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

William McPike State Bar #95869 257 East Bellevue Road, # 188 Atwater, CA 95301 (559) 841-3366 Email: mcpike@psnw.com Attorney for Acacia Corporate Management, LLC & Michael Scott Ioane. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STEVEN BOOTH and LOUISE BOOTH, Plaintiffs, v. MICHAEL SCOTT IOANE, ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT LLC, , Does 1-25,inclusive; and All Persons Unknown Claiming Any Legal or Equitable Right, Title, Estate, Lien or Interest in the Property Described in the Complaint Adverse to Plaintiffs' Title or Any Cloud) Upon Plaintiffs' Title Thereto, Named Herein as Does 26 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 1:12-CV-171 AWI GSA DEFENDANTS OBJECTION TO REPLY BY PLAINTIFFS IN RE: OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS BY THE UNITED STATES. Date: May 21, 2012 Time: 1:30 p.m. Place: Department 10 Judge: Hon. Anthony W. Ishii

Defendants. _______________________________ AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION Come now defendants, ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT LLC and Michael Scott Ioane, by and through their counsel to object and request that the court strike the Reply filed by Plaintiffs in regard to the United States opposition to the motion to dismiss state court removed case. First, it is the position of the Defendants that the removed state court action ought to be dismissed in favor of the pending action 07-1129 that involves the same parties and issues in that open case. 1
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION TO REPLY BY PLAINTIFFS IN RE: OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS BY THE UNITED STATES.

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

The objection and request to strike is based on the following: Second, Although the United States has been informed of Defendants motion through electronic means by the clerks office, it has no standing to oppose Defendants motion since they are not defendants in this action, and are not named by Plaintiffs as defendants in this action. Third, Defendants motion is directed at the Plaintiffs in this action, not the United States. Fourth, plaintiff already filed their opposition to Defendants ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT LLC and Michael Scott Ioanes Motion to dismiss the removed state court action, it is improper for them to now file a reply; customarily replies are filed by the moving party. In this case Defendant ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT LLC and Michael Scott Ioane are the moving party; not the plaintiff/Booths. Fifth, plaintiff in this case and Defendant United States, in the related cross action, continue to play games with the court and rules of procedure. I.E United States filed an opposition from which they had no standing. Then to make things more confusing for the court plaintiff Booth filed a reply to the US opposition, which was not a motion brought by plaintiff, rather it was brought by Defendants ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT LLC and Michael Scott Ioane and directed towards plaintiffs complaint against Defendants ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT LLC and Michael Scott Ioane. The United States is not a defendant or plaintiff in that complaint. For all the foregoing reasons we request that the court sustain our objection and strike the filing. If the court believes we need to more fully brief this issue, we then ask for continuance to do so. Respectfully submitted May 15, 2012. By:/s/ William McPike /s/

William McPike Certificate of Service It is hereby certified that on May15, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing: Reply to Plaintiff Opposition to Dismiss, removed state court case, Judicial Notice in Support of Reply, Declaration of Ioane in Support of Reply, Objection and request to strike to 2
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION TO REPLY BY PLAINTIFFS IN RE: OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS BY THE UNITED STATES.

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

united states opposition to motion to dismiss, Objection and request to strike reply by plaintiff to US opposition to motion to dismiss, With the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following: G Patrick Jennings, Trial Attorney Tax Division,US Dept of Justice,P.O. Box 683,Ben Franklin Station,Washington, D.C. 20044-0683And Randolf Krbechek, 9477 N. Fort Washington Road, Suite 104, Fresno, CA 93730

By:/s/ William McPike /s/ William McPike

3
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION TO REPLY BY PLAINTIFFS IN RE: OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS BY THE UNITED STATES.