells Fargo NA.3

c. Secured a settlement from a multi-year investigation of Appellee

Harmon Law Offices PC, for wrongful foreclosure and eviction practices.

d. Fifty to Sixty thousand illegal foreclosures have been identified in the

Commonwealth alone, to the extent that new legislation was introduced to

address the enormity of clouded title issues (as referenced in the lower Court

Docket).

e. Former Attorney General Martha Coakley is believed to be most

recognized nationwide for her efforts in fighting fraudulent foreclosures.

NOW, under penalties of perjury, the Commonwealth and former AG Coakley state that they

DO NOT BELIEVE there to be other related cases involving foreclosure or allegations similar

to this case. By doing so, the Appellant shows just cause to expand upon existing Fraud on

the Court claims against Appellees - Commonwealth of MA and Martha Coakley.

2
Reference the February 9, 2012 press release from the www.mass.gov website.
3
Reference - Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Bank of America et al Docket No, 11-
4363.
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 5 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

2. Bank Appellees, Wells Fargo NA and US Bank NA Are two (2) of the major

US Lenders identified by the DOJ, tied to 4.2M related illegal foreclosures. The

Plaintiff lists a few case examples here in this reply (see below) and within the

docket of the lower court. Upon securing counsel, and once aligned with the

assistance of federal prosecutors, the Appellant is confident that the magnitude of

related cases involving foreclosure or allegations similar to this case, will more

accurately be presented to the Court.

NOW, under penalties of perjury, Bank Appellees Wells Fargo NA and US Bank NA state

that they DO NOT BELIEVE there to be other related cases involving foreclosure or allegations

similar to this case. By doing so, the Appellant shows just cause to expand upon existing

Fraud on the Court claims against Appellees Wells Fargo NA and US Bank NA.

3. Harmon Law Offices PC has been recognized as the Foreclosure Mill of

Massachusetts, and is believed to have represented lenders in the recognized illegal

foreclosure of up to 60,000 properties in the Commonwealth alone. Harmon has

previously been under a multi-year investigation by the Commonwealth for wrongful

foreclosure and eviction practices, and has been definitively tied to disbarred Florida

Foreclosure kingpin, David Stern. Harmon WITHDREW as counsel to bank

Appellee US Bank NA just days after being informed by the Appellant of pending

civil and criminal complaints being brought against them.

Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 6 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

NOW, under penalties of perjury, Appellee Harmon Law Offices PC state that they DO

NOT BELIEVE there to be other related cases involving foreclosure or allegations similar to

this case. By doing so, the Appellant shows just cause to expand upon existing Fraud on the

Court claims against Appellee Harmon Law Offices PC.

4. Nelson Mullins LLP and Peter Haley, David E. Fialkow, and Jeffrey S.

Patterson Nelson Mullins was the second tier law firm, replacing Harmon in

litigation against the Appellant. They are well known for representing lenders in

foreclosure litigation up and down the east coast of the United States. Peter Haley

serves as the managing partner of the firms Boston Office. David Fialkow and

Jeffrey Patterson reported to Haley and were the representing attorneys following

Harmons withdrawal from the Appellants foreclosure litigation. Like Harmon,

Nelson Mullins WITHDREW as counsel to bank defendants/appellees Wells Fargo

NA and US Bank NA just days after being informed by the Appellant of pending

civil and criminally complaints being brought against them. Upon withdrawal, both

Fialkow and Patterson either left on their own, or were released from Nelson

Mullins. Both are now employed by K&L Gates LLP.

It is from the massive amount of NATIONWIDE foreclosure cases which led to

Nelson Mullins co-authoring and teaching (with the assistance of the Massachusetts

Attorney Generals Office AND US Attorneys Office) the well-known West

Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 7 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

LegalEd Course After the Bubble Bursts4, where a portion of the courses

description reads as follows:

This program will focus on criminal and regulatory issues emerging from the

collapse of the national real estate and secondary mortgage markets. Among the

topics to be explored are: the uncovering of widespread fraud in the origination of

mortgages prior to the collapse, and the priorities of state and federal authorities

in prosecuting such cases; civil and criminal authorities priorities in confronting

fraud in connection with post-collapse foreclosure rescue transactions; and

criminal and regulatory issues relating to banking and foreclosure practices in

connection with mortgages held in pooled investment vehicles.

Listed as guest speakers for the course are:

a. James H. O'Brien - Assistant Attorney General - Massachusetts Office of

the Attorney General;

b. Paul Levenson - Assistant US Attorney (Panel I Moderator) - US

Attorneys Office;

c. Appellee - Jeffrey S. Patterson, Esq. - Nelson Mullins Riley &

Scarborough LLP;

d. Juliane Balliro - Partner (Panel II Moderator) - Nelson Mullins Riley &

Scarborough LLP; and

e. James Patrick Dowden - Assistant U.S Attorney - US Attorney's Office

4See Exhibit A, which provides further detail of the referenced course, After the Bubble
Bursts.
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 8 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

NOW, under penalties of perjury, Nelson Mullins LLP, Peter Haley, David E. Fialkow and

Jeffrey S. Patterson state that they DO NOT BELIEVE there to be other related cases involving

foreclosure or allegations similar to this case. By doing so, the Appellant shows just cause to

expand upon existing Fraud on the Court claims against these Appellees/Defendants.

5. CMLTI 2006 AR-1 this residential mortgage-backed security (RMBS) trust is

believed to include approximately 3000 mortgages. Through the sworn testimony of

FRAUD EXPERT LYNN SYZMONIAK (United States vs. Ace Corporation,

which is just one of MANY related cases that involve this specific trust), CMLTI

2006 AR-1 and ALL mortgages contained within, are considered void/invalid,

including the Appellants mortgage, and many of which may not have been

foreclosed upon, but are still considered INVALID/VOID.

NOW, under penalties of perjury, CMLTI 2006 AR-1 states that they DO NOT BELIEVE

there to be other related cases involving foreclosure or allegations similar to this case. By doing

so, the Appellant shows just cause to expand upon existing Fraud on the Court claims

against these Appellees/Defendants.

6. Ken/Mary Daher and Jeffrey/Isabelle Perkins as Real Estate professionals,

the Dahers (as Brokers) and Isabelle Perkins (Licensed to teach real estate in MA),

these parties are certainly aware of the Nations Foreclosure Crisis and illegal

foreclosure. It is therefore HIGHLY UNLIKELY that these Appellees (or most

Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 9 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

Americans, for that matter) have never heard of other related cases including (but not

limited to) the referenced $25B Mortgage Foreclosure settlement. Furthermore, the

Appellant forewarned these parties of the legal risks associated with the referenced

foreclosure and the Nations foreclosure crisis. The Appellees chose to ignore these

warnings.

NOW, under penalties of perjury, Ken Daher, Mary Daher, Jeffrey Perkins, and Isabelle

Perkins ALL state that they DO NOT BELIEVE there to be other related cases involving

foreclosure or allegations similar to this case. By doing so, the Appellant shows just cause to

expand upon existing Fraud on the Court claims against these Appellees/Defendants.

The lower court docket will definitively show a number of referenced cases related to this case,

some of which involve the Appellees/Defendants themselves.5 These case references include

(but are not limited to):

1. United States of America, et al v. Bank of America, et al Docket No. 1:12-

cv-00361-RMC, includes Appellees Wells Fargo NA and US Bank NA, and is

believed to be the case reference associated with the historic $25B settlement of the

US Foreclosure Crisis. It is through this settlement, that BOTH the Department of

Justice AND the Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General identified the

Appellants property (and 4.2M others) as ILLEGAL FORECLOSURES. Fifty

(50) to Sixty (60) Thousand of these illegal foreclosures in the Commonwealth

alone are directly tied to Appellee Harmon Law Offices PC;

5
For example, reference Document No. 117, filed July 3, 2016 in the US District Court.
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 10 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

2. The Federal Bank Regulators $8B settlement involving fifteen mortgage

servicers including Appellees Wells Fargo NA and US Bank NA. This case

reference involved an Independent Foreclosure Review which ALSO identified

the Appellants illegal foreclosure;

3. Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Bank of America et al Docket No, 11-

4363 and includes Appellee Wells Fargo NA. Elements of this case included

a. Pervasive use of fraudulent documentation in the foreclosure process,

including so-called robo-signing;

b. Foreclosing without holding the actual mortgage;

c. Corrupting Massachusetts land recording system; and

d. Failing to uphold loan modification promises to Massachusetts

homeowners.

4. United States of America v. Ace Corporation, et al Docket No. 13-cv-00464-

JFA, (US District Court, Western District of North Carolina), which includes the

sworn testimony of FRAUD EXPERT, Lynn Syzmoniak.6

5. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. WELLS FARGO NA and KURT

LOFRANO, Docket No: 1:12-cv-07527-JMF - US District Court, Southern District

of New York, dated April 8, 2016. Here, the Defendant Wells Fargo NA has

ADMITTED TO FRAUDULENT MISCONDUCT involving thousands of

mortgages, in a $1.2B settlement with the United States Department of Justice

(DOJ).

6
Lynn Syzmoniak is also referenced as identifying misconduct associated with Appellee
RMBS Trust CMLTI 2006 AR-1 rendering ALL mortgages associated with it (Including the
Appellants referenced mortgage) as VOID.
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 11 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

6. Corvello v. Wells Fargo Bank NA et al - 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No.

11-16234.

7. Wigod v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. - United States Court of Appeals, Seventh

Circuit No. 11-1423.

This sample of case references from the lower court docket should satisfactorily justify and

provide clarification to the Appellants filed Docketing Statement. It should also reveal the

collective INTENT by these Appellees/Defendants to grossly mislead and deceive this Court.

F. Adverse Parties to the Appeal The Appellant has clearly articulated, both in the lower

court and also in his Judicial Misconduct Petition, a list of reasons which have irrefutably

disqualified Judge Burroughs from ruling in the referenced litigation. Once the judges

disqualification is validated by the Judicial Council, the Appellants interpretation of the

law is:

1. That the referenced dismissal order will be considered VOID;

2. That ALL related orders issued by Judge Burroughs will ALSO be considered

VOID. That includes the April 27, 2016 dismissal order of Fialkow and

Patterson. Therefore, Fialkow and Patterson SHOULD still be considered as

Appellees here.

The Appellant restates, that since raising these allegations from nearly a year ago,

neither Fialkow, Patterson, nor ANY Appellee has questioned, challenged, or opposed a

single allegation of judicial misconduct (including TREASON), leading to this

conclusion.
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 12 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

This Court SHOULD recognize that it is the Appellant who has given an accurate

portrayal of events, and litigants involved. Based on this latest effort to deceive and

mislead the Court, it is the Appellants intention to now bring a new and/or expanded

claim of Fraud on the Court against ALL Appellees, including David E. Fialkow

and Jeffrey S. Patterson, pursuant to FRCP 60(b). The Appellant respectfully requests

that the Court assess any additional penalties against the Appellees it deems appropriate.

Finally, the Appellant states for the record that he fully expects the Judicial Council will

uphold the law and validate the Appellants judicial misconduct claims. There is also

clear expectation that the Executive Branch of the United States government will next

appoint either a federal or special prosecutor, assemble a grand jury, and start a full

criminal investigation moving forward.

Due to the severity of these civil and criminal claims, and also concerns for personal

safety and security, copies of this filed REPLY are sent via certified mail to: The

Executive Office of the President (EOP), the US Inspector General Michael Horowitz,

US Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the House Judiciary Committee, and to the Federal

Bureau of Investigation (FBI). A copy will also be made available to the Public.

Respectfully submitted this 15th Day of May, 2017.

Mohan A. Harihar
Appellant
7124 Avalon Drive
Acton, MA 01720
Mo.harihar@gmail.com
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 13 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

EXHIBIT A
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 14 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912
Case: 17-1381 Document: 00117154466 Page: 15 Date Filed: 05/15/2017 Entry ID: 6091912

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 15, 2017 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court
using the CM/ECF System, which will send notice of such filing to the following registered
CM/ECF users:

Jeffrey B. Loeb
David Glod
David E. Fialkow
Kevin Patrick Polansky
Matthew T. Murphy
Kurt R. McHugh
Jesse M. Boodoo

Mohan A. Harihar
Appellant
7124 Avalon Drive
Acton, MA 01720
Mo.harihar@gmail.com