1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Thomas A. Lamb 2806 Howe Place #1 Anchorage, Alaska 99517 E-mail: tlamb775@aol.com Telephone: 907-306-5855

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE ) THOMAS A. LAMB a Resident of the State of) ) Alaska, acting as pro se, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No.: 3AN-12- 09961 CI vs. ) ) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BARACK ) ) OBAMA and MITT ROMNEY, ) ) Defendants )

MOTION TO USE TWITTER AS A METHOD OF PROCESS

16 17 18

Plaintiff Thomas A. Lamb, pro se, in response to this Court denying the Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration of immediate disclosure of records on October 17th, 2012 and pursuant to Alaska Civil Rule 77 moves this court to allow electronic transmissions of pleadings

19

in the above-captioned case to be used a method of service on the official Twitter accounts of
20

Defendant Barack Obama listed as @barackobama and Mitt Romney listed as @mittromney.
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dated this _22nd day of October, 2012 ____________________ ____________________ Thomas A. Lamb

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that on this 22nd day of October, 2012 I caused a copy of the foregoing to be served by certified Priority mail and personal twitter accounts to the following parties known address and official twitter accounts: Obama for America P.O. Box 803638 Chicago, Il 60680 @barackobama Romney for President P.O. Box 149756 Boston, Ma 02114-9756 @Mittromney Courtesy copy sent to The Alaska Supreme Court 303 K Street Anchorage, AK 99501-2084 Clerk of Appellate Courts Marilyn May

________________________________
9

Thomas A. Lamb
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 2

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

Thomas A. Lamb 2806 Howe Place #1 Anchorage, Alaska 99517 E-mail: tlamb775@aol.com Telephone: 907-306-5855

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE ) THOMAS A. LAMB a Resident of the State of) ) Alaska, acting as pro se, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No.: 3AN-12- 09961 CI vs. ) ) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BARACK ) ) OBAMA and MITT ROMNEY, ) ) Defendants ) MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION Plaintiff Thomas A. Lamb, pro se, in response to this Court denying the Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration of immediate disclosure of records on October 17th, 2012 and pursuant to Alaska Civil Rule 77 (g) moves this court for an expedited consideration of the Plaintiffs motion to use Twitter as a method of process. Dated this _22nd day of October, 2012 ____________________ ____________________ Thomas A. Lamb

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that on this 22nd day of October, 2012 I caused a copy of the foregoing to be served by certified Priority mail and personal twitter accounts to the following parties known address and official twitter accounts: Obama for America P.O. Box 803638 Chicago, Il 60680 @barackobama Romney for President P.O. Box 149756 Boston, Ma 02114-9756 @Mittromney Courtesy copy sent to The Alaska Supreme Court 303 K Street Anchorage, AK 99501-2084 Clerk of Appellate Courts Marilyn May

________________________________
9

Thomas A. Lamb
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Thomas A. Lamb 2806 Howe Place #1 Anchorage, Alaska 99517 E-mail: tlamb775@aol.com Telephone: 907-306-5855

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE ) THOMAS A. LAMB a Resident of the State of) ) Alaska, acting as pro se, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No.: 3AN-12-09961 CI vs. ) ) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BARACK ) ) OBAMA and MITT ROMNEY, ) ) Defendants ) AFFIDAVIT OF THOMAS A. LAMB IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO USE TWITTER AS A METHOD OF SERVICE AND MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION

THOMAS A. LAMB, pro se, duly sworn, deposes and states: 1. 2. account. 3. On September 9th, 2012 a Demand letter addressed to the Defendants and I am the Plaintiff in the above captioned case. The Twitter account under the identifier @tlamb775 is my personal

was posted on my personal blog at www.thomasalamb.blogspot.com indicating that civil legal

25 26 27 28

action would proceed if and an expedited consideration was mentioned. 4. I received no response from the Defendants.

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 5

1 2 3 4 5

5.

On September 25th, 2012 I sent an electronic notice to both of the

Defendants personal campaign Twitter accounts that the above captioned case was filed in an Alaska Court. (See http://es.twitter.com/tlamb775/status/250731839784902657, downloadable screen shot at http://www.scribd.com/doc/110664008/Update-2-Indicating-Complaint-Filed and actual link at my personal blog at http://thomasalamb.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-demand-letter-

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

to-candidates-barack.html) 6. On September 26th, 2012, at 12:20 P.M. at the Midtown Station of the

United States Postal Service, I sent a summons and complaint of the above captioned case via certified mail, label #70112970000192476712 and #70121010000197540950 to the Defendants listed P.O. Box via the campaigns website and by searching the internet. 7. On October 9th, 2012, I received the certified receipt that the Obama

campaign picked up the above captioned complaint and summons on October 4th, 2012. 8. On October 9th, 2012, I received a returned mailing of the complaint that

was sent to the Romney campaign. The reason for delivery was no such number.
17 18 19 20 21 22

9.

On October 9th, 2012, a call was made to the Romney campaign notifying

them that a complaint was sent and returned. I left my contact phone number with a campaign staffer after asking who I would send the complaint to. No return call was made. 10. On October 11th, 2012, a Motion for Expedited Consideration of Plaintiff's

Motion for Immediate Disclosure of Records Pertaining to Presidential Candidates Barack

23 24 25 26 27 28

Obama and Mitt Romney was filed with the court. 11. On October 11th, 2012 I sent Notice to the Defendants Twitter accounts

that motions had been filed. (See https://twitter.com/tlamb775/status/256534541630590976)

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

12.

On October 12th, 2012, I sent a notice and link of the motions to the

Defendants Twitter accounts. (See https://twitter.com/tlamb775/status/256683423840731136 and link to motion practice http://www.scribd.com/doc/109803555/Memorandum-PDF ) 13. On October 15th, 2012, I received an order denying the expedited

consideration in which the court stated before the plaintiffs motion could be considered, plaintiff must provide the court with legitimate Civil Rule 5 proof of service of the summons and complaint and the pending motions and supporting documents on defendants. The date of when the order was mailed was left blank. 14. On October 15th, I also received a Notice of Deficient Filing(s). In the

notice, it was indicated in part, that there has been no proof of Civil Rule 4 service on the parties. 15. On October 16th, 2012 I motioned the court for reconsideration and in the

supporting affidavit, I indicated that Civil Rule 5 proof of service was met on October11th, 2012 when in affidavit I stated that a summons and complaint was sent certified mail to the

17 18 19 20 21 22

Defendants on September 26th, 2012 and in the same affidavit, I served notice that all motion practice had been sent certified mail to the Defendants on October 11th, 2012. 16. A memorandum sent supporting the motion for reconsideration stated that

according to Alaska Civil Rule 4 (e) and 5 (f) the affidavit in support of the motion for expedited consideration fulfilled the rule.

23 24 25 26 27 28

17.

I also sent via the Defendants Twitter accounts a link to the motion

practice. (See https://twitter.com/tlamb775/status/258293076295032832 and http://www.scribd.com/doc/110227118/Motion-for-Reconsideration-to-Expedite)

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 7

1 2 3 4 5

18.

I called the court clerk at 264-0441 on the October 16th, 2012 and asked if

there were any deficiencies with the motion for reconsideration that was filed on October16th, 2012. The court clerk said no 19. I sent the motion for reconsideration and all documents supporting the

motion via USPS Priority Mail to the Defendants. Unfortunately, the documents were returned
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

for additional postage. When I found out the documents had been returned, I went to the UPS store to ask if there was an error on the cost of postage. The clerk said no. See Exhibit A and B 20. 21. I paid the $5.15 that was indicated on the notice. I then went to the United States Post Office Midtown Station and had the

clerk check the postage and he said the original postage was correct and he had his supervisor make a copy of the letter package and asked if I wanted a refund. I said no. I wanted to make sure there were no problems. 22. On October17th, an order was issued by the court stating:

In fact, plaintiff has not perfected proper service on defendants. Civil Rule 4(d) (1) requires personal service of the summons and complaint on defendants. Civil Rule (h) provides for the alternate service by mail if the mailing of the summons and complaint is done by registered or certified mail with restricted delivery to defendant who must sign off on the return receipt. Plaintiff has not followed Civil Rule 4(d) or Civil 4 (h). There has been no personal service. Plaintiffs service by mail was directed to Romney for President and Obama for America. These mailings are not proper service by mail under Alaska law. The motion for reconsideration is denied.

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 8

1 2 3 4 5

23.

On October 18th, 2012, I filed a Notice to the Court via certified mail

indicating that the Romney campaign stated that the pleadings sent to their addressed headquarters was sufficient and the documents would be sent to the appropriate lawyers. The staffer indicated that there was no one person to send the restricted delivery to. See Exhibit C 24. On October 18th, 2012 I called the Obama campaign headquarters and the

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

staffer indicated that many people sign for their certified mail. I asked who I could send restricted mail to and the staffer did not know. I left my name, phone number and e-mail and as of this date of filing this affidavit, no one has contacted me. See Exhibit C 25. As for the mailing of motions on October, 11th, 2012, no return receipt has

been sent back but via scribd.com links of motions have been sent to the Defendants personal Twitter accounts.

Thomas A. Lamb

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this ____ day of ___________ 2012.

Notary Public in and for Alaska. My Commission Expires:

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE ) THOMAS A. LAMB a Resident of the State of) ) Alaska, acting as pro se, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No.: 3AN-12- 09961 CI vs. ) ) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BARACK ) ) OBAMA and MITT ROMNEY, ) ) Defendants )

ORDER
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiffs motion for expedited consideration is GRANTED. IT IS ALSO SO ORDERED that the Motion to use the Defendants Twitter accounts as a means of serving the Defendants the notice of complaint and summons and court pleadings is GRANTED. The Plaintiff has fulfilled the intent in Alaska Civil Rule 4 to ensure notice, in a timely manner has been served on the Defendants.

Date

The Honorable Judge Frank A. Pfiffner

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 10

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

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE ) THOMAS A. LAMB a Resident of the State of) ) Alaska, acting as pro se, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No.: 3AN-12-09961 CI vs. ) ) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BARACK ) ) OBAMA and MITT ROMMNEY, ) ) Defendants )

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO USE TWITTER AS A METHOD OF PROCESS AND MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS Thomas A. Lamb, Plaintiff moves this court to grant the Plaintiff the appropriate relief in due process under Alaska Civil Rule 4 and grant the motion. Time has become a factor in this case and the timeline from the demand letter, the filing of the complaint after the nominating process for the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, the defendants can respond to the complaint within 20 days after the Defendants receive the complaint. The Defendant Barack Obama received the complaint on October 4th 2012. That would allow the Defendant to respond by November 1st 2012. As for the Defendant Mitt Romney, accordingly the summons and complaint had to be sent again via what amounts to be the pony express from Alaska to the Lower 48. However, the Plaintiff did send a link to the Twitter accounts of the Defendants that has a copy of the summons. (See https://twitter.com/tlamb775/status/259556955675299840)

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 11

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

There is a double irony that developed from the Twitter message sent to the Defendants, an anonymous person who uses the Acorn avatar and titles their Twitter account ACORN Reborn (evidently promoting the group ACORN that the Defendant Barack Obama was associated with) sent the Twitter message again that the Plaintiff sent while stating it hotlinking is stealing. (See https://twitter.com/OccupyUnmasked/status/260369996469907457 and screen shot http://www.scribd.com/doc/110798116/Acorn-Reborn ) The general election is on November 6th, 2012 which does not allow for a timely appeal or response to an order to produce the records and allow the public to view and digest the information. The Plaintiff has put his trust in the process but to no avail, the Defendants have ignored the multiple requests and time is running out.

LEGAL ARGUMENT The motion at hand, moves this court in an expedited manner to allow the Plaintiff to use Twitter as a means of serving notice to the Defendants. The use of social network sites such as Twitter and Facebook in serving notice that a complaint has been filed, has legal merit and has been adjudicated. In the divorce case Mpafe vs. Mpafe, the court on May 10th, 2011 granted a Plaintiff acting pro se the use of the social network Facebook to serve notice on her spouse. (See http://www.scribd.com/doc/70014426/Mpafe-v-Mpafe-order) In the order, the presiding Judge stated that serving someone by using an ad in a newspaper was antiquated. Likewise, it has been argued in a previous motion in this case that sending certified mail and getting a response back in a timely fashion is akin to the pony express. The use of Facebook and social media has been adjudicated in international courts as well. (See http://www.applebyglobal.com/publication-pdf-versions/articles/articles-2012/areyou-being-served--the-increasing-role-of-social-media-in-service-of-proceedings---september2012-(2).pdf )

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 12

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 high courts in places like Australia and the United Kingdom have ruled that the use of social media to serve legal notice is allowed. Alaska Civil Rule 4 d (13) addresses Personal Service in a foreign country (i) in the manner prescribed by the law of the foreign country for service in that country in an action in any of its courts of general jurisdiction; If either Defendant were on a campaign stop in the United Kingdom or Australia, the use of the social media platform Facebook or Twitter could be used to serve notice. Likewise, even though is not specifically stated in Alaska Civil Rule 4, due process would be afforded to the Defendants via Twitter. However, in another case FORTUNATO vs, CHASE BANK USA the presiding Judge from the United States District Court in the Southern District of New York on June 6th, 2012 denied the use of Facebook, but the Judge stated he did not know of any court case that had allowed Facebook to be used to serve notice. This being ordered when the Mpafe case was adjudicated on May 10th, 2011. The Judge went further and stated that Facebook accounts can be set up by anyone. Even with stating that, the Judge ordered that Chase Bank U.S.A. put ads in the local newspapers in the surrounding area that the person was said to live in the Facebook account. This being ordered in hope that the individual would read the notice. (See http://www.nylj.com/nylawyer/adgifs/decisions/061212keenan.pdf) Unlike the Chase Bank U.S.A. case, the Twitter accounts of the Defendants are certified to be the accounts of the Defendants and accordingly by law, are theirs. It is know that Defendant Barack Obama uses his Twitter account and when he sends a message via to his millions of followers, he will end the message with BO. Arguably, the electronic transmission of a message via Twitter to the Defendants accounts is no different than sending a Fax or e-mail. The message is sent directly to the Defendants account and notice was served there.

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 13

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

Arguably, the use of Twitter is more direct means to serve notice than via an ad in the newspaper and according to Alaska Civil Rule 4 (e ) 2 Service by publication in a Newspaper: the party who seeks to have service made must send the absent party a copy of the notice and the complaint or the pleading (A) by registered or certified mail, with return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, and (B) by regular first class mail. The notice must be addressed in care of the absent party's residence or the place where the party usually receives mail, unless it shall appear by affidavit that the absent partys residence or place is unknown or cannot be ascertained after inquiry. The summons and complaint were sent certified mail to the Defendants know campaign headquarters address. The rule does not require the summons and complaint be sent restricted mail to the individual or person who under federal law can sign for restricted mail.

CONCLUSION Accordingly this court can grant the order for an expedited consideration and allow the Plaintiff to use Twitter as a means of ensuring the Defendants were served notice. And on its own motion to expedite this case so that the Plaintiff is not denied due process and the public is not kept in the dark on the records that are requested. Dated this __22nd__ day of October, 2012 ____________________ ____________________ Thomas A. Lamb

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that on this 22nd day of October, 2012 I caused a copy of the foregoing to be served by certified Priority mail and personal twitter accounts to the following parties known address and official twitter accounts: Obama for America P.O. Box 803638 Chicago, Il 60680 @barackobama Romney for President P.O. Box 149756 Boston, Ma 02114-9756 @Mittromney Courtesy copy sent to The Alaska Supreme Court 303 K Street Anchorage, AK 99501-2084 Clerk of Appellate Courts Marilyn May

________________________________
9

Thomas A. Lamb
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Lawsuit RomneyObama- 15