Murphy's Law and
U.S. Attorney Warren Zimmerman!

rainbow

This is the sort of event that you can only dream about happening. And when it does, you laugh and dance about all day long!

Warren Zimmerman is the Assistant U.S. Attorney in Tampa (813-274-6030) and is the person defending the government's wrongdoing in the lawsuit.

In the spirit of pointing out my incompetence, he sent the following email:

Subject: Your certificate of service in Case # 8:04cv2013
Time: 9/9/04 2:18 PM

Mr. Brown:

I received earlier this week your "certificate of service" in the above-referenced case.

The first line of this document begins, "On September2 26, 2004," the following documents ... were sent...."

Obviously, September2 is not a month, September 26 hasn't arrived yet and September 226 or "2 26" are likewise not dates of service. The postmark on the envelope reads "3 September," for what that's worth.

Does your mistake, assuming for the sake of argument only that it was a mistake, cause you to reconsider any of the scurrilous allegations that you have made against Nancy Slutter and others? Will you be retracting from your website any accusations or innuendos which might still be there with regard to her and similarly situated federal employees? Or will you be uploading the evidence of your own erroneous certificate of service?

Warren A. Zimmerman
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
Middle District of Florida
400 North Tampa Street, Suite 3200
Tampa, Florida 33602
(813) 274-6335 (ph)
(813) 274-6200 (fax)

Of course, I confess that I actually did make a mistake using a prior document and trying to modify the date. So I filed an amended document with the court with the new date. I thought that was the end of the matter.

But six days later, Warren filed six "Notice of pendency of other actions" documents, all of which included mention of Case # 8:04cv2013. Except he got the case number wrong. Instead of "2013" he typed "2031".

Oh joy! Oh bliss!

So...

Mr. Zimmerman:

I reviewed your "Notice of pendency of other actions" in the above-referenced case.

You refer to the case number in all six notices as 8:04-cv-2031-T-17TBM.

Obviously, 2031 is not the case number. That belongs to a plaintiff named Diaz that is suing Verizon, for what that's worth.

Does your mistake, assuming for the sake of argument only that it was a mistake, cause you to reconsider any of the scurrilous allegations that you have made against me? Will you be retracting those accusations and innuendos? Will you be uploading the evidence of your own six erroneous notices to the court?

Got'cha! ;-)

David W. R. Brown

I have the feeling that God probably sends all U.S. Attorneys to Hell.

But in this case, I think God (using Murphy's Law) went out of his/her way to also remind Warren about the Golden Rule.

It's a pity that they don't teach "Ethics 101" in law schools...

rainbow


Return to Patent Office Lawsuit Homepage