Download - McConnell, Oma, Adversary

1 Law Office of Barry R. Wegman Barry R. Wegman SBN 127356

2 7506 Collett Ave Van Nuys, California 91406

3 (818) 570-9312 Email: [email protected]

4

5 Attorney for Plaintiff, Bob Atchison

6

7

8

9

10

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LOS ANGELES DIVISION

11 In re: Case No.: 2:14-bk-14501-BB

12 OMA MCCONNELL, Chapter: 7

13 Debtor. 14 BOB ATCHISON, Adv No.: 15

16 v.

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT TO DETERMINE DISCHARGE AND DISCHARGEABILITY OF DEBT

17 OMA MCCONNELL also known as OMA HAMOU also known as 18 ALEXANDRA MCCONNELL,

19

20

21

Defendant.

[ 523, 727] Status Conference: Date: TBD Time: Ctrm:

22 TO THE HONORABLE SHERI BLUEBOND, JUDGE, AND TO INTERESTED

23 PARTIES:

24 COMES NOW Plaintiff Bob Atchison for its causes of action against the Defendant

25 Oma McConnell, states and alleges as follows:

26

27 1.

JURISDICTION & VENUE

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted herein 28 under 28 U.S.C. 1334 and 28 U.S.C. 157, in that this action arises in and relates to the

\Complaint. wpd 1 COMPLAINT

1 Chapter 7 Bankruptcy case of Oma McConnell ("McConnell", "Debtor" or "Defendant") 2 filed on March 10, 2014 which is presently pending before the Court.

3 2. This is a core proceeding arising under Title 11 of the United States Code

4 involving the Debtor's bankruptcy case, which is presently pending in the United States

5 Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, particularly 28 U.S.C. 6 157(b)(2)(I)and (J). See also Fed.R.Bankr.P. 7001(1). 7 3. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1408 and 1409. 8 PARTIES

9 4. Bob Atchison ("Plaintiff') resides at 101 Laurel Lane, Austin, Texas 78705. 10 5. Defendant Oma McConnell ("McConnell" or "Defendant") resides in the 11 County of Los Angeles, California.

12 FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

13 6. Plaintiff has expertise with respect to certain periods of Russian history,

14 specifically the home and fate of the last Tsar of Russia. In the early 1990's he was

15 instrumental in the designation of the Alexander Palace, the Romanovs' home, as an

16 endangered monument by the World Monuments Fund and was chief historian on the

17 WMF's first expedition to the palace. Plaintiff has appeared on PBS, the Discovery Channel

18 and A&E Television on issues related to the Romanovs and the palace.

19 7. Plaintiff maintains a website dedicated to this period of Russian history

20 located at http://www.alexanderpalace.org. Available through this website, Plaintiff

21 operates a Russian History discussion forum, where he first encountered Defendant, who

22 engaged him to perform consulting services for her, for which she never did pay Plaintiff.

23 8. On October 11 , 2005 (Case D-1-GN-03-003141) the Travis County District 24 Court of Texas issued a judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount 25 of$13,859.99 plus statutory interest because of her failure to pay for his consulting services 26 (the "2005 Judgment"). Defendant never paid that judgment. 27 9. Defendant is the owner and operates an online blog located at

28 omahamou.cornloma. Defendant commonly posts comments to this site.


1 10. Since obtaining judgment against Defendant, Defendant has engaged in 2 activities designed to frustrate Plaintiffs enforcement of the judgment he obtained, 3 including but not limited to avoiding post judgment discovery, making numerous motions 4 for protective orders to avoid providing post judgment discovery, disobeying of court orders 5 for the production of post judgment discovery, filing frivolous bankruptcy petitions, only to 6 dismiss them after frustrating the enforcement of judgments obtained by Plaintiff and other 7 creditors.

8 11. In addition to efforts to frustrate Plaintiffs enforcement of the 2005

9 Judgment, Defendant has set out in a deliberate effort to defame Plaintiff. Although many

10 postings have been made since 2009 and even earlier, said posts remain online and

11 published to whomever should visit Defendant's forum sites in June 2014. In the past year,

12 Defendant has posted repeatedly online false matter concerning Plaintiff, including but not

13 limited to asserting:

14 a. Plaintiff had committed perjury and forgery in obtaining the 2005 15

16

17

18

19

20

b.

c.

d.

e.

f.

Judgment;

Plaintiff was being investigated for criminal activity;

Plaintiff lies about Russian Orthodox Church and its clergy;

Plaintiff stalks her;

Plaintiff has sent people to cause her physical harm; and

Plaintiff has had her drugged.

21 This list is not exhaustive and only covers a single day's worth of online comments.

22 FIRST COUNT FOR RELIEF 23 (Defamation- 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6)) 24 12. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference the allegations contained

25 within paragraphs 1 through 11, inclusive as though fully set forth.

26 13. Each of the facts published online by Defendant were and are false and no

27 privilege exists to make such statements.

28 Ill


1 14. The statements assert criminal activity by Plaintiff which has never occurred

2 or taken place, but which have a natural tendency to injure Plaintiff and which are libelous 3 on their face as the comments require no explanation of their defamatory meaning.

4 15. Moreover, Defendant filed an application for a civil harassment restraining

5 order on September 9, 2013 against Plaintiff. Upon the filing, a pro forma temporary

6 restraining order was issued not on the merits, but upon the filing. Plaintiff posted the

7 conformed document as evidence that Plaintiff had been restrained by the Court, although

8 no findings had been made.

9 16. The statements were made by Defendant who knew or should have known the

10 statements were false and would subject Plaintiff to ridicule, and ostracize him from 11 contacts and opportunities connected with his expertise in Russian history.

12 17. The statements were made knowing they would be seen by both friends,

13 acquaintances, and business contacts with the intent they result in humiliation of Plaintiff.

14 At all times mentioned, the acts of Defendant were intended to cause harm to Plaintiff or

15 performed with a reckless disregard for the consequences of her actions, solely to hurt,

16 punish and humiliate Plaintiff.

17 18. As a proximate cause of the conduct of Defendant, Plaintiff has been generally

18 injured in a sum according to proof at the time of trial. 19 19. The conduct of Defendant was despicable and intended to cause Plaintiff

20 humiliation in the community of Russian History interests and amounts to fraudulent,

21 oppressive or malicious conduct justifying the imposition of punitive and exemplary 22 damages in an amount according to proof at the time of trial.

23 20. As a further consequence ofthe conduct ofDefendant, Plaintiff is entitled to a

24 declaration that Defendant is not entitled to a discharge of the damages she caused Plaintiff

25 pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6). 26 Ill

27 Ill

28 Ill

\Complaint.wpd 4 COMPLAINT

1

2

SECOND COUNT FOR RELIEF

(Preliminary and Permanent Injunction) 3 21. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference the allegations contained

4 within paragraphs 1 through 19, inclusive, as though fully set forth.

5 22. Plaintiff is informed and believes and upon such information and belief that he

6 has lost business opportunities related to his Russian history expertise as a direct

7 consequence of business contacts learning of the false allegations by Defendant and that

8 damages from lost opportunities both in the past and in the future are difficult to calculate,

9 rendering monetary damages an inadequate remedy.

10 23. Injunctive relief is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of judicial proceedings 11 and to stop great, irreparable injury to Plaintiff and Plaintiffs reputation and business 12 pursuits, including those related to his expertise in Russian history.

13 24. Plaintiff seeks a preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, as follows: 14

15

16

17

18

a.

b.

For a preliminary injunction prohibiting Defendant or anyone acting on her behalf from posting false and defamatory matter related in any way

related to Plaintiff, his web sites or his Russian history expertise on the

Internet during the duration of this litigation; and,

For a mandatory and permanent injunction requiring Defendant and 19 anyone acting on her behalf to remove any and all false and defamatory

20 matter related in any way to Plaintiff or his web sites on the Internet on

21 web sites under the control of Defendant or anyone acting on her behalf

22 and to not post false or defamatory matter about Plaintiff or his web

23 sites on the Internet in the future.

24 THIRD COUNT FOR RELIEF

25 (Declaration of Vexatious Litigant Status against Defendant Defendant Hamou, aka 26 Defendant McConnell aka Alexandra McConnell) 27 25. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 19, inclusive as

28 though fully set forth herein.


1 26. After the 2005 Judgment was entered, Defendant, acting on her own behalf

2 filed a Petition for Bill of Review with the Travis County District Court of Texas, on or

3 about October 11, 2010, entitled Oma Hamou v Robert D. Atchison, bearing case number

4 GN 90993478 attempting tore-litigate all issues which occurred at the 2005 trial, including

5 the issues of fraud and manufactured documents. This proceeding was dismissed by

6 judgment on motion for summary judgment. 7 27. Because her Petition for Bill of Review submitted Defendant to the

8 jurisdiction of the Texas Court, Plaintiff filed a request on or about February 16, 2011 for 9 post-judgment discovery, requesting the production of documents and deposition from

10 Defendant. In response:

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 Ill

\Complaint.wpd

a. On or about March 24, 2011, while acting on her own behalf,

Defendant filed a frivolous motion for a Protective Order seeking relief

from the document production. Judge Timothy Shulak, presiding,

denied the motion for protective order and granted the order for the

document production and personal examination of Defendant;

b. On or about July 20, 2011, while acting on her own behalf, Defendant

filed a second frivolous motion for Protective Order from Post

Judgment Discovery, to be heard at the same time as a motion to

compel for failure to comply with the Court's earlier order and for

sanctions. On July 29, 2011, Judge Harger of the Travis County

District Court first denied Defendant's second motion for protective

order and then issued an Order to compel Defendant to comply with

Plaintiffs requests for document production and her personal

examination under oath and awarded sanctions in the amount

of $500 for Defendant's failure to comply with previous court orders. These sanctions remain unpaid and Defendant has yet to comply with

these court orders.

6 COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

c.

f.

In a continuing effort to engage in conduct designed solely to cause

unnecessary delay, Defendant failed to provide documents or appear for

her personal examination under oath as ordered by Judge Harger. On

October 17, 2011 Judge Hurley of the Travis County District Court

issued an Order of Contempt of Court against Defendant and imposed

$1 ,000 in sanctions against her for failure to comply with orders of document production and examination. These sanctions remain unpaid

and the order to comply has been ignored.

After the events alleged above, Defendant continued her conduct in

violation of Court Orders designed solely to cause unnecessary delay

such that on December 5, 2011 Judge Meachem of the Travis County

District Court issued another court order demanding that Debtor

comply with previous court orders for Deposition on Written Questions and Document Production and on January 1 7, 20 12 Chief Judge

Livingston of the Travis County District Court issued an Order to

Appear and Show Cause to Debtor, requiring her to appear on February

17, 2012 in person to explain her continuing violation of court orders.

When Defendant did not appear on February 17, 2012, on March 26,

2012 Chief Judge Livingston issued a Bench Warrant for Debtor' s

arrest.

21 28. Thereafter, in a further effort to frustrate Plaintiffs enforcement of his 2005

22 Judgment in California, Defendant, acting on her own behalf, on March 5, 2012, filed an

23 emergency petition under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, entitled In re Oma Hamou,

24 bearing case number 2: 12-bk-17945-ER, without any accompanying schedules or

25 declarations. Richard Diamond was appointed Chapter 7 trustee of Defendant's bankruptcy.

26 29. Because Defendant did not file schedules or other documents with her

27 petition, she was ordered by the Bankruptcy Court to file those schedules and other

28 documents within 14 days. Her 341 a Meeting of Creditors was scheduled for April 11,


1 2012. She did not file any schedules or other documents ordered by the Bankruptcy Court,

2 she did not appear at the first or several continued meetings of creditors. Defendant did post

3 on her online forum that she expected a dismissal of her bankruptcy case and that this would

4 be followed by a new bankruptcy filing.

5 30. During the course of her bankruptcy proceeding, Plaintiff applied for and was

6 granted a Rule 2004 examination under oath of Defendant, with the production of

7 documents. In response, Defendant, acting on her own behalf, filed an incomplete and

8 frivolous motion for a protective order to which Plaintiff was forced to respond or have the

9 motion potentially deemed meritorious. Notwithstanding, Defendant failed to schedule any

10 hearing, resulting in a frivolous and unnecessary two month delay in obtaining an order

11 denying her motion for a protective order in which the bankruptcy court admonished

12 Defendant for obtaining a defacto two month extension of time for production and

13 examination without a court order.

14 31. Defendant never produced any documents nor appeared for her examination

15 pursuant to the order of the Bankruptcy Court.

16 32. Defendant's bankruptcy was dismissed without discharge on July 9, 2012.

17 33. On or about April 24, 2012, Defendant, acting on her own behalf, filed a

18 Complaint against Plaintiff with the United States District Court for the Central District of

19 California entitled OMA MCCONNELL V ROBERT DAVID ATCHISON, ET AL, bearing

20 case number 12-03556 -RGK and alleging civil RICO claims. This required Plaintiff to

21 retain counsel to respond with a Motion to Dismiss. The action was dismissed by the

22 District Court.

23 34. On or about September 9, 2013 Defendant, acting on her own behalf, filed a

24 petition for a restraining order against Plaintiff in California, entitled MS. OMA

25 MCCONNELL VS REBERT D. ATCHISON, ET AL, (sic) bearing case number ESO 1704 7. 26 The proceeding alleged grounds for imposition of a civil restraining order and was served

27 upon Plaintiff in Texas. A pro forma temporary restraining order was issued upon filing the

28 application which Defendant posted online as evidence she had obtained a restraining order


1 regarding Plaintiffs alleged harassment of her. Plaintiff incurred the expense of hiring

2 counsel, travel and appearing in California for the hearing, only to have the matter dismissed

3 by the Court when Defendant failed to appear. Plaintiff was awarded the sum of$2,800.00 4 in attorney fees for this frivolous exercise. The sum was never paid by Defendant.

5 3 5. Each of the actions complained of above were either frivolous under the law

6 or actions designed and taken solely to cause unnecessary delay justifying a declaration of 7 Defendant as a vexatious litigant under California Code of Civil Procedure, 39l(b)(2) and 8 (b)(3). 9 36. A Prefiling Order is requested prohibiting Defendant from filing any new

10 litigation in the courts of this state or in the federal courts in propria persona without first

11 obtaining leave of the presiding justice or presiding judge of the court where the litigation is 12 proposed to be filed.

13 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

14 (Fraud- 523(a)(2)) 15 3 7. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference the allegations contained

16 within paragraphs 1 through 20, inclusive.

17 3 8. When Debtor made promises to pay Plaintiff for consulting work on a film she

18 allegedly was making. She never intended to pay him. Instead, she was preparing an image

19 for the purposes of defrauding others.

20 39. In furtherance of her real objectives, Debtor placed advertisements in Variety, 21 an entertainment weekly, concerning a Russian history film she was making. She retained

22 Plaintiff due to his expertise in Russian history. Plaintiff is informed and believes and

23 thereupon alleges that Debtor never paid Variety for all the ads she placed. Plaintiff utilized

24 a residential address to falsely claim it was a commercial film production office with many

25 employees. Additionally, Defendant falsely informed Plaintiff that her efforts were

26 supported by a large trust fund stated to be valued in millions of dollars. All of these claims

27 were made to induce Plaintiff to provide consulting services to her.

28 Ill


1 40. Defendant never paid Plaintiff for his work performed on her behalf and at her

2 request.

3 41. Plaintiff obtained a judgment in the state court of Texas against Debtor in the 4 sum of$13,859.99. Debtor failed to appear on February 17, 2012 pursuant to an Order to 5 Appear by the Texas state court to explain why she has ignored that Court' s Orders.

6 42. Utilizing Plaintiff's expertise, the Variety advertising, and social security

7 numbers she was able to obtain from persons she interviewed for employment, she obtained

8 credit which she exploited but for which she never paid.

9 43. It was never Debtor' s intent to pay Plaintiff. She knew when she first retained

10 Plaintiff that she had no intent to pay him. Instead she intended to use his name to promote

11 her scheme to obtain credit using other people' s names and social security numbers.

12 44. At all times mentioned it was Defendant's intent to defraud Plaintiff into

13 lending his name and expertise to her scheme to defraud others.

14 45. Plaintiff was unaware of the history of the Debtor at the time he entered the

15 agreement and was justified in relying on her representations that she would pay him for his 16 services.

17 46. As a proximate cause of the fraud of Defendant, Plaintiff entered the

18 agreement and provided services, none of which were compensated and he has been

19 damaged in the sum of$13,859.99 plus interest from the date of entry of judgment on 20 October 11 , 2005.

21 4 7. As a further consequence of the conduct of Defendant, Plaintiff is entitled to

22 punitive and exemplary damages in a sum according to proof at the time of trial.

23 48. Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration that the obligation represented by the

24 October 2005 Texas judgment is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(1)(A). 25 Ill

26 Ill

27 Ill 28 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF


1 (False Oath- 727(a)(4)) 2 49. Plaintiff refers to and incorporations paragraphs 1 through 20, above as though

3 fully set forth.

4 50. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Debtor has used

5 numerous aliases and false social security numbers to effect her schemes in the past. In fact,

6 in response to such allegations in the past, Defendant has claimed she has two legitimate

7 social security numbers in online posts, though she did not provide two social security

8 numbers in her petition. She has also not provided all the various aliases she has used.

9 51. Debtor signed her Petition for relief under penalty of perjury and was required 10 to provide all aliases and social security numbers she has used. She failed to provide that

11 information.

12 52. As a consequence, Debtor is not entitled to a discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

13 727(a)(4). 14 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

15 (Malicious and Intentional Conduct- 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6)) 16 53. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference the allegations contained

17 within paragraphs 1 through 19, inclusive, and paragraphs 26 through 35, inclusive as

18 though fully set forth herein.

19 54. The obligations of Defendant to Plaintiff represented by the sanctions in the

20 sums of $500 and $1000, both issued by the Texas state court where imposed as sanctions 21 for the intentional failure to comply with a court orders and constitute penalties imposed by

22 the Court. These debts are not dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6). 23 55. The harassment proceeding commenced by Defendant on September 9, 2013

24 was only intended to provide her with a court document indicating she had obtained an order

25 to stop harassment by Plaintiff. This was done so she could post it online and represent her

26 claims of harassment were justified by the order of the court. 27 Ill

28 56. Defendant failed to appear for the harassment proceeding and the matter was


1 dismissed and attorney fees imposed in the sum of $2,800.00. 2 57. The harassment proceeding never had any merit. Plaintiff lives in the State of

3 Texas and Defendant takes great pains to avoid Plaintiff knowing her place of residence,

4 such that there was no merit to any claim that Plaintiff had been harassing Defendant. The

5 claim was frivolous and not brought with any probable cause or probability of success.

6 58. The bringing of the harassment proceeding was solely intended to create a

7 document to use to harass Plaintiff. The entire proceeding was maliciously brought with the

8 intent to cause Plaintiff harm, inconvenience and expense or with a reckless disregard for

9 the consequences.

10 59. Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration that the amounts awarded to him in

11 sanctions and attorney fees are not dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6). 12 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as follows: 13 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

14 1. For an award of damages according to proof;

15 2. For an award of punitive and exemplary damages in a sum according to proof at

16 the time of trial;

17 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

18 3. For a determination that Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief; 19 4. For Orders:

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

\Complaint.wpd

a.

b.

For a preliminary injunction prohibiting Defendant or anyone acting on her behalf from posting false and defamatory matter related in any way

related to Plaintiff, his web sites or his Russian history expertise on the

Internet during the duration of this litigation;

For a mandatory and permanent injunction requiring Defendant and anyone acting on her behalf to remove any and all false and defamatory

matter related in any way to Plaintiff or his web sites on the Internet on

web sites under the control of Defendant or anyone acting on her behalf

and to not post false or defamatory matter about Plaintiff or his web

12 COMPLAINT

1 sites on the Internet in the future;

2 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

3 5. For a declaration that Defendant is a Vexatious Litigant;

4 6. For a permanent Order prohibiting Defendant from filing any new litigation in the

5 courts of this state or in the federal courts in propria persona without first obtaining a

6 pre filing order providing leave of the presiding justice or presiding judge of the court where 7 the litigation is proposed to be filed;

8 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

9 7. For a determination that the debt of Defendant in the sum of$13,859.99 plus 10 interest as set forth in the 2005 Texas judgment is not dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 11 523(a)(2)(A); 12 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

13 8. For a determination that Defendant provided a false oath with respect to her

14 aliases and social security numbers and should be denied any discharge of any debt under 11

15 U.S.C. 727(a)(4); 16 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

17 9. For a determination that court ordered sanctions and attorney fees are not

18 dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6); 19 ALL CLAIMS FOR RELIEF:

20 5. For costs of suit incurred herein; and,

21 6. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 22 Dated: June 20, 2014 23

24

25

26

27

28

\Complaint. wpd 13

LAW OFFICE OF BARRY R. WEGMAN

~-gm-an ___ _ Barry R. Wegman, counsel for Plaintiff Bob Atchison

COMPLAINT

Attorney or Party Name, Address, Telephone & FAX Nos., State Bar No. & Email Address

Attorney for Plaintiff

FOR COURT USE ONLY

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - DIVISION

CASE NO.:

CHAPTER:

In re:

Debtor(s). ADVERSARY NUMBER:

Plaintiff(s) Versus

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS AND NOTICE OF STATUS CONFERENCE IN ADVERSARY

PROCEEDING [LBR 7004-1]

TO THE DEFENDANT: A Complaint has been filed by the Plaintiff against you. If you wish to defend against the Complaint, you must file with the court a written pleading in response to the Complaint. You must also serve a copy of your written response on the party shown in the upper left-hand corner of this page. The deadline to file and serve a written response is . If you do not timely file and serve the response, the court may enter a judgment by default against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint.

A status conference in the adversary proceeding commenced by the Complaint has been set for:

Place: 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 3420 Twelfth Street, Riverside, CA 92501 411 West Fourth Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701 1415 State Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101

Hearing Date: Time: Courtroom:

21041 Burbank Boulevard, Woodland Hills, CA 91367

This form is mandatory. It has been approved for use in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. June 2012 Page 1 F 7004-1.SUMMONS.ADV.PROC


You must comply with LBR 7016-1, which requires you to file a joint status report and to appear at a status conference. All parties must read and comply with the rule, even if you are representing yourself. You must cooperate with the other parties in the case and file a joint status report with the court and serve it on the appropriate parties at least 14 days before a status conference. A court-approved joint status report form is available on the courts website (LBR form F 7016-1.STATUS.REPORT) with an attachment for additional parties if necessary (LBR form F 7016-1.STATUS.REPORT.ATTACH). If the other parties do not cooperate in filing a joint status report, you still must file with the court a unilateral status report and the accompanying required declaration instead of a joint status report 7 days before the status conference. The court may fine you or impose other sanctions if you do not file a status report. The court may also fine you or impose other sanctions if you fail to appear at a status conference.

KATHLEEN J. CAMPBELL CLERK OF COURT

Date of Issuance of Summons and Notice of Status Conference in Adversary Proceeding:

By: Deputy Clerk


PROOF OF SERVICE OF DOCUMENT

I am over the age of 18 and not a party to this bankruptcy case or adversary proceeding. My business address is: A true and correct copy of the foregoing document entitled: SUMMONS AND NOTICE OF STATUS CONFERENCE IN ADVERSARY PROCEEDING [LBR 7004-1] will be served or was served (a) on the judge in chambers in the form and manner required by LBR 5005-2(d); and (b) in the manner stated below: 1. TO BE SERVED BY THE COURT VIA NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING (NEF): Pursuant to controlling General Orders and LBR, the foregoing document will be served by the court via NEF and hyperlink to the document. On (date) _______________, I checked the CM/ECF docket for this bankruptcy case or adversary proceeding and determined that the following persons are on the Electronic Mail Notice List to receive NEF transmission at the email addresses stated below: Service information continued on attached page 2. SERVED BY UNITED STATES MAIL: On (date) _______________, I served the following persons and/or entities at the last known addresses in this bankruptcy case or adversary proceeding by placing a true and correct copy thereof in a sealed envelope in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows. Listing the judge here constitutes a declaration that mailing to the judge will be completed no later than 24 hours after the document is filed. Service information continued on attached page 3. SERVED BY PERSONAL DELIVERY, OVERNIGHT MAIL, FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION OR EMAIL (state method for each person or entity served): Pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 5 and/or controlling LBR, on (date) _______________, I served the following persons and/or entities by personal delivery, overnight mail service, or (for those who consented in writing to such service method), by facsimile transmission and/or email as follows. Listing the judge here constitutes a declaration that personal delivery on, or overnight mail to, the judge will be completed no later than 24 hours after the document is filed. Service information continued on attached page I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct. Date Printed Name Signature

FORM B104 (08/07) 2007 USBC, Central District of California

ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET (Instructions on Page 2)

ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER (Court Use Only)

PLAINTIFFS Bob Atchison

ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) Law Office of Barry R. Wegman 7506 Collett Ave. Van Nuys, Ca 91406 818 570-9312 PARTY (Check One Box Only) D Debtor D U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin

~Creditor D Trustee

D Other

DEFENDANTS Oma McConnell, aka Oma Hamou, aka Alexandra McConnell

ATTORNEYS (If Known)

PARTY (Check One Box Only) i2l Debtor D U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin D Creditor D Trustee

D Other

CAUSE OF ACTION (WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED) intentional torts including defamation, 11 USC 523(a)(6), fraud, 11 USC 523(a)(2)(A); Declaratory Relief declaration of vexatious I itigant status.

NATURE OF SUIT (Number up to five (5) boxes starting with lead cause of action as 1, first alternative cause as 2, second alternative cause as 3, etc.)

FRBP 7001(1)- Recovery of Money/Property 0 11-Recovery of money/property- 542 turnover of property 0 12-Recovery of money/property - 547 preference 0 13-Recovery of money/property- 548 fraudulent transfer 0 14-Recovery of money/property- other FRBP 7001(2)- Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien 0 21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property FRBP 7001 (3) -Approval of Sale of Property 0 31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner- 363(h) FRBP 7001(4)- Objection/Revocation of Discharge 0 41-0bjection I revocation of discharge- 727(c),(d),(e) FRBP 7001(5)- Revocation of Confirmation 0 51-Revocation of confirmation FRBP 7001(6)- Dischargeability 0 66-Dischargeability- 523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims I8J 62-Dischargeability- 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false

representation , actual fraud 0 67-Dischargeability- 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement,

larceny

(continued next column) l.a Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law

0 Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint Other Relief Sought INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TO PREVENT FURTHER DEFAMATION

FRBP 7001(6)- Dischargeability (continued) 0 61-Dischargeability- 523(a)(5), domestic support I8J 68-Dischargeability- 523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury 0 63-Dischargeability- 523(a)(8) , student loan 0 64-Dischargeability - 523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation

(other than domestic support) 0 65-Dischargeability - other

FRBP 7001(7) -Injunctive Relief 0 71-lnjunctive relief- imposition of stay I8J 72-lnjunctive relief- other FRBP 7001 (8) Subordination of Claim or Interest 0 81-Subordination of claim or interest FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment IKJ 91-Declaratory judgment FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action 0 01-Determination of removed claim or cause Other 0 SS-SIPA Case- 15 U.S.C. 78aaa et.seq. 0 02-0ther (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state

court if unrelated to bankruptcy case)

0 Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23

Demand $ 21 ,345.99

FORM B104 (08/07), page 2 2007 USBC, Central District of California

BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES NAME OF DEBTOR BANKRUPTCY CASE NO.

Oma McConnell 2:14-bk-14501 DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING DIVISIONAL OFFICE NAME OF JUDGE

Central Los Angeles Bluebond

RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY)

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NO.

DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING DIVISIONAL OFFICE NAME OF JUDGE

SIGNATUR& {CCD') . ~ I \ '>