Human Rights Alert

Digitally signed by
Human Rights Alert Joseph Zernik

DN: cn=Joseph
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 Zernik, o, ou,
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net email=jz12345@ea
rthlink.net, c=US
Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Date: 2011.05.12
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert 17:41:17 +03'00'
11-11-12 Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v Alcatraz Media, LLC, et al (1:09-cv-01543)

Simulated Litigation in the US Court, Northern District of Georgia
The case was intended to unlawfully quash subpoena of William Windsor on US Judge Olinda Evans in a
related case. It is part of a widespread practice in both the state and US courts today, through collusion of US
judges and the US Attorney Office. Combined with other related cases, originating from the same underlying
matter, it also documents that the US Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court patronize the practice.
Attached:
# Date Record Page #
1 May 12, 2011 PACER Docket Report 5
2 May 12, 2011 Related Transactions Report 23
3 June 3, 2009 Dkt #001, Commencing Records: 71
a) “Motion” by Assistant US Attorney CHRISTOPHER HUBER 71
b) Subpoena issued on Judge Evans in a related case, which was the 84
underlying matter
c) Proposed Order to Quash Subpoena 104
d) Civil Cover Sheet 105
4 June 8, 2009 Dkt #005, Windsor’s Notice of Appearance, 109
The case is patently some form of Simulated Litigation through collusion of US Judges OLINDA EVANS
and Judge WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR, and Assistant US Attorney CHRISTOPHER HUBER, and the
Clerk of the US Court, Northern District of Georgia JAMES N HATTEN . [i ]
The case as a whole demonstrate the manner in which the record keeping systems of the US courts, PACER
and CM/ECF are employed for the conduct of Simulated Litigations. The fundamental shell game
characteristic of the systems is that all authentication records are excluded from public view in PACER.
Instead, such records are concealed under CM/ECF, where only the Court and authorized attorneys can view
them.
The case should be reviewed in view of the Civil Litigation Management Manual, Second Edition (2010) by
the Judicial Conference of the United States, Committee on Court Administration and Case Management. [ii ]
Upon such review, a reasonable person would conclude that the case at hand was never deemed by the US
Court, Northern District of Georgia as a matter that was litigated in the US Court pursuant to the law of the
United States.
Comments:
1) Civil Cover Sheet:
• The civil docket was opened under case number (1:09-MI-0220) through action of the US Attorney
Office, under cause of action of FRCP 45(b) Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoena on behalf of
Judge Olinda Evans. It now appears under a different case number and case type designation.
z Page 2/4 May 12, 2011
2) Execution of Summons and Complaint

• No summonses were issued by the clerk, and no summonses were executed with the opening of the
docket. There is no evidence of execution of service of the Commencing record (Motion to Quash)
either.
3) Insufficient Pleadings
The motion was not designated as “Verified”, and in fact included no verification and no declaration by either
Judge Olinda Evans or anybody else. No declaration by Judge Olinda Evans was included in other papers in
the case either.
4) Assignment to a US Judge, Referral to a US Magistrate
• No Assignment of a US Judge or Referral to a US Magistrate were noted in the designated space in
the Civil Cover Sheet.
• No evidence of due Assignment Order for US Judge William S. Duffey, Jr appears in the docket.
Instead, repeated notations appear in the docket of “Submission” of motions to Judge Duffey.
However, such notations uniformly appear with no Docket Number, and therefore could not be
valid and effectual, authenticated court records:
08/06/2010 Submission of 64 MOTION to Expunge Writ of Execution
08/26/2010 Submission of 65 MOTION for Recusal to District Judge William S. Duffey
09/13/2010 Submission of 78 MOTION for Leave to File Emergency Motion
5) Change of Case Number
• The notation in the docket, which is the legal foundation for the change in case number appears with
no Docket Number and therefore could not possibly be authenticated as a valid and effectual court
record:
06/10/2009 Case reported statistically. Matter transferred from 1:09-mi-220-WSD. (kt) (Entered:
06/10/2009)
6) Party Designations
• Olinda Evans, who commenced the action was not listed as Petitioner, or Plaintiff, a true party
designation, but as “Movant”, a false party designation.
7) Related Cases
• Although at that time there were related cases in the US Court, Northern District of Georgia, e.g.
Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v. Alcatraz Media, LLC et al (1:06-cv-00714), no Related
Case was listed in the Civil Cover Sheet.
8) Minutes
• No Minutes of any proceedings were recorded throughout the Simulated Litigation.
9) Authentication Records of purported “Orders” and “Writ of Execution”
Various notations in the docket are patent fraud, e.g.:
a) Order, Dkt #42
09/03/2009 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Marc W. Brown, counsel to Plaintiffs, and William
M. Windsor re 42 Order on Motion for Reconsideration
• Certificate of Mailing, which is the authentication record for the purported “Order” (Dkt #42),
was noted in the docket with no Docket Number, and therefore could not possibly be
authenticated.
z Page 3/4 May 12, 2011
b) Writ of Execution, Dkt # - none

06/16/2010 WRIT of Execution issued in the amount of $37,333.67 as to William Windsor per 54 Order
and per the direction of the USCA.
• The Writ of Execution was “issued”, but not “entered”, and

• The Writ of Execution was noted in the docket with no Docket Number, and therefore could
not possibly be authenticated.
c) Oral Order, Dkt # - none
09/24/2010 ORAL ORDER (by docket entry only) as ordered by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr.
• The notion of Oral Order is false on its face.

• The “Oral Order” was noted in the docket with no Docket Number, and therefore could not
possibly be authenticated.
d) Certificate of Mailing, Dkt # - none
11/03/2010 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to William M. Windsor re 99 Order on Motion for Protective
Order, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion to Stay, Order on Motion for
Recusal, Order on Motion for Leave to File, Order on Motion for Extension of Time. (kt) (Entered:
11/03/2010)
e) Certificate of Mailing, Dkt # - none
• Certificate of Mailing, which is the authentication record for the purported “Order” (Dkt #99),
was noted in the docket with no Docket Number, and therefore could not possibly be
authenticated.
11/03/2010 Clerks Certificate of Mailing
10) Corporate Disclosures
• Although several corporations are listed as parties to the Simulated Litigation, no Corporate
Disclosure was filed by any corporation. It should also be noted that the US Court, Northern
District of Georgia is among the US Courts, which deny public access to the Corporate Parent
Report. [ iii ]
11) Judgment Index
• It should also be noted that the US Court, Northern District of Georgia is among the US Courts,
which deny public access to the Judgment Index. Therefore, there is no way to ascertain that any
judgment or dispositive order were ever entered in the case.
12) Related Transactions Report
• The Related Transactions Report is deemed a meticulously crafted adulterated court record: Neither
the commencing record (Dkt #1), neither any of the purported “Motions” (E.g., Dkt #6, 8, 9, 13,17,
etc) were designated as a Transaction, and therefore, could not be possibly terminated. However, the
Report as a whole was constructed in a manner that a naive reader would not discern that fact.
CONCLUSION:
The case of Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v Alcatraz Media, LLC, et al (1:09-cv-01543) is deemed a
form of Simulated Litigation, a widespread practice in both the state and US courts today.
Mr Windsor was advised to attempt to gain access to the authentication records (NEFs - Notices of
Electronic Filing) of key records in this case, in order to ascertain the nature of the records. However,
there is sufficient evidence in the Docket Report, as is, that key records were never authenticated.
z Page 4/4 May 12, 2011
The case should be viewed in the context of several other actions related to the same underlying matter
in the various US courts. Combined, the cases provide a unique documentation of racketeering in the US
courts through the conduct of Simulated Litigations, [ iv ] where the US courts of appeals and the US
Supreme Court in fact patronize the practice.
The case at hand is of particular interest, since it provides direct evidence of collusion by the US
Attorney Office and the US courts in such conduct.
LINKS
i
Regarding Simulated Litigation, see:
11-05-10 Citizens United v Federal Election Commission - Simulated Litigation in the US Supreme Court…
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/55064366/H
Also, see:Texas Penal Code - §32.48. Simulating Legal Process
§ 32.48. SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person recklessly causes to be delivered to
another any document that simulates a summons, complaint, judgment,
or other court process with the intent to:
(1) induce payment of a claim from another person; or
(2) cause another to:
(A) submit to the putative authority of the document; or
(B) take any action or refrain from taking any action in response to the document, in compliance with the document, or
on the basis of the document.
(b) Proof that the document was mailed to any person with the intent that it be forwarded to the intended recipient is a sufficient showing
that the document was delivered.
ii
10-11-19 Civil Litigation Management Manual, Second Edition (2010) Judicial Conference of the United States, Committee on Court
Administration and Case Management
iii
Zernik, J: The Clerks and the Calendars of the US Courts
iv
[1] 11-02-13 Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v William Windsor (1:06-cv-00714) - Evidence of Racketeering in the US District Court,
Northern District of Georgia
[2] 11-02-13 Maid Of The Mist Corporation et al v William Windsor (1:06-cv-00714) in the US District Court, Northern District of Georgia: Court
records
[3] 12-12-11 Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v William Windsor (10-10139) in the US Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit: Compiled Records of
Appeal s
[4] 11-01-18 Press Release: Windsor v Maid of the Mist in the Supreme Court of the United States and Alleged Corruption of the Office of the
Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States
[5] 11-02-10 Windsor v Maid of the Mist Corporation (10-690 and 10-A690) - Fraud opined in US Supreme Court records, received by Mr
Windsor from office of Clerk Suter
[6] 11-01-28 William M. Windsor v. Maid of the Mist Corporation, at al. (10-A690) in the Supreme Court of the United States: a) Suggested
request for a valid record of denial, certified by Justice Thomas, and b) Records provided on January 28, 2011 by Mr Windsor s
[7] 11-02-10 Press Release: Fraud Opined in US Supreme Court Records Received by Petitioner William Windsor From the Office of Clerk
Suter
5/12/2011 CM/ECF-GA Northern District Court
APPEAL, CLOSED, SUBMDJ
U.S. District Court

Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:09-cv-01543-WSD
Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v. Alcatraz Media, LLC et al Date Filed: 06/10/2009
Assigned to: Judge William S. Duffey, Jr Date Terminated: 06/30/2009
Case in other court: USCA, 09-14735-DD Jury Demand: None
USCA, 09-14735-DD Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions
USC, 10-15220-E Jurisdiction: Federal Question
USCA, 10-15717-E
USCA, 11-10259-E
Cause: FRCP 45(b) Motion to quash or modify subpoena
Plaintiff
Maid of the Mist Corporation represented by Brett A. Mendell
Hawkins Parnell Thackston & Young, LLP
303 Peachtree Street, N.E.
4000 SunTrust Plaza
Atlanta, GA 30308-3243
404-614-7400
Fax: 404-614-7500
Email: bmendell@hplegal.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
Carl Hugo Anderson , Jr.

4000 SunTrust Plaza
404-614-7400
Fax: 404-614-7500
Email: canderson@hptylaw.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Marc W. Brown
Phillips Lytle, LLP
3400 HSBC Center
Buffalo, NY 14203
716-504-5755
LEAD ATTORNEY
Sarah Louise Bright

ecf.gand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p… 1/18
4000 SunTrust Plaza
404-614-7534
Email: sbright@hplegal.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
Plaintiff
Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, represented by Brett A. Mendell
Ltd. (See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
Carl Hugo Anderson , Jr.

(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
Marc W. Brown
LEAD ATTORNEY
Sarah Louise Bright

LEAD ATTORNEY
V.
Defendant
Alcatraz Media, LLC represented by George Brian Raley
Raley & Sandifer
945 East Paces Ferry Road
2650 Resurgens Plaza
Atlanta, GA 30326
404-995-9000
Email: braley@raleysandifer.com
TERMINATED: 06/30/2009
LEAD ATTORNEY
Defendant
Alcatraz Media, Inc. represented by George Brian Raley
TERMINATED: 06/30/2009
LEAD ATTORNEY
Defendant
William M. Windsor represented by William M. Windsor
P.O. Box 681236
Marietta, GA 30068
770-578-1094
Fax: 770-234-4106
PRO SE
Movant
Judge Orinda D. Evans represented by Christopher J. Huber
U.S. Attorneys Office - ATL
Assistant United States Attorney, Criminal
Division
600 Richard Russell Building
75 Spring Street, S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 581-6292
Email: chris.huber@usdoj.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
Movant
Barbara G. Windsor represented by Barbara G. Windsor
P.O. Box 681236
Marietta, GA 30068
770-578-1056
Fax: 770-234-4106
PRO SE
Date Filed # Docket Text

06/03/2009 1 EMERGENCY MOTION to Quash Subpoena with Memorandum In Support by Judge Orinda
D. Evans. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum of Law in Support, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4
Text of Proposed Order, # 5 Civil Cover Sheet)(eop) (Entered: 06/03/2009)
06/03/2009 Submission of 1 EMERGENCY MOTION to Quash Subpoena, submitted to Magistrate Judge
Walter E. Johnson. (eop) (Entered: 06/03/2009)
06/04/2009 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Carl Hugo Anderson, Jr. and Sarah L. Bright on behalf of Maid
of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd. (Anderson, Carl)
Modified on 6/5/2009 to update text re attys appearing, per pleading (alc). (Entered:
06/04/2009)
06/04/2009 3 MOTION for Joinder in United States District Judge Orinda D. Evans' 1 Emergency
Motion to Quash Subpoena, filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat
Company, Ltd. (Anderson, Carl) Modified on 6/5/2009 to include document link (alc).
(Entered: 06/04/2009)
06/08/2009 4 ORDER STAYING CASE. The Court STAYS the subpoena and deposition until the 1
Emergency Motion to Quash is fully briefed and the Court decides the motion. The 3 Motion
for Joinder is GRANTED. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 6/8/09. (eop) Modified
text on 6/9/2009 (eop). (Entered: 06/09/2009)
06/08/2009 5 NOTICE Of Filing, Notice of Appearance of William M. Windsor (Attachments: # 1 Notice of

Appearance)(eop) (Entered: 06/09/2009)
06/08/2009 6 EMERGENCY MOTION for Hearing by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)
(eop) (Entered: 06/09/2009)
06/08/2009 7 NOTICE Of Filing, Emergency Motion for Hearing by William M. Windsor (eop) (Entered:
06/09/2009)
06/10/2009 8 MOTION to Supplement United States District Judge Orinda D. Evans' Emergency
Motion to Quash Subpoena by Orinda D. Evans. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Text of
Proposed Order)(Huber, Christopher) (Entered: 06/10/2009)
06/10/2009 Case reported statistically. Matter transferred from 1:09-mi-220-WSD. (kt) (Entered:
06/10/2009)
06/10/2009 9 MOTION to Disqualify Attorneys Hawkins and Parnell, Carl Hugho Anderson, Sarah Bright,
Phillips Lytle, and Marc W. Brown with Brief In Support by William M. Windsor.
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(kt) (Entered: 06/11/2009)
06/10/2009 10 NOTICE Of Filing 9 MOTION to Disqualify Attorney by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered:
06/11/2009)
06/10/2009 11 MOTION for Hearing re 9 MOTION to Disqualify Attorney by William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 06/11/2009)
06/10/2009 12 NOTICE Of Filing 11 MOTION for Hearing re 9 MOTION to Disqualify Attorney by William
M. Windsor.(kt) (Entered: 06/11/2009)
06/15/2009 13 EMERGENCY MOTION for Conference by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit
A)(kt) (Entered: 06/16/2009)
06/15/2009 14 NOTICE Of Filing 13 Emergency MOTION for Hearing by William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 06/16/2009)
06/18/2009 15 MOTION for Reconsideration or Revision of 4 Order Staying Case, with Brief In Support by
William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D,
# 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit 1, # 9 Exhibit 2, # 10 Exhibit H)(kt)
(Entered: 06/19/2009)
06/18/2009 16 NOTICE Of Filing re 15 MOTION for Reconsideration re 4 Order Staying Case, by William
M. Windsor (kt) (Entered: 06/19/2009)
06/22/2009 17 MOTION to Disqualify Judge with Brief In Support by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: #
1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit A (cont.), # 3 Exhibit 1, # 4 Exhibit B, # 5 Exhibit B (cont.), # 6
Exhibit 1, # 7 Exhibit 2, # 8 Exhibit 3)(kt) (Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/22/2009 18 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages re: 17 Motion to Disqualify Judgeby William M.
Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(kt) (Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/22/2009 19 NOTICE Of Filing 17 MOTION to Disqualify Judge by William M. Windsor (kt) (Entered:
06/23/2009)
06/22/2009 20 MOTION for Hearing re 17 MOTION to Disqualify Judge by William M. Windsor.
(Attachments: # 1 Notice of filing Motion for Hearing)(kt) (Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/22/2009 21 RESPONSE to 1 Emergency MOTION to Quash Subpoena, filed by William M. Windsor.
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3)(kt) (Additional
attachment(s) added on 6/23/2009: # 5 Main Document, # 6 Exhibit 1) (kt). (Entered:
06/23/2009)
5/12/2011 ) CM/ECF-GA Northern District Court
06/22/2009 22 NOTICE Of Filing 21 Response to Motion by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/22/2009 23 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages on 21 Response to Emergency Motion to Quash by
William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/22/2009 24 RESPONSE to 8 MOTION to Supplement United States District Judge Orinda D. Evans'
Emergency Motion to Quash Subpoena filed by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit 1)(kt) (Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/22/2009 25 NOTICE Of Filing 24 Response to Motion to Supplement by William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/23/2009 Notification of Docket Correction re 21 Response to Motion. Edited document to attach the
correct PDF to the Main docket entry and Exhibit 1. (kt) (Entered: 06/23/2009)
06/24/2009 26 MOTION to Withdraw George Brian Raley as Attorneyby Alcatraz Media, LLC, Alcatraz
Media, Inc.. (Raley, George) (Entered: 06/24/2009)
06/25/2009 27 RESPONSE in Opposition re 6 MOTION for Hearing filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation,
Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 06/25/2009)
06/26/2009 28 RESPONSE re 13 MOTION for Hearing, 6 MOTION for Hearing filed by Orinda D. Evans.
(Huber, Christopher) (Entered: 06/26/2009)
06/26/2009 29 REPLY BRIEF re 1 MOTION to Quash Subpoena, 8 MOTION to Supplement United States
District Judge Orinda D. Evans' Emergency Motion to Quash Subpoena filed by Orinda
D. Evans. (Huber, Christopher) (Entered: 06/26/2009)
06/29/2009 30 RESPONSE in Opposition re 9 MOTION to Disqualify Attorney filed by Maid of the Mist
Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Anderson, Carl) (Entered:
06/29/2009)
06/29/2009 31 RESPONSE in Opposition re 11 MOTION for Hearing re 9 MOTION to Disqualify Attorney
filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Anderson,
Carl) (Entered: 06/29/2009)
06/30/2009 32 ORDER GRANTING 1 Motion to Quash and 8 Motion to Supplement by United States
District Judge Orinda D. Evans. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED Defendant William
M. Windsor's 6 Emergency Motion for Hearing; 9 Motion to Disqualify Attorney Harkins &
Parnell; 11 Motion for Hearing; 13 Motion for Hearing; 15 Motion to Reconsider or Revise
Stay Order; 17 Motion to Disqualify Judge; 18 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages; 20
Motion for Hearing; and 23 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages are DENIED AS MOOT.
GRANTING 26 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney Raley & Sandifer, Attorney George Brian
Raley terminated, on the grounds that their clients Defendants Alcatraz Media, LLC and
Alcatraz Media, Inc., are not parties in this action and thus should not be listed as counsel of
record in this action. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 6/30/2009. (kt) (Additional
attachment(s) added on 6/30/2009: # 1 Main Document) (kt). Modified on 6/30/2009 (kt).
(Entered: 06/30/2009)
06/30/2009 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Marc Brown, counsel for Alcatraz Media, LLC, Alcatraz
Media, Inc., also William M. Windsor re: 32 Order on Motion to Quash, Order on Motion for
Hearing, Order on Motion to Supplement, Order on Motion to Disqualify Attorney, Order on
Motion to Disqualify Judge, Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages, Order on Motion
to Withdraw as Attorney. (kt) (Entered: 06/30/2009)
06/30/2009 Notification of Docket Correction re 32 Order on Motion to Quash, Order on Motion for
Hearing, Order on Motion to Supplement, Order on Motion to Disqualify Attorney, Order on
Motion to Disqualify Judge, Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages, Order on Motion
to Withdraw as Attorney. Edited document to rule on 15 Motion to Revise. (kt) (Entered:
06/30/2009)
06/30/2009 33 CLERK'S JUDGMENT ENTERED. (kt)--Please refer to http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov to
obtain an appeals jurisdiction checklist-- (Entered: 06/30/2009)
06/30/2009 Civil Case Terminated. Magistrate Judge Walter E. Johnson terminated from case. (kt)
(Entered: 06/30/2009)
07/10/2009 34 MOTION for Reconsideration of 32 Order on Motion to Quash Subpoena and Judgment to
dismiss this action with Brief In Support by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Additional attachment(s)
added on 7/13/2009: # 1 Exhibit A) (kt). (Entered: 07/13/2009)
07/10/2009 35 NOTICE Of Filing 34 MOTION for Reconsideration re 32 Order on Motion to Quash, by
William M. Windsor.(kt) (Entered: 07/13/2009)
07/10/2009 36 MOTION to Change Venue with Brief In Support by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit A)(kt) (Entered: 07/13/2009)
07/10/2009 37 NOTICE Of Filing 36 MOTION to Change Venue by William M. Windsor.(kt) (Entered:
07/13/2009)
07/13/2009 Notification of Docket Correction re 34 MOTION for Reconsideration re 32 Order on Motion

to Quash. Edited document to add the exhibit.(kt) (Entered: 07/13/2009)
07/22/2009 38 RESPONSE in Opposition re 34 MOTION for Reconsideration re 32 Order on Motion to
Quash, Order on Motion for Hearing, Order on Motion to Supplement, Order on Motion to
Disqualify Attorney,,, Order on Motion to Disqualify Judge, Order on Motion for Leave to File
Excess Pages,, filed by Orinda D. Evans. (Huber, Christopher) (Entered: 07/22/2009)
07/22/2009 39 RESPONSE in Opposition re 36 MOTION to Change Venue filed by Orinda D. Evans.
(Huber, Christopher) (Entered: 07/22/2009)
07/23/2009 40 MOTION for Joinder in United States District Judge Orinda D. Evans' Response to
Defendant William M. Windsor's Motion for Reconsideration by Maid of the Mist
07/23/2009)
07/23/2009 41 MOTION for Joinder in United States District Court Judge Orinda D. Evans' Response to
Defendant William M. Windsor's Motion for Change of Venue by Maid of the Mist
07/23/2009)
08/17/2009 Submission of 36 MOTION to Change Venue to District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt)
(Entered: 08/17/2009)
08/28/2009 Submission of 34 MOTION for Reconsideration re 32 Order on Motion to Quash, Order on
Motion for Hearing, Order on Motion to Supplement, Order on Motion to Disqualify Attorney,
Order on Motion to Disqualify Judge, Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages, to
District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 08/28/2009)
08/31/2009 Submission of 40 MOTION for Joinder in United States District Judge Orinda D. Evans'
Response to Defendant William M. Windsor's Motion for Reconsideration to District
Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 08/31/2009)
09/03/2009 42 ORDER re: Plaintiff's 40 Motion for Joinder, seeking to join Judge Evans' response to
Windsor's Motion for Reconsideration and 41 Motion for Joinder seeking to join Judge Evans'
response to Windsor's Motion for Change of Venue. The Court construes these as motions to
adopt the responses, and they are hereby GRANTED. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
Defendant Windsor's 34 Motion for Reconsideration and 36 Motion to Change Venue are
DENIED. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 9/3/2009. (kt) (Entered: 09/03/2009)
09/03/2009 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Marc W. Brown, counsel to Plaintiffs, and William M.
Windsor re 42 Order on Motion for Reconsideration, Order on Motion to Change Venue,
Order on Motion for Joinder. (kt) (Entered: 09/03/2009)
09/15/2009 43 NOTICE Of Filing Notice of Appeal by William M. Windsor. (fem) (Entered: 09/16/2009)
09/15/2009 44 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 32 Order on Motion to Quash, Order on Motion for Hearing,
Order on Motion to Supplement, Order on Motion to Disqualify Attorney, Order on Motion to
Disqualify Judge, Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages, Order on Motion to
Withdraw as Attorney, 33 Clerk's Judgment, 42 Order on Motion for Reconsideration, Order
on Motion to Change Venue, Order on Motion for Joinder, William M. Windsor. Filing fee $
455, receipt number GAN100016334. Transcript Order Form due on 9/29/2009 (fem)
(Entered: 09/16/2009)
09/16/2009 45 Transmission of Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal, Judgment, Order and Docket Sheet to
US Court of Appeals re 44 Notice of Appeal,, (fem) (Entered: 09/16/2009)
09/23/2009 46 USCA Acknowledgment of 44 Notice of Appeal,, filed by William M. Windsor. Case
Appealed to USCA Case Number 09-14735-D (fem) (Entered: 09/25/2009)
10/14/2009 CERTIFICATE OF READINESS of Appeal Record re 44 Notice of Appeal, filed by William
M. Windsor. Case Appealed to usca Case Number 09-14735-D. (fem) (Entered: 10/14/2009)
10/14/2009 47 Certified copy of CERTIFICATE OF READINESS transmitted to USCA re 44 Notice of
Appeal. Case Appealed to usca Case Number 09-14735-D (fem) (Entered: 10/14/2009)
10/22/2009 48 USCA Acknowledgment of COR re: 44 Notice of Appeal filed by William M. Windsor. Case
Appealed to USCA - 11th Circuit. USCA Case Number 09-14735-DD. (kac) (Entered:
10/26/2009)
12/23/2009 49 FORTHWITH LETTER from USCA re 44 Notice of Appeal, filed by William M. Windsor.
Case Appealed to USCA Case Number 09-14735-DD. Appeal Record due by 12/31/2009.
(fem) (Entered: 12/29/2009)
12/29/2009 50 Certified and Transmitted Record on Appeal to US Court of Appeals re 44 Notice of Appeal,,
Case Appealed to USCA Case Number 09-14735-D. (fem) (Entered: 12/29/2009)
01/04/2010 51 USCA Acknowledgment of receipt of record on appeal re 44 Notice of Appeal,, filed by
William M. Windsor. Case Appealed to USCA Case Number 09-14735-DD. (fem) (Entered:
01/12/2010)
02/26/2010 52 Certified copy of ORDER of USCA DENYING Appellant's Emergency Motion to Disqualify
Eleventh Circuit Judges and Motion to Change Venue", DISMISSING appeal AS
FRIVOLOUS AS BRIEFED. All remaining motions are DENIED AS MOOT with the
exception of Maid's Motion for Sanctions for Filing a Frivolous Appeal which is GRANTED
re: 44 Notice of Appeal, filed by William M. Windsor Case Appealed to USCA Case Number
09-14735-DD. Maid is DIRECTED to file a statement of costs and expenses withing twenty-
one(21) days of the date of this Order and Appellant's response will be due withing fourteen
(14) days of service of Maid's statement. (fem) (Entered: 03/02/2010)
04/20/2010 53 NOTICE of Change of Address for William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 04/23/2010)
05/07/2010 54 Certified copy of ORDER of USCA DENYING all pending motions filed by appellant.
Appellants Response to Appellees Maid of the Mist, motion for Eleventh Circuit Rule 27-4
sanctions far exceeds the twenty (20) page limit, therefore the Court STRIKES Appellant's
response and directs the Clerk to return that document unfiled. Maid's motion for Eleventh
Circuit Rule 27-4 sanctions for Appellant's filing of frivolous motions is DENIED in light of the
Rule 38 sanctions awarded in this order, however this order does not preclude the grant of
another Rule 27-4 motion filed in any of Appellant's other appeals or petitions pending in this
court, GRANTING Maid's application for Rule 38 sanctions in the form of attorneys fees and
single costs in the amount of $37,333.67 re: 44 Notice of Appeal, filed by William M. Windsor
Case Appealed to USCA Case Number 09-14735-DD. (fem) (Entered: 05/12/2010)
06/16/2010 WRIT of Execution issued in the amount of $37,333.67 as to William Windsor per 54 Order
and per the direction of the USCA. Original returned to counsel for plaintiff. (fmm) (Entered:
06/16/2010)
06/17/2010 55 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Post Judgment Interrogatories and Requests for
Production of Documents on William M. Windsor by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of
the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd..(Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 06/17/2010)
06/28/2010 56 NOTICE Of Filing Writ of Execution for Rule 38 damages award by Maid of the Mist
Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd. re 54 USCA Order,,, (Attachments:
# 1 Exhibit Recorded Writ of Execution)(Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 06/28/2010)
06/30/2010 57 NOTICE Of Filing of Notice of Appeal by William M. Windsor. (fem) (Entered: 07/07/2010)
06/30/2010 58 NOTICE OF APPEAL to the United States Supreme Court as to 32 Order on Motion to
Quash, Order on Motion for Hearing, Order on Motion to Supplement, Order on Motion to
Disqualify Attorney, Order on Motion to Disqualify Judge, Order on Motion for Leave to File
Excess Pages, Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, 33 Clerk's Judgment, 42 Order on
Motion for Reconsideration, Order on Motion to Change Venue, Order on Motion for Joinder,
by William M. Windsor. Transcript Order Form due on 7/14/2010 (fem) (Entered: 07/07/2010)
US Court of Appeals re 58 Notice of Appeal,, (Attachments: # 1 Appeal Fee Letter)(fem)
(Entered: 07/07/2010)
07/07/2010 60 MOTION for Emergency Protective Order to Quash interrogatories and requests for
production of documents by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 07/08/2010)
07/07/2010 61 NOTICE Of Filing by William M. Windsor 60 MOTION for Protective Order. (kt) (Entered:
07/08/2010)
07/13/2010 62 Appeal Record Returned: 58 Notice of Appeal, Case Appealed to USCA Case Number 09-
14735-DD. (fem) (Entered: 07/19/2010)
07/19/2010 63 NOTICE Of Filing of Motion to Expunge Writ of Execution and Motion for Stay, by William
M. Windsor. (rvb) (Entered: 07/21/2010)
07/19/2010 64 MOTION to Expunge Writ of Execution, and MOTION to Stay, by William M. Windsor.
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(rvb) (Entered: 07/21/2010)
07/21/2010 65 MOTION for Recusal by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 07/22/2010)
07/21/2010 66 NOTICE Of Filing 65 MOTION for Recusal by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered:
07/22/2010)
07/21/2010 67 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Remove filing Restrictions and Motion for Evidentiary
Hearing by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(kt) (Entered:
5/12/2011 g y CM/ECF-GA Northern
( District Court )( ) (
07/22/2010)
07/21/2010 68 NOTICE Of Filing by William M. Windsor re 67 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to
Remove Filing Restrictions. (kt) (Entered: 07/22/2010)
07/21/2010 69 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Strike the Answer filed by the Maid Defendants by
William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(kt) (Entered: 07/22/2010)
07/21/2010 70 NOTICE Of Filing 69 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Strike by William M. Windsor.
(kt) (Entered: 07/22/2010)
07/21/2010 71 MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Hearing and Motion for Preliminary Injunctionby
07/21/2010 72 NOTICE Of Filing 71 MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Hearing and Motion for
Preliminary Injunction by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 07/22/2010)
07/21/2010 73 MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Approval to File a Brief on Judicial Immunityby
07/21/2010 74 NOTICE Of Filing 73 MOTION for Leave to File by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered:
07/22/2010)
07/22/2010 Notification of Docket Correction re 73 MOTION for Leave to File, 70 Notice of Filing, 71
MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Hearing and Motion for Preliminary Injunction, 74
Notice of Filing, 69 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Strike, 68 Notice of Filing, 72 Notice
of Filing, 67 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Remove. DOCUMENTS FILED IN
ERROR, WRONG CASE. (kt) (Entered: 07/22/2010)
07/23/2010 75 RESPONSE re 60 MOTION for Protective Order filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation,
Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Carl
H. Anderson, Jr.)(Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 07/23/2010)
08/05/2010 76 RESPONSE in Opposition re 64 MOTION to Expunge Writ of Execution MOTION to Stay
filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Anderson,
08/06/2010 Submission of 64 MOTION to Expunge Writ of Execution MOTION to Stay, 60 MOTION
for Protective Order to District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 08/06/2010)
08/06/2010 77 RESPONSE in Opposition re 65 MOTION for Recusal filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation,
Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 08/06/2010)
08/06/2010 79 NOTICE Of Filing 78 MOTION for Leave to File Emergency Motion for Extension of time by
William M. Windsor.(kt) (Entered: 08/09/2010)
08/09/2010 78 MOTION for Leave to File Emergency Motion for Extension of time and for Stayby William
M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 08/09/2010)
08/26/2010 Submission of 65 MOTION for Recusal to District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered:
08/26/2010)
08/26/2010 80 EMERGENCY MOTION for Extension of Time and, MOTION to Stay by William M.
Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 08/30/2010)
08/26/2010 81 NOTICE Of Filing 80 MOTION for Extension of Time MOTION to Stay by William M.
09/03/2010 82 RESPONSE in Opposition re 80 MOTION for Extension of Time MOTION to Stay filed by
Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Attachments: # 1
5/12/2011 CM/ECF-GA
p , Northern District Court p y, (
Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Carl H. Anderson, Jr.)(Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
09/03/2010 83 NOTICE Of Filing Subpoenas to Barbara G. Windsor, Ryan M. Windsor, Alcatraz Media,
LLC, and Alcatraz Media, Inc. by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat
Company, Ltd. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - Subpoena to Barbara G. Windsor, # 2 Exhibit 2 -
Subpoena to Ryan M. Windsor, # 3 Exhibit 3 - Subpoena to Alcatraz Media, LLC, # 4 Exhibit
4 - Subpoena to Alcatraz Media, Inc.)(Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
09/03/2010 84 MOTION for Leave to File Response to Defendant's First Emergency Motion for Extension
of Time and Stayby Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company,
Ltd.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Carl H. Anderson, Jr., # 2 Text of Proposed
Order, # 3 Draft Response to Defendant's First Emergency Motion for Extension of Time and
Stay)(Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
09/13/2010 Submission of 78 MOTION for Leave to File Emergency Motion for Extension of time to
District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 09/13/2010)
09/23/2010 85 NOTICE of Request for Specific Approval to File William M. Windsor's Emergency Motion
for Production of Documents for In Camera Inspection by this Court by William M. Windsor.
(Attachments Placed in the File). (kt) (Entered: 09/27/2010)
09/23/2010 86 NOTICE of Request for Specific Approval to file Notice of Filing of William Windsor's Motion
for Stay with the United States Supreme Court by William M. Windsor. (Attachments placed
in file.). (kt) (Entered: 09/27/2010)
09/23/2010 87 NOTICE of Request for Specific Approval to Obtain Subpoenas by William M. Windsor.
(Attachments placed in file.). (kt) (Entered: 09/27/2010)
09/23/2010 88 NOTICE of Request for Specific Approval to File William Windsor's Emergency Motion for
Sanctions by William M. Windsor. (Attachments placed in file.). (kt) (Entered: 09/27/2010)
09/23/2010 89 NOTICE of Request for Specific Approval to file William Windsor's Emergency Motion for
Protective Order and Motion to Quash all Discovery by William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Attachments placed in file.). (Entered: 09/27/2010)
09/23/2010 90 NOTICE of Request for Specific Approval to file Motion to Expunge the Writ of Execution by
William M. Windsor. (Attachments placed in file.). (kt) (Entered: 09/27/2010)
09/23/2010 91 NOTICE Of Filing Affidavit of Barbara G. Windsor, by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered:
09/27/2010)
09/24/2010 ORAL ORDER (by docket entry only) as ordered by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on 9/23/10:
Mr. Windsor's courier appeared today in the Clerk's Office to file several pleadings, including
motions, in the above-styled action. This action was closed and judgment was entered on June
30, 2009. Based on the history and current disposition of this case and Plaintiff's previous
request to stay all action in his cases because of issues with his eye, the Court directed the
Clerk's Office to not accept the pleadings for filing in their present form. The Court instead
ordered Mr. Windsor to first request permission to file the pleadings in this closed case and
further ordered any request for permission to file in this case be limited to five pages or less in
length. The purpose of this requested procedure is so the Court can evaluate if the pleadings
are appropriate to be filed in this closed case and, if so, the proper form in which the pleadings
should be submitted if allowed. (jdb) (Entered: 09/24/2010)
09/30/2010 Submission of 80 MOTION for Extension of Time MOTION to Stay to District Judge William
S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 09/30/2010)
10/12/2010 Submission of 84 MOTION for Leave to File Response to Defendant's First Emergency
Motion for Extension of Time and Stay to District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered:
10/12/2010)
10/12/2010 92 NOTICE of filing Request for Specific Approval to file Motion for Stay by William M.
Windsor. (Request placed in file). (kt) (Entered: 10/13/2010)
10/18/2010 93 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to file Emergency Motion for Conference
by William M. Windsor. (Attachments placed in file.). (kt) (Entered: 10/19/2010)
10/18/2010 94 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to File Motion to Compel Production of
Documents for In Camera Inspection by William M. Windsor. (Attachments placed in file.).
(kt) (Entered: 10/19/2010)
10/18/2010 95 NOTICE Of Filing Motion to Expunge Writ of Execution and Motion to Stay by William M.
Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Motion to Expunge Writ of Execution and Motion to Stay)(kt)
(Entered: 10/19/2010)
10/18/2010 96 NOTICE Of Filing Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Subpoena by Barbara G.
Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Motion for Proto and Quash)(kt) (Entered: 10/19/2010)
10/28/2010 97 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to File Notice of Filings with the United states
Supreme Court by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 10/29/2010)
11/03/2010 98 RESPONSE re 96 Notice of Filing Response in Opposition to Non-Party Barbara G.
Windsor's Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Subpoena filed by Maid of
the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1
- Declaration of Carl H. Anderson, Jr.)(Anderson, Carl) (Entered: 11/03/2010)
11/03/2010 99 ORDER DENYING 60 Motion for Protective Order; DENYING 64 Motion for to Expunge
Writ of Execution; DENYING 64 Motion to Stay; DENYING 65 Motion for Recusal.
DENYING 78 Motion for Leave to File Emergency Motion for Extension of Time;
DENYING 80 Motion for Extension of Time ; DENYING 80 Motion to Stay; DENYING 84
Motion for Leave to File Response to Defendant's First Emergency Motion to Extension of
Time; and GRANTING 97 Motion for Leave to File with the United States Supreme Court.
Windsor is ORDERED to immediately pay the Plaintiffs $37,333.67, plus interest. Windsor is
ADVISED that if he persists in presenting filings that violate Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
11(b), he risks subjecting himself to additional sanctions. The Clerk is DIRECTED, in the
future, to discard any Requests for Specific Approval that does not comply with the
terms of this Court's September 24, 2010 Order and to discard any other filings for
which this Court has not granted specific approval. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey,
Jr on 11/3/2010. (kt) (Entered: 11/03/2010)
11/03/2010 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to William M. Windsor re 99 Order on Motion for Protective
Order, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion to Stay, Order on Motion
for Recusal, Order on Motion for Leave to File, Order on Motion for Extension of Time. (kt)
(Entered: 11/03/2010)
11/05/2010 100 MOTION for Specific Approval to File Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash
Subpoena by Non-Party Barbara G. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 11/05/2010)
11/05/2010 101 NOTICE Of Filing 100 Request for Specific Approval to file Motion for Protective Order and
Motion to Quash Subpoena by Barbara G. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 11/05/2010)
11/05/2010 102 NOTICE Of Filing Notice of Appeal by William M. Windsor. (fem) (Entered: 11/08/2010)
11/05/2010 103 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 99 Order on Motion for Protective Order, Order on Motion for
Miscellaneous Relief Order on Motion to Stay Order on Motion for Recusal Order on Motion
Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion to Stay, Order on Motion for Recusal, Order on Motion
for Leave to File, Order on Motion for Extension of Time, Order, by William M. Windsor.
Filing fee $ 455, receipt number GN100029838. Transcript Order Form due on 11/19/2010
(fem) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/8/2010: # 1 Exhibit A) (fem). (Additional
attachment(s) added on 11/8/2010: # 2 Exhibit B) (fem). (Additional attachment(s) added on
11/8/2010: # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E Part I, # 6 Exhibit E Part II, # 7 Exhibit
Part III, # 8 Exhibit Part IV, # 9 Exhibit F, # 10 Exhibit G, # 11 Exhibit H, # 12 Exhibit I, # 13
Exhibit J, # 14 Exhibit K, # 15 Exhibit L, # 16 Exhibit M, # 17 Exhibit N, # 18 Exhibit O Part I,
# 19 Exhibit O Part II, # 20 Exhibit O Part III, # 21 Exhibit O PART IV, # 22 Exhibit O Part
V, # 23 Exhibit O, # VI) (fem). Modified on 11/8/2010 to correct docket text.(fem). (Entered:
11/08/2010)
US Court of Appeals re 103 Notice of Appeal. (fem) (Entered: 11/08/2010)
11/18/2010 105 ORDER granting the pro se Request for Specific Approval by Non-Party Barbara G.
Windsor' (sic) to File Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Subpoena 100 . The
Clerk is DIRECTED to accept for filing any "Motion for Protective Order and Motion to
Quash Subpoena" - not exceeding twenty-five pages, see LR 71.D, NDGa. - submitted by
Barbara Windsor on or before November 24, 2010. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on
11/18/2010. (pdw) (Entered: 11/18/2010)
11/18/2010 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Barbara G. Windsor re 105 Order. (pdw) (Entered:
11/18/2010)
11/18/2010 106 USCA Acknowledgment of 103 Notice of Appeal, filed by William M. Windsor. Case
Appealed to USCA Case Number 10-15220-E. (fem) (Entered: 11/19/2010)
12/02/2010 107 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to file Motion Seeking Order to confirm that
this civil action is Stayed by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Request for Specific
Approval)(kt) (Entered: 12/03/2010)
12/02/2010 108 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to file Motion to Recuse Judge William S.
Duffey, Jr. Due to Pervasive Bias by William M. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Request for
Specific Approval)(kt) (Entered: 12/03/2010)
12/02/2010 123 NOTICE Of Filing of Request for Specific Approval to file Motion for Order Confirming Stay
by Barbara G. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Request for Specific Approval to File Motion for
Order)(kt) (Entered: 02/07/2011)
12/02/2010 124 NOTICE Of Filing Second Request for Specific Approval to file Motion for Protective Order
and Motion to Quash Subpoena by Barbara G. Windsor. (Attachments: # 1 Second Request
for Specific Approval)(kt) (Entered: 02/07/2011)
12/06/2010 109 ORDER VACATED, pursuant to 125 Order. ORDER DENYING 107 Second Request for
Specific Approval by Non-Party Barbara G. Windsor to file Motion for Protective Order and
Motion to Quash Subpoena. Mr. Windsor also filed 12/2/2010, a Request for Specific Approval
by a Non-Party to File a Motion for Order Confirming Stay. Mrs Windsor's 108 Request for
Specific Approval is DENIED. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 12/3/2010. (kt)
Modified on 2/3/2011 (kt). Modified on 2/9/2011 (kt). (Entered: 12/06/2010)
12/06/2010 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to counsel for Maid of the Mist Corporation, Barbara G.
Windsor, William M. Windsor re 109 Order. (kt) (Entered: 12/06/2010)
12/06/2010 110 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to file Motion for Clarification and Motion
for Conference by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 12/07/2010)
12/06/2010 111 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to file Rule 60(b) Motion by William M.
12/06/2010 112 NOTICE Of Filing of Notice of Appeal by William M. Windsor. (fem) (Entered: 12/10/2010)
12/06/2010 113 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 109 Order, by William M. Windsor. Filing fee $ 455, receipt
number GAN100030691. Transcript Order Form due on 12/20/2010 (fem) (Entered:
12/10/2010)
US Court of Appeals re 113 Notice of Appeal (fem) (Entered: 12/10/2010)
12/13/2010 115 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to File Motion for Continuance, Extension,
Stay, and/or Protective Order by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 12/14/2010)
12/21/2010 116 USCA Acknowledgment of 113 Notice of Appeal filed by William M. Windsor. Case
Appealed to USCA Case Number 10-15717-E (fem) (Entered: 12/28/2010)
01/18/2011 117 NOTICE OF APPEAL by William M. Windsor. Transcript Order Form due on 2/1/2011.
(fem) Modified on 1/20/2011 to correct docket text.(fem). (Entered: 01/20/2011)
US Court of Appeals re 117 Notice of Appeal (fem) (Entered: 01/20/2011)
01/31/2011 121 USCA correspondence to Mr. Windson re: 103 Notice of Appeal. Case Appealed to USCA
Case Number 10-15220-E. (fem) Modified on 2/2/2011 to correct docket text. (fem).
(Entered: 02/02/2011)
02/01/2011 119 MOTION for Leave to File Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Against Defendant William M.
Windsor and Non-Party Subpoenant Barbara G. Windsor by Maid of the Mist Corporation,
Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd. (Anderson, Carl) Modified on 2/2/2011 to change
event type (mdy). (Entered: 02/01/2011)
02/01/2011 120 MOTION for Leave to File Plaintiffs' Motion for Contempt Against Defendant William M.
Windsor by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.
(Anderson, Carl) Modified on 2/2/2011 to change event type (mdy). (Entered: 02/01/2011)
02/02/2011 Notification of Docket Correction re 119 MOTION for Leave to File, 120 MOTION for
Leave to File. Entries corrected to change event types. (mdy) (Entered: 02/02/2011)
02/02/2011 122 USCA Acknowledgment of 117 Notice of Appeal filed by William M. Windsor. Case
Appealed to USCA Case Number 11-10259-E (fem) (Entered: 02/02/2011)
02/03/2011 Notification of Docket Correction re 108 Notice of Filing. Edited document to correct typo.
(kt) (Entered: 02/03/2011)
02/08/2011 126 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to File Motion for Sanctions by William M.
02/09/2011 125 ORDER VACATING 109 Order, and the following is a substituted in its place. Mrs Windsor's
124 Second request for Specific Approval by Non-party to File Motion for Protective Order
and Motion to Quash Subpoena is DENIED. Mrs. Windsor's 123 Request for Specific
Approval to file Motion for Order Confirming Stay is DENIED. The Plaintiffs, Maid of the
Mist Corporation and Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd, filed a Specific Request for
Approval to file a Motion to Compel Against Defendant William M. Windsor and Non-Party
Subpoenant Barbara G. Windsor 119 and a Specific Request for Approval to File Motion for
Contempt Against Defendant William Windsor 120 . Those requests are GRANTED, and the
Clerk is DIRECTED to accept such motions - not exceeding twenty-five pages each. Signed
by Judge William S Duffey Jr on 2/9/2011 (kt) (Entered: 02/09/2011)
by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 2/9/2011. (kt) (Entered: 02/09/2011)
02/09/2011 ORAL ORDER GRANTING 119 Motion for Leave to File; granting 120 Motion for Leave to
File. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 2/9/2011. (kt) (Entered: 02/09/2011)
02/24/2011 127 Certified copy of ORDER of USCA DISMISSING appeal re: 117 Notice of Appeal filed by
William M. Windsor Case Appealed to USCA Case Number 11-10259-E. (fem) (Entered:
02/25/2011)
02/25/2011 128 MOTION for Contempt against William M. Windsor with Brief In Support by Maid of the
Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit
Declaration of Carl H. Anderson, Jr., # 2 Exhibit 1 to CHA Declaration, # 3 Exhibit 2 to CHA
Declaration, # 4 Exhibit 3 to CHA Declaration, # 5 Exhibit 4 to CHA Declaration, # 6 Exhibit
5 to CHA Declaration, # 7 Exhibit 6 to CHA Declaration, # 8 Exhibit 7 to CHA Declaration, #
9 Exhibit 8 to CHA Declaration, # 10 Exhibit 9 to CHA Declaration)(Anderson, Carl)
(Entered: 02/25/2011)
02/25/2011 129 MOTION to Compel Discovery Responses against William M. Windsor and MOTION for
Order to Enforce Subpoena against Non-Party Barbara G. Windsor with Brief In Support by
Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit A - Declaration of Carl H. Anderson, Jr., # 2 Exhibit 1 to CHA Declaration, # 3
Exhibit 2 to CHA Declaration, # 4 Exhibit 3 to CHA Declaration, # 5 Exhibit 4 to CHA
Declaration, # 6 Exhibit 5 to CHA Declaration, # 7 Exhibit 6 to CHA Declaration, # 8 Exhibit
7 to CHA Declaration, # 9 Exhibit 8 to CHA Declaration, # 10 Exhibit 9 to CHA Declaration,
# 11 Exhibit 10 to CHA Declaration, # 12 Exhibit 11 to CHA Declaration, # 13 Exhibit 12 to
CHA Declaration, # 14 Exhibit B - Good Faith Certification)(Anderson, Carl) . Added
MOTION for Order on 2/28/2011 (mdy). (Entered: 02/25/2011)
02/28/2011 Notification of Docket Correction re 129 MOTION to Compel Discovery Responses against
William M. Windsor and Motion to Enforce Subpoena against Non-Party Barbara G.
WindsorMOTION for Order. Entry corrected to add MOTION for Order. (mdy) (Entered:
02/28/2011)
03/03/2011 130 REQUEST for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of 99 Order on Motion for Protective
Order, Motion to Quash Subpoenas and Discovery Requestsby William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 03/04/2011)
03/09/2011 133 Certified copy of ORDER of USCA DENYING appellant's motion for intercircuit assignment
of judges, DENYING AS MOOT his motion for clarification as the docket currently reflects
his payment of the appellate filing fees. Based on the Court's review, this appeal is
DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS re: 103 Notice of Appeal, filed by William M. Windsor Case
Appealed to USC Case Number 10-15220-E. Appellant may file only a single motion for
reconsideration of this order, and must be timely and not exceed 20 pages. No other motions
may be filed by Appellant. (fem) (Entered: 03/15/2011)
03/11/2011 131 REQUEST for Specific Approval to File Motion for Extension of Time to Respond, by William
M. Windsor. (rvb) (Entered: 03/11/2011)
03/11/2011 132 REQUEST for Specific Approval to File Special Power of Attorney, by William M. Windsor.
(rvb) (Entered: 03/11/2011)
03/11/2011 ORDER (by docket entry only) granting 131 REQUEST for Specific Approval to File Motion
for Extension of Time to Respond AND granting MOTION for Extension of Time to
Respond. Mr. Windsor and Mrs. Windsor may have up to and including March 21, 2011, to file
responses to recent motions filed by the Pffs. Responses shall not exceed the page limit
prescribed by the local rule Ordered by Judge William S Duffey Jr on 3/11/11 (jdb)
prescribed by the local rule. Ordered by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on 3/11/11. (jdb)
(Entered: 03/11/2011)
03/11/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Barbara G. Windsor, William M. Windsor re Order on
Motion for Extension of Time filed 3/11/11. (cc:email) (jdb) (Entered: 03/11/2011)
03/16/2011 134 ORDER DENYING 130 Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of Motion for
Protective Order and Motion to Quash Subpoenas and Discovery Responses. Signed by Judge
William S. Duffey, Jr on 3/16/2011. (kt) (Entered: 03/16/2011)
03/16/2011 135 ORDER DENYING 132 Motion for Specific Approval to File Special Power of Attorney.
Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 3/16/2011. (kt) (Entered: 03/16/2011)
03/16/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to William M. Windsor re 135 Order on Motion for Specific
Approval to File Special Power of Attorney; 134 Order on Motion for Leave to File Motion for
Reconsideration of Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Subpoenas and
Discovery Responses. (kt) (Entered: 03/16/2011)
03/18/2011 137 USCA clerically granted appellant's motion to reinstate appeal re 117 Notice of Appeal.Case
Appealed to USCA Case Number 11-10259-E. (fem) (Entered: 03/22/2011)
03/21/2011 136 MOTION to Seal (in letter form) by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Additional attachment(s) added
on 3/22/2011: Exhibit Filed Under Seal # 1 Financial Statements) (kt). Modified on 3/22/2011
(kt). (Entered: 03/22/2011)
03/21/2011 138 RESPONSE in Opposition to 128 MOTION for Contempt against William M. Windsor filed
by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 03/22/2011)
03/21/2011 139 RESPONSE to 129 MOTION to Compel Discovery Responses against William M. Windsor
and Motion to Enforce Subpoena against Non-Party Barbara G. WindsorMOTION for Order
filed by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 03/22/2011)
03/21/2011 140 REQUEST for Leave to File Motion for Protective Orderby William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 03/22/2011)
03/22/2011 141 REQUEST for Leave to File Correction to Response to the Motion for Contemptby William
03/22/2011 142 NOTICE Of Filing Request for Specific Approval to file Motion for Contempt by William M.
Windsor. (kt) Modified on 4/22/2011 to treat as a motion. (dfb) (Entered: 03/24/2011)
03/29/2011 143 REQUEST for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration by William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 03/30/2011)
03/31/2011 144 REQUEST for Leave to File an Apology and Withdraw Filing & Related Matters by William
04/01/2011 Submission of 128 MOTION for Contempt against William M. Windsor, 129 MOTION to
Compel Discovery Responses against William M. Windsor and Motion to Enforce Subpoena
against Non-Party Barbara G. WindsorMOTION for Order to District Judge William S.
Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 04/01/2011)
04/01/2011 145 REQUEST for Leave to File Amended Financial Information under seal by William M.
04/04/2011 Notification of Docket Correction re 144 MOTION for Leave to File an Apology. Edited
document text. (kt) (Entered: 04/04/2011)
04/04/2011 146 REPLY BRIEF re 129 MOTION to Compel Discovery Responses against William M.
Windsor and Motion to Enforce Subpoena against Non-Party Barbara G. WindsorMOTION
for Order filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd..
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Declaration of Carl H. Anderson, Jr.)(Anderson, Carl) (Entered:
04/04/2011)
04/04/2011 147 REPLY BRIEF re 128 MOTION for Contempt against William M. Windsor filed by Maid of
the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd.. (Anderson, Carl) (Entered:
04/04/2011)
04/04/2011 148 REPLY BRIEF re 129 MOTION to Compel Discovery Responses against William M.
Windsor and Motion to Enforce Subpoena against Non-Party Barbara G. WindsorMOTION
for Order filed by Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd..
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Declaration of Carl H. Anderson, Jr. w/ exhibits)(Anderson,
04/08/2011 Submission of 136 MOTION to Seal, 140 MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Protective
Order to District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 04/08/2011)
04/11/2011 Submission of 141 MOTION for Leave to File Correction to Response, to District Judge
William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 04/11/2011)
04/11/2011 149 REQUEST for Specific Approval for Leave to File Motion to Stay by William M. Windsor.
(kt) (Entered: 04/12/2011)
04/18/2011 Submission of 144 MOTION for Leave to File an Apology, 143 MOTION for Leave to File
Motion for Reconsideration to District Judge William S. Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 04/18/2011)
04/19/2011 Submission of 145 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Financial to District Judge William S.
Duffey. (kt) (Entered: 04/19/2011)
04/19/2011 150 Certified copy of ORDER of USCA DISMISSED appeal for lack of jurisdiction re: 117
Notice of Appeal filed by William M. Windsor Case Appealed to USCA Case Number 11-
10259-E. (fem) (Entered: 04/21/2011)
04/21/2011 151 ORDER granting William M. Windsor's 136 Motion to Seal Financial Materials submitted on
March 21, 2011; denying Windsor's 140 Request for Specific Approval to File Motion for
Protective Order; granting Windsor's 141 Request for Specific Approval to File Correction to
Response to the Motion for Contempt; denying Windsor's 142 Request for Specific Approval
to File Motion for Contempt; denying Windsor's 143 Request for Specific Approval to File
Motion for Reconsideration; granting Windsor's 144 Request for Specific Approval to File an
Apology and Withdraw Filing & Related Matters; granting Windsor's 145 Request for Specific
Approval to File Amended Financial Information under Seal and denying the Request for
Protective Order or any other relief; denying Windsor's 149 Request for Specific Approval to
File Motion for Stay. The Clerk is DIRECTED to return filing for Barbara Windsor dated
March 21, 2011. The Clerk is DIRECTED to return to Barbara G. Windsor the Notice of
Appeal Certificate of Compliance, and Certificate of Service that were filed in her name on
April 11, 2011 for her own original signature. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on
4/21/2011. (dfb) (Entered: 04/22/2011)
04/21/2011 152 ORDER granting Plaintiffs' 129 Motion to Compel. Without further delay or objection,
Windsor and his wife are ORDERED to provide complete responses to the Plaintiffs'
discovery requests no later than May 13, 2011. Windsor is further ORDERED to produce
under seal to the Court no later than May 13, 2011 information for in camera inspection (see
Order for specifics). Plaintiffs are DIRECTED to submit no later than May 13, 2011,
documentation regarding the attorneys' fees and expenses they reasonably incurred in bringing
th ti t
ecf.gand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p…
l Si d b J d Willi S D ff J 4/21/2011 (dfb) (E t d16/18
the motions to compel. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on 4/21/2011. (dfb) (Entered:
04/22/2011)
04/22/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Barbara G. Windsor, William M. Windsor re 151 , 152
Orders. Documents referenced in 151 order returned to William and Barbara Windsor. (dfb)
(Entered: 04/22/2011)
04/28/2011 157 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to file Motion to Stayby William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 05/04/2011)
05/03/2011 153 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to file Motion for Reconsideration of Order
Granting Motion to Compel by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 05/04/2011)
05/03/2011 154 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to file Motion for Hearing on Motion to Contempt
against William M. Windsor, Demand for Order to Show Cause, Authorization for Discovery
and Subpoenas; and Motion for Recusal of Judge William S. Duffey by William M. Windsor.
(kt) (Entered: 05/04/2011)
05/03/2011 155 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to File Motion for Reconsideration of Order
Denying Motion for Contempt by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 05/04/2011)
05/03/2011 156 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to file MOTION for Reconsideration by William
05/04/2011 158 ORDER re 157 MOTION for Specific Approval to file Motion for Stay by William M.
Windsor. William Windsor and Barbara Windsor are ORDERED to appear for an Evidentiary
Hearing set for 5/13/2011 at 11:00 AM in ATLA Courtroom 1705 before Judge William S.
Duffey Jr. Mr. Windor's 157 Motion for Specific Approval to file Motion for Stay is DENIED.
05/04/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Barbara G. Windsor, William M. Windsor re 158 Order, Set
Deadlines/Hearings. (kt) (Entered: 05/04/2011)
05/04/2011 159 ORDER DENYING 154 Motion for Leave to Request twelve signed subpoenas. Signed by
Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 5/4/2011. (kt) (Entered: 05/05/2011)
05/04/2011 160 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to file MOTION for Extension of Time to respond
to discovery requests by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 05/05/2011)
05/05/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Barbara G. Windsor, William M. Windsor re 159 Order on
Motion for Leave to File. (kt) (Entered: 05/05/2011)
05/06/2011 161 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to file a MOTION for Recusal by William M.
05/06/2011 162 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL for Motion to Require This Court to Honor The
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 05/09/2011)
05/06/2011 163 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to Order the Clerk of Court to issue signed
Subpoenas by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered: 05/09/2011)
05/06/2011 164 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL for Motion to Authorize Clerk of the Court to file
Windsor's Response to the Show Cause Order by William M. Windsor. (kt) (Entered:
05/09/2011)
05/09/2011 165 ORDER DENYING 153 Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of Order
Granting Motion to Compel; DENYING 154 Motion for Leave to file Motion for Hearing;
DENYING 155 Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of Order; DENYING
156 Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration; DENYING 160 Motion for Leave to
File Motion for Extension of Time re Respnd [sic]; DENYING 161 Motion for Recusal;
DENYING 162 Motion for leave to file Motion to Require this Court to Honor the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure; DENYING 163 Motion for Order directing the Clerk of Court to
Issue Signed Subpoenas. GRANTING 164 Mr. Windsor's Request for Specific Approval to
Authorize the Clerk of Court to file Windsor's Response to Show Cause Order - not
exceeding, twenty-five pages, see L.R. 7.1D, NDGa, submitted by Mr. Windsor on or before
May 12, 2011. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 5/9/2011. (kt) Modified on 5/9/2011
(kt). (Entered: 05/09/2011)
05/09/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Barbara G. Windsor, William M. Windsor re 165 Order on
Motion for Leave to File, Order on Motion for Recusal, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous
Relief, Order on Motion for Order. (kt) (Entered: 05/09/2011)
05/09/2011 Notification of Docket Correction re 165 Order on Motion for Leave to File, Order on Motion
for Recusal, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion for Order. Edited to
include that 164 was granted in the docket text.(kt) (Entered: 05/09/2011)
05/10/2011 167 REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC APPROVAL to file Motion for Clarification of show Cause
Order and Motion for Change of Hearing date, re 165 Order by William M. Windsor. (kt)
(Entered: 05/11/2011)
05/11/2011 166 ORDER re 165 Order setting hearing date. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing
scheduled for 11:00 a.m. on Friday, May 13, 2011 is continued to a later date. Mrs. Windsor is
ORDERED to provide the Clerk of Court, in writing within seven (7) days of receipt of a copy
of this Order, with a telephone number and address at which she - or counsel representing her
- can be reached directly. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order by certified
mail, return receipt requested, to Mrs. Windsor at each of the addresses listed in Appendix A.
The Court will advise the parties and Mrs. Windsor once the hearing date is rescheduled.
05/11/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to Barbara G. Windsor, via certified mail, and William M.
Windsor re 166 Order. (kt) (Entered: 05/11/2011)
05/11/2011 ORDER (by docket entry only) denying as moot 167 Motion for Hearing; denying as moot 167
Motion for Clarification per 166 Order. Ordered by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on 5/11/11.
(jdb) Modified on 5/11/2011 to correct typo(jdb). (Entered: 05/11/2011)
05/11/2011 Clerks Certificate of Mailing as to William M. Windsor re ORDER (by docket entry only)
denying as moot 167 Motion for Hearing; denying as moot 167 Motion for Clarification per 166
Order entered on 5/11/11. (cc: email) (jdb) (Entered: 05/11/2011)
PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt
05/12/2011 07:33:21
PACER
dr2600 Client Code:
Login:
Docket Search 1:09-cv-01543-
Description:
Report Criteria: WSD
Billable
15 Cost: 1.20
Pages:
5/12/2011 CM/ECF-GA Northern District Court-Re…
1:09-cv-01543-WSD Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v. Alcatraz Media, LLC et al
William S. Duffey, Jr, presiding
Date filed: 06/10/2009
Date terminated: 06/30/2009
Date of last filing: 05/11/2011
Related Transactions
Note: Each selected transaction in this case is shown below in a box with any other
transactions to which it is related.
Event Event
Doc. No. Event Name
Filed Terminated
Submission to Magistrate Judge 06/03/2009
1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
2 Notice of Appearance 06/04/2009
4 Order Staying Case 06/08/2009

15 Motion for Reconsideration 06/18/2009 06/30/2009
16 Notice of Filing 06/18/2009

9 Motion to Disqualify Attorney 06/10/2009 06/30/2009

11 Motion for Hearing 06/10/2009 06/30/2009
Case Reported Statistically 06/10/2009


4 Order Staying Case 06/08/2009
…uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/RelTransactQry.… 1/48

17 Motion to Disqualify Judge 06/22/2009 06/30/2009
21 Response to Motion 06/22/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
Notification of Docket Correction 06/23/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009

8 Motion to Supplement 06/10/2009 06/30/2009


1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
27 Response in Opposition to Motion 06/25/2009


29 Reply Brief 06/26/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009


32 Order on Motion to Quash 06/30/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
Clerks Certificate of Mailing 06/30/2009
Submission to District Judge 08/28/2009
42 Order on Motion for Reconsideration 09/03/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
45 Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheet to 09/16/2009
USCA
46 USCA Acknowledgment 09/23/2009
47 Certificate of Readiness Transmission 10/14/2009
Certificate of Readiness 10/14/2009
48 USCA Acknowledgment (other) 10/22/2009
49 Forthwith letter 12/23/2009
50 Appeal Record Sent to USCA 12/29/2009
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
58 Notice of Appeal 06/30/2010
USCA
62 Appeal Record Returned 07/13/2010
32 Order on Motion for Hearing 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA
32 Order on Motion to Supplement 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA
32 Order on Motion to Disqualify Attorney 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
pp
USCA
32 Order on Motion to Disqualify Judge 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA
32 Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages 06/30/2009

18 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages 06/22/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA
32 Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney 06/30/2009

26 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney 06/24/2009 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA
33 Clerk's Judgment 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009


1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
Terminated Case 06/30/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009

36 Motion to Change Venue 07/10/2009 09/03/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009



1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009

40 Motion for Joinder 07/23/2009 09/03/2009

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
5/12/2011
32 CM/ECF-GA Northern District Court-Re…
Order on Motion to Supplement 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA
42 Order on Motion to Change Venue 09/03/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
56 N ti f Fili
…uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/RelTransactQry.…
06/28/2010 15/48
USCA
42 Order on Motion for Joinder 09/03/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
USCA
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010
USCA

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
45 Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheet 09/16/2009

to USCA
1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
5/12/2011 g CM/ECF-GA Northern District Court-Re…

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
5/12/2011
32 Order on Motion to WithdrawCM/ECF-GA Northern District Court-Re…
as Attorney 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
52 USCA Order 02/26/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
53 Notice of Change of Pro Se Address 04/20/2010

5/12/2011 g CM/ECF-GA Northern District Court-Re…
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
Writ Issued 06/16/2010
55 Certificate of Service 06/17/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
5/12/2011
6 Motion for Hearing CM/ECF-GA Northern District Court-Re…
06/08/2009 06/30/2009
44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010
54 USCA Order 05/07/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
USCA

to USCA
1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009
5/12/2011
32 Order on Motion to DisqualifyCM/ECF-GA
Attorney Northern District Court-Re…
06/30/2009

60 Motion for Protective Order 07/07/2010 11/03/2010

1 Motion to Quash 06/03/2009 06/30/2009

65 Motion for Recusal 07/21/2010 11/03/2010

67 Motion for Leave to File 07/21/2010 07/21/2010






64 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief 07/19/2010 11/03/2010
64 Motion to Stay 07/19/2010 11/03/2010




80 Motion for Extension of Time 08/26/2010 11/03/2010
80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010


80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010

85 Notice (Other) 09/23/2010
86 Notice (Other) 09/23/2010
87 Notice (Other) 09/23/2010
88 Notice (Other) 09/23/2010

89 Notice (Other) 09/23/2010
90 Notice (Other) 09/23/2010
Order 09/24/2010
103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
121 Appeal Remark 01/31/2011
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011

92 Notice (Other) 10/12/2010


98 Response (Non-Motion) 11/03/2010
98 Response (Non-Motion) 11/03/2010

99 Order on Motion for Protective Order 11/03/2010

103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
106 USCA A k ld t
…uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/RelTransactQry.…
11/18/2010 31/48
121
133 Appeal Remark
USCA Order 01/31/2011
03/09/2011
99 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief 11/03/2010

103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011
99 Order on Motion to Stay 11/03/2010

64 Motion to Stay 07/19/2010 11/03/2010
103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011
99 Order on Motion for Recusal 11/03/2010

103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011
99 Order on Motion for Leave to File 11/03/2010

103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011
99 Order on Motion for Extension of Time 11/03/2010

103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011

80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010
103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011

103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011

103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
USCA
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011

64 Motion to Stay 07/19/2010 11/03/2010

80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010


to USCA
64 Motion to Stay 07/19/2010 11/03/2010
80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010
Order 09/24/2010
103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011


64 Motion to Stay 07/19/2010 11/03/2010
80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010
Order 09/24/2010
103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011


109 Order 12/06/2010
USCA
125 Order 02/09/2011

109 Od 12/06/2010
109 Order 12/06/2010
USCA
125 Order 02/09/2011

125 Order 02/09/2011

125 Order 02/09/2011
109 Order 12/06/2010

USCA
125 Order 02/09/2011

109 Order 12/06/2010
USCA

109 Order 12/06/2010

to USCA
109 Order 12/06/2010

109 Order 12/06/2010

to USCA
117 Notice of Appeal 01/18/2011 04/19/2011

64 Motion to Stay 07/19/2010 11/03/2010
80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010
Order 09/24/2010
103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
122 USCA A k l d t 02/02/2011

117 Notice of Appeal 01/18/2011 04/19/2011


125 Order 02/09/2011

109 Order 12/06/2010
Order on Motion for Leave to File 02/09/2011

Order on Motion for Leave to File 02/09/2011

127 USCA Order 02/24/2011

117 Notice of Appeal 01/18/2011 04/19/2011
128 Motion for Contempt 02/25/2011

147 Reply Brief 04/04/2011

129 Motion to Compel 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
129 Motion for Order 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
133 USCA Order 03/09/2011

64 Motion to Stay 07/19/2010 11/03/2010
80 Motion to Stay 08/26/2010 11/03/2010
Order 09/24/2010
103 Notice of Appeal 11/05/2010 03/09/2011
Order on Motion for Extension of Time 03/11/2011


Order on Motion for Extension of Time 03/11/2011




117 Notice of Appeal 01/18/2011 04/19/2011


129 Motion to Compel 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
129 Motion for Order 02/25/2011 04/21/2011

129 Motion to Compel 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
146 Reply Brief 04/04/2011

129 Motion to Compel 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
129 Motion for Order 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
147 Reply Brief 04/04/2011

148 Reply Brief 04/04/2011

129 Motion to Compel 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
129 Motion for Order 02/25/2011 04/21/2011


136 Motion to Seal (misc.) 03/21/2011 04/21/2011


150 USCA Order 04/19/2011

117 Notice of Appeal 01/18/2011 04/19/2011

151 Order on Motion to Seal 04/21/2011








152 Order on Motion to Compel 04/21/2011

129 Motion to Compel 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
152 Order on Motion for Order 04/21/2011

129 Motion for Order 02/25/2011 04/21/2011

129 Motion to Compel 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
129 Motion for Order 02/25/2011 04/21/2011
151 Order on Motion to Seal 04/21/2011
152 Order on Motion to Compel 04/21/2011
158 Order 05/04/2011

158 Set Deadlines/Hearings 05/04/2011



158 Order 05/04/2011
158 Set Deadlines/Hearings 05/04/2011


167 Motion for Clarification 05/10/2011 05/11/2011
166 Order 05/11/2011
Order on Motion for Hearing 05/11/2011
Order on Motion for Clarification 05/11/2011

166 Order 05/11/2011

166 Order 05/11/2011

166 Order 05/11/2011

166 Order 05/11/2011

166 Order 05/11/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011
166 Order 05/11/2011

166 Order 05/11/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011
166 Order 05/11/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011
166 Order 05/11/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011

163 Motion for Order 05/06/2011 05/09/2011
Docket Report ...
PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt
05/12/2011 09:18:37
PACER
dr2600 Client Code:
Login:
Related Search 1:09-cv-01543-
Description:
Transactions Criteria: WSD
Billable
4 Cost: 0.32
Pages:
Case 1:09-cv-01543-WSD Document 1 Filed 06/03/09 Page 1 of 2
FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE
'URI GIN! dL U .S.D .C. Atlanta
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

JUN 0 3 2009
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA JAMES N . TIEN, Clark
ATLANTA DIVISION i
MAID OF THE MIST CORPORATION

and MAID OF THE MIST STEAMBOAT r
COMPANY, LTD .,
CIVIL ACTION NO .
Plaintiffs, ~1 no _ u,
V. EXPEDITED TREATMENT REQUESTED
ALCATRAZ MEDIA, LLC ., ALCATRAZ

}~ ~
MEDIA, INC ., and WILLIAM M .
WINDSOR, ~V . :
~
Defendants .
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ORINDA D . EVANS'

EMERGENCY MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA
COMES NOW the United States of America, by and through the
United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia and the
undersigned Assistant U .S . Attorney, on behalf of the Honorable
Orinda Evans, United States District Judge, and moves to quash the
deposition subpoena issued for her appearance and testimony in the
captioned action and delivered to his chambers . The grounds for
this motion awe mope fully set forth in the accompanying memorandum
of law . The United States respectfully requests expedited
consideration of this Motion so that a decision may be entered
before the return date of the subpoena, June 16, 2009 .

Respectfully submitted,
DAVID E . NAHMIAS
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
CHRIS OPH R J . HUBER

ASSISTANT U .S . ATTORNEY
Georgia Bar No . 545627
600 Richard B . Russell Federal Bldg .

75 Spring Street, S .W .
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Telephone : (404) 581-6292

Facsimile : (404) 581-6181
Counsel for Movant

United States of America on behalf of the
Honorable Orinda Evans, District Judge
Dated : June 3, 2009

Case 1:09-cv-01543-WSD Document 1-1 Filed 06/03/09 Page 1 of 11

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

and MAID OF THE MIST STEAMBOAT
COMPANY, LTD .,
CIVIL ACTION NO .
Plaintiffs,

WINDSOR,
Defendants .
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ORINDA D . EVANS'
EMERGENCY MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA
The United States of America, on behalf of the Honorable
Orinda Evans, District Judge, pursuant to Fed . R . Civ . P . 45, seeks
to quash a deposition subpoena served by Defendant William Windsor
(proceeding pro se ) upon Judge Evans, with a return date of
June 16, 2009 . The subpoena seeks testimony regarding the bases
for Judge Evans' decisions in a closed matter and her mental
process in coming to those decisions .
The subpoena should be quashed . First, the mental processes
of a judge are not the proper subject of compelled testimony .
Second, case is closed, with a final judgment entered . As such,
the subpoena is invalid . Given the short notice provided by

Windsor and the upcoming return date of the subpoena, the United
States respectfully requests expedited consideration of this Motion
so that a decision may be entered before the return date of the
subpoena, June 16, 2009 .
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The underlying matter, Civ . No . 1 :06-cv-0714-ODE, arises out
of an agreement between plaintiffs Maid of the Mist Corporation and
Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd . (collectively "Maid" or
"plaintiffs") and defendants Alcatraz Media, LLC, and Alcatraz
Media, Inc . (collectively "Alcatraz")3 to sell vouchers for
tickets to ride Maid of the Mist's Niagara Falls boats . The
relationship deteriorated and Maid eventually notified Alcatraz
that it would no longer honor Alcatraz vouchers after July 29,
2005 . Alcatraz's decision to continue selling vouchers after July
29, 2005, despite the notice from Maid gave rise to the underlying
'Counsel for Judge Evans spoke with Windsor and requested that
the subpoena be withdrawn . Windsor refused to withdraw the
subpoena, forcing the United States to file this motion .
ZThe Statement of Facts is taken largely from the Court's Order

regarding summary judgment, filed August 9, 2007 [Doc . 251 and
the Court's Order, filed May 22, 2009, regarding Windsor's Motion
for Recusal, Motion to Reopen, Motion for Sanctions under Fed . R .
Civ . P . 37 and the Court's Inherent Powers, Motionn for Sanctions
under Fed . R . Civ . P . 11, and Motion for Discovery [Doc . 390] .
'Defendant Windsor is affiliated with Alcatraz .
2
action alleging tortious interference with business relations .
Maid sought a permanent injunction against Alcatraz's future sales
of Maid vouchers, as well as attorney's fees and costs .
Plaintiffs and defendants filed cross-motions for summary
judgment . On August 8, 2007, the Court granted Maid's motion for
summary judgment on its claim for tortious interference with
business relations, granted Maid a permanent injunction against
Alcatraz and defendant William M . Windsor's sale of vouchers or e-
tickets for rides on Maid's boats at Niagara Falls, and found
defendants liable for attorney's fees and expenses under O .C .G .A .
§ 13-6- 1 1 as a matter of law . [Doc . 2511 Finally, the Court
granted summary judgment to Maid on each of Alcatraz's
counterclaims . Id .
On December 3, 2007, the Court awarded Maid attorney's fees
and expenses pursuant to O .C .G .A . § 13-6-11 in the amount of
$421,773 .84 . [Doc . 325] . On December 26, 2007, the Court granted
the parties' Consent Motion for Stay in which Defendants agreed to
pay $446,671 .26 into the registry of the Court as a supersedeas
bond . [Doc . 3341 .
Alcatraz and Windsor appealed to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit . On September 19, 2008, the Court
of Appeals affirmed the Court's granting of summary judgment to
3
Maid on its claim for tortious interference with business
operations and the Court's issuance of a permanent injunction
against Defendants . [Doc . 344 . The Court of Appeals also affirmed
the Court's granting of summary judgment in Maid's favor on
Alcatraz's counterclaims and concluded that Maid was entitled to
recover attorney's fees and expenses for its successful tortious
interference claim under O .C .G .A . § 13-6-11, but vacated and
remanded to the Court for determination of the amount to award
Maid's attorney's fees and expenses . Id .
On October 28, 2008, the Court issued an Order making the
Court of Appeals' Mandate the judgment of the Court . [Doc . 346] .
On December 9, 2008, the Court signed a Consent Final Order and
Judgment disbursing the negotiated sum of $395,000 .00 as attorney's
fees and expenses to Maid . [Doc . 354] . Windsor expressly agreed to
the terms and entry of the Consent Final Order and Judgment, which
stated that " [t] he case is hereby closed all issues having been
decided . No appeal shall be taken from this Judgment, and
the parties waive all rights to appeal ." Id .
On or about May 20, 2009, Windsor attempted to serve a
subpoena on Judge Orinda D . Evans in her chambers . See Ex . 1
(subpoena and attached declaration) . An assistant to Judge Evans
accepted service on the Judge's behalf . The subpoena included a
4
declaration setting forth the substance of the requested testimony,
apparently in an effort to address the Subpoena Regulations adopted
by Judicial Conference related to the testimony of Judiciary
Personnel . See Ex . 2 (available at
http ://www .uscourts .gov/courts/regulations .htm) . In the
declaration, Windsor states that the deposition seeks testimony
regarding the bases for Judge Evans' decisions in the underlying
matter and to provide information to attack those decisions . The
subpoena has a return date of June 1 6, 2009 .
DISCUSSION
Judgment in the underlying case was entered on October 16,
2007 and the case was closed that same day . A year and a half
later, after the Court's judgment was affirmed by the Court of
Appeals, Windsor continues to challenge the Court's decisions, now
by issuing a subpoena to Judge Evans seeking to inquire into the
Court's mental reasoning and decision-making process . The subpoena
should be quashed because of the substance of the testimony it
seeks and its timing .4
4The purported rationale for issuing the subpoena to Judge Evans

is to discover facts to support Windsor's Motion for Recusal .
That motion has already been denied . For that reason alone, the
subpoena should be quashed as moot .
5
I . A JUDGE CANNOT BE FORCED TO TESTIFY REGARDING HER MENTAL

PROCESS
The subpoena at issue violates the long-standing rule that a
judge cannot be forced to testify regarding her mental process and
decision-making . That is exactly what Windsor is attempting here .
Windsor attached a declaration to the subpoena identifying the
nature of the testimony sought . The declaration makes clear that
Windsor seeks to have Judge Evans testify about her official
judicial actions and her mental process in arriving at decisions inn
the underlying matter . See Ex . 1, ¶¶ 6-10 .
Federal courts are in agreement that "judges are under no
obligation to divulge the reasons that motivated them in their
official acts ; the mental processes employed in formulating the
decision may not be probed ." United States v . Cross, 516 F . Supp .
700, 707 (M .D . Ga . 1981), aff'd 742 F .2d 1279 (11th Cir . 1984)
(emphasis added) . As such, °[t]he mental processes of a judge are
not the proper subject of compelled testimony ." United States v .
Harvev, 544 F . Supp . 189, 191 (S .D . Fla . 1982) (citing United
States v . Morgan, 313 U .S . 409, 422, 61 S . Ct . 999, 1004, 85 L . Ed .
1429 (1941)) ; see also Robinson v . Commissioner of Inte r nal
Revenue, 70 F .3d 34, 38 (5th Cir . 1995) ("A judge may not be asked
to testify about his mental processes in reaching a judicial
6
opinion .") ; Grant v . Shalala, 989 F .2d 1332, 1344 (3d Cir . 1993)
(Alito, C .J . ("It has long been recognized that attempts to probe
the thought and decision making processes of judges are
generally improper .") ; McCorkle v . United States, 2007 WL 177683,
*1 (M .D . Fla . Jan . 19, 2007) ("judges cannot be compelled to
testify concerning the mental processes used in formulating
official judgments or the reasons that motivated the judge in
performance of his or her official duties") ; United States v .
Roebuck, 271 F . Supp . 2d 712, 718 (D .V .I . 2003) ("The overwhelming
authority concludes that a judge may not be compelled to testify
concerning the mental processes used in formulating official
judgments or the reasons that motivated him in performance of his
official duties .") . It is "impermissible" to "attempt to obtain
the mental impressions of the court in the decisionmaking
process ." Matter of Randall, 640 F .2d 898, 902 (8th Cir . I981) .
Absent extreme and extraordinary circumstances, courts will
not enforce subpoenas for oral testimony of federal judges as to
their discretionary actions and decision-making processes . Harvey,
544 F . Supp . at 191 ; United States v . Dow dv, 440 F . Supp . 894, 896-
97 (W .D . Va . 1977) . "Should a judge be vulnerable to subpoena as
to the basis of every action taken by him, the judiciary would be
open to `frivolous attacks uponn its dignity and integrity, and
7
* * * interruption of its ordinary and proper functioning . "' Dow dv,
440 F . Supp . at 896 (quoting United States v . Valenti, 120 F . Supp .
80 (D .N .J . 1954)) .
Because the testimony sought by the subpoena seeks to invade
Judge Evans' decision-making process and mental process, the
subpoena should be quashed .
II . THE SUBPOENA WAS SERVED AFTER THE CASE WAS CLOSED AND SHOULD
BE QUASHED
In addition to seeking to invade the Court's decision-making,
the subpoena was issued after the case was closed . As such it is
untimely and should be quashed .
Generally, a subpoena should be quashed when it is served
after the close of discovery . See Pushko v . Kl .ebener, 2007 WL
2671263, *3 (M .D . Fla . Sept . 7, 2007) (quashing purported trial
subpoena because it was issued after the close of discovery) ;
Dodson V . CBS Broadcasting Inc . , 2005 WL 3177723, *1 (S .D .N .Y . Nov .
29, 2005) (same) . Here, the subpoena was not even issued while the
case was ongoing, but rather after the case was closed . Subpoenas
are not valid when they are issued in closed cases .' See Fed . R .
'Windsor apparently recognizes this rule because he filed a

motion seeking to have the Court reopen discovery inn order to
allow the Clerk of the Court to issue multiple subpoenas . EDoc .
374] That motion was denied . [Doc . 3901 .
8
Civ . P . 45 (a) (requires subpoena to state title of action and the
"court i n which it is pending" ; subpoena can only be issued to a
party) (emphasis added) ; see also Azania v . S cTuadrito, 1997 WL
268085, *2 (7th Cir . May 7, 1997) (not an abuse of discretion to
quash subpoena issued after summary judgment entered) ; Matter of
the City of El Paso, Texas, 887 F .2d 1103, 11 05 (D .C . Cir . 1989)
(subpoena pursuant to Rule 45 invalid where case has been
appealed) .'
Because the subpoena is not valid, it should be quashed .
'As discussed above, the Judicial Conference of the United States

has promulgated regulations pursua nt to 28 U .S .C . § 604 limiting
the circumstances in which a Judge may testify about her official
duties in response to a subpoena . See - Ex 2 . Those regulations
prohibit such test i mo ny u nless "authorized in accordance with
these regulations ." Id at § 5(a) . A final determination
regarding Windsor's request- pursuant to these regulations has not
yet been made .
9
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the subpoena issued to the
Honorable Orinda D . Evans should be quashed .
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID E . NAHMIAS
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
CHRIST PHE J . HUBER


75 Spring Street, S .W .
Telephone : (404) 581-6292

Facsimile : (404) 581-6181
Counsel for Movant

United States of America on behalf of the
Honorable Orinda Evans, District Judge
Dated : June 3, 2009
10
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
I hereby certify, pursuant to LR 7 . 1 .D ., N .D . Ga ., that the
foregoing United States District Judge Orinda D . Evans' Emergency
Motion to Quash Subpoena and Memorandum of Law in Support was
prepared in 12 point Courier New font .
v
CHRISTO HER HUBER
11
z
% AnRB f Rev , 12/07) Subpoena in .Q Ci vil Case
Issued by the
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MAID OF THE MIST CORPORATION Northern District of Georgia
and MAID OF THE MIST STEAMBOAT SU BPOENA IN A C IVIL
CASE
COMPANY, LTD. v. ALCATRAZ MEDIA,
LLC, ALCATRAZ MEDIA, INC . and • ~~, _ _ - O~
WILLIAM 1w1 . WINDSOR Case Nurnber : , ~ ~~
~ ~" _ w<-V--
TO : ~~ _ t _~ ~ _ _ , ~, ~
~sf.9 r~ ~r ~ N yam... » r• y
.~,' :_ ~ ~ .
nr
S This subpoena is invalid, and imposes no duty on the person served to
appear anywhere, if it was not served to g ether with the fees for one
*/~~'~r ~ ~"' '~ ~' day's attendance and mileage . FURTHER, this subpoena imposes no
duty on anyone to produce documents or things at his or her own
expense .
D YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear in the United States District court at the place, date, and time specified below to
testify in the above case .
PLA CE OF TESTIMONY COURT ROOM
DATE AND TIME
YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the place, date, and time specified below to testify at the taking of a deposition
in the above case .
PLACE OF DEPOSITION rE AND
D YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents or objects at the
place, date, and time specified below (list documents or objects) :
PLACE DATE AN D TI
-- D YOU -ARE COMMANDED topermit inspeet iv"f the7€crl}crwmg-premises at th e-date-and-tirrrc- sFecifred below .
PR EM ISES TE AND TIME
Any organization not a party to this suit that is subpoenaed for the taking of a deposition shall designate one or more officers,
directors, or managing agents, or other persons who consent to testify on its behalf, and may set forth, for each person designated, the
matters on which the person will testify . Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) .
ISSUING OFFICER ' S 5 iGNATU R A ND (IND ICATE IF ATTORNEY F O R PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT) D ATE
JAMES N: HATTF . .
I S SUING OFFIC ER 'S N AM E, E5S
United States District Court

2211 United States Court ecie ri[ Rule of Ci vil Procedure 45 ( c ), ( d), mtid (c), u3i next pag e)
75 Spring Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 303Q3-3361 rice, state district under case number .
A(3R K lK g v 12/071 Suh riorna in ci Civil s'n1l'aer
ce 21
PROOF OF SERVICE
o AtE PLACE .1
SLAVED
SERVED ON (PRINT NAME) J ~6a-C_ ..Cl\ I- v~5{si S ~~'v MANNER QF 5 E RV1CE
SERVED BY (PRINT NAME) TITLE
,r1'n~ll Q s ;c\Q n~-

DECLARATION OF SERVER
declare under penalty of perjury underthe laws ofthe United States of America that the foregoing information contained
in the Proof of' Service is true and correct .
1
Executed on VD ac) I aW 1 ~) V ,~
DATE 51GNATU R - F S E RV E R
ADDRESS OF SERV E R
WS
F'Qdcral Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e), as amended on December 3, 2007 :
(t) I']i (1 'I'8Ci 'IMC A P8R9UN SU6.1 ECT TO A SUBPOENA. (i) shnws a su6sl smtiul n ea d Ior t h e Ic slim uuy nr maien :d dim c u nnm be turbot wixv
f 1 1 Aeoid i n8 Undue Burden or P-x praisc : Sanctions . A party or attorney responsible 1'or met wi t hout undue hardship; and
i ; .u i ngaud scr i» gg a suhpuenn must take ma s un a ble s t eps to avoid i mposing undue burden nr (ii) en sures that the cubp nana e d person will b, renruimlily compensated
.
axp¢~ n~ tilt it person subjret to the xuhpuana . The s sui ng cou rt must enforce this dory and
i n 'pose i n upprnptitif c sanc ti o n -n•Hie6 May include lost earnings and reasonable atiomey's ( d) DUTIES in RESPONDING •ro A SUBPOENA.
Roes -- m e a puny or attoniry who fails to comply . (I ) Producing Documents or Cle ch o nicu E l y stored Btifmnoatiun. Those procedure, uppfy
(2) Command t o Produce Ivlntgriuls or Permit Inspec t ion . to producing documents or electronically stored in liirmaiirn o :
(A) Appearance Not Requ i red . A person command ed to produce documents. (A) Documents. A person responding to a subpoena it) produce dacumci u s u ni v
electronically stored i ntomtati nn, ur ta ngi 61e things, or to pernit thr inspection of premises. need produce them as they are kept i n the urd i nury course uFltusiricss urn nms[ u N0m2e and hihcl ahem
not appear in p erson at the place o f production or inspection unless also com manded t o appea r to correspond to the categories in the deinniul .
l in• n Jcpu s iiion, hearing . or trial . (B) Form for Producing Electronically Sio rcd Infumiariun Not Spccil ied . II ' x
(H ) p6j ec [ ions. A person commanded to produce docwneuts or tangible things or to subpoena does not specify u l'n rm for pro ducing electronically stored i nl 'un nanun . the purs ue
pe iinn inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated i n die subpoena a written responding must produce it in a Fimn or 1'nnns in wh ich it is ordinarily m :i in mi ned kit in n
n hjecu n» t o inspecti ng, tupyiug, testing or sampling nny oral! aF t he inat ariulx ortu inspecting reasonably usable i'unn or forms .
the pm m i.rs -• o r i o producing e1 cctrnnically st orrd in I 'oimatian in tire Fonn or loons Rquusl e d, (C) Electronically Stored Guiinnnuun Produced in On ly One Fumi_ T h e person
The ulrjcu t iun n u isi be served before the earlier of the ri me s prcilied for compliance or 14 days responding need not produce tile same a lc e iron ically stored inl'omual i an i n m utt than title 116nn,
,il'iar tile subpoena i s served. [far objection is m a de , the following odes apply: (D ) Inaccessible Electronically Stored In fomiatiun. 'nit person responding n eed not
l i) .ai airy little, on notice t o the commanded person, the serving party may i nove prov i de discovery ufeiect mnic ally, stored information Irnm sources flun tilt, parson identities Lis
t he issuing cnun tar a n order compell ing production or inspection . not reasonably accessible 6ecnuse of midue burden or cost. On motion t o coil iptl discw• ery, ur
(ii) 1ltiase acts may be inqui re d on ly as d ir ec t ed i n the order, c ud tile ord e r muss for a protective order, the person responding must show Ihtu the infonmition is not reasonably
protect .1 pc i~io u who is ne ither a party nor •r patty' s af}ieer I'rorn significant expense result ing accessible because of undue burden or cost . ft' lli al showing i s .
madeifie c our t may nuneha[e.s
fi'0m compliance . order discovery from such sources iFlhc requesting party sh ows good c ause, considering i lw
( 3) Quashing or Nludilyi ng a . Subpoena lim itntipns of Rsde ?G161 (2)(C ) . The court m ay specifyy cundiiiuns for th e disco, cry.
(A) When Required . On timely rnnlion. ile a i ssuing court must gi ursh ur modify a (2) Cla i ming Privi leg e o r P rulwiun.
, uhpu mal il+ur: ( A) IIlIO[1A .lI lIfl1 Withheld. A P01-S011 tVIt III]OE(II III iliVpUCI1iW d i n l nnem ii nn unde r a
I i) rai ls to a llow a reosunabk little t o comp ly; dor m t hat i t is privileged or su bjec i to protection as trial-prepn ruii un muaeriod must :
ii i) requires n person who i s neither u party no r a pony's officer to [love l more (i) expressly m a ke the cl ai »r, nud
IIIAI} 1- IlI} miles front WISCIY 111 :11 liaison resides . is cinploycd . or regularly transacts business in (ii) describe the nat ure al't he withheld docunicnis . communications, of
perso n --- e xce p i t han , subject to Rule a5(r)( .l)(8 )1 iii ) . the person may be commanded toattvid tan gi ble Thin gs in n manner that, without r"calinginformation
:i trial by nnav cl i ng. l io n an y such place within the stmt where the trial i s held ; enable the parties to mess dm c l ai m.
li ii f re quires disclosure oi' p riv drgcd or u sher protected aiall er , i Fim e zccp ti wi (t3 ) inforpintiinl Produced . If in lion n aiion produced in irs punso to a snbp<mnci ix
,it w;ac e r :qpp l iasr it su bj ect In a cl tl im iii privilege or n !' pruic cii on as I ri:i l-pre par:ni un m ; n enal, file person making
tivl subjects x p er .o n to u nder burden . the c l aim may noii f~ any pin y that r c ct i wJ the inlumcuiun oCdic cl :ii ioi and lilt hazes !ire it .
{13) When Pcnnntecl . To protect a person s ubject to or ul]cclcd b y a subpoena. tile Ailer being notif i ed, n Party mu ss promptly return, s eg u e.ic e, or destroy the .p r cilied
issuing tours m ay, on rmluun, quash or nu dity the subpoena il'it :
requires in liiminlion and airy copi es it his: must nut use or disclose [lie i nfiny n:uioi> > m lil th e cLwun is
li t d isc los ing a UUdo a acrel or other c wi Fiden t inl fI:YC:11YI1, dd velup utam. or resolved : m kis t take reasunahla see ps to retrieve d m i nl'arnin fiun i f th e parry dise lu,ed i i l,c liu •e
cu n mn urci al ml'onnatian : bei ng nuti li,:d: a nd may prumpdy pres e nt dio i i ol'a rnta iiuu to the court unJr[ sr:l[ lei n
(ii) disclosing nn imnwaincJ cxpen's op i nion or i nl'onnatiun t hut does not deiaanin ueimi or sh e c l aiut. I'ha narsnn who pruiiuceJ th e nti'm•ma uun miut preserve nine
de s cri be +p .ci Ei c « :currc iw es in dispute an d results from the ex p,:n 'Y surdy that was not inlimnaiioio uititi l she Claim is rosul led .
requested by a party ; o r
( iii) a person who is neither a party itur a party's officer to incur su 6stentinl (e) CONTEMPT .
esperisc iu travel inure than 1 00 miles to attend t r ial "I l rc i ssuing cnun ditty lurid in co on cm pl .1 pCl'YUII t\IkU . lint tug. been sort ed . lad, %S gIlillp
(C ) Spacil ying CwidW uns a s a n Alternative
. In the circum3muces described in R ule adaqu ai c excuse to obey rite SllI7Pt1C11il . A nwupu iTv'; tii i hura iu obey nms i h a rseu,c,l If the
d5tc1131(B), the coo n may
. instead o Fq u:uhing or m a ditying a subpoena . order appearance car su6pucna purports to rey u i n: die nunpmn y to ouo nd or produce ;ii a p l ace rn i1 s idc lilt 111111t2i Of
pruductinn under .llecihed cundilions i f'i he serving puny : R ule Ai(c)f 31( .AXii ) .

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
MAI1D OF TAE MST

CORLPOR.ATICJN
and MAID OF THE MIST
STEAMBOAT COMPANY, LTD.,
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO :
V.
1 :06-CV-0714-ODE
ALC A.TRAZ MEDIA, LLC,
ALCATRAZ MEDIA, INC . and
WILtIAM M. WINDSOR,
Defendants.
EIGHTH DECLARATION OF WILLIAM M. WINDSOR

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO RECUSE JUDGE EVANS
1, William M . Windsor, the undersigned, hereby declare under penalty of
Pe~urY :
1 . My name is William M . Windsor ("Windsor"). Tam over the age of 21,
am cc#mpetent to testiff, and have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein .
2. T have served as a manager of Alcatraz Media, LLC and Alcatraz
Media. , Inc . (collectively, "Alcatraz") . I am a party to this action, and I am
representing myself pro se .
1
3 . This Eighth Declaration of Defendant William M . Windsor in Support
of Motion to Recuse Judge Evans ("Dec #8") is provided in response to the
"Subpoena Regulations Adopted by Judicial Conference ." (Exhibit # 1 .) "The
request for testimony or production of records shall set forth, or shall be
accompanied by an affidavit setting forth, a written statement by the party seeking
the testimony or production of records, or by counsel for the party, containing an
explaj.riation of the nature of the testimony or records sought, the relevance of the
testiMony or records sought to the legal proceedings, and the reasons why the
testimony or records sought, or the information contained therein, are not readily
avail4ble from other sources or by other means . This explanation shall contain
sufficient information for the determining officer designated in section 7(b) to
determine whether or not federal judicial personnel should be allowed to testify or
the records should be produced . Where thee request does not contain an explanation
cuff dient for this purpose, the determining officer may deny the request or may
ask the requester to provide additional information ."
4 . The Subpoena in a Civil Actionn that this Declaration accompanies
(Exhibit #Z) is a subpoena for Judge Orinda D . Evans ("Judge Evans"), the judge
in this proceeding .
2
5 . T have filed a Motion to Recuse Judge Evans (Docket #3b 1), attached
hereto as Exhibit #3 . I have filed a Reply to Plaintiffs' Response in apposition to
Defendant William M . Windsor's Motion to Recuse Judge Evans, attached hereto
as Exhibit #4 .
6 . The nature of the testimony sought is to establish that Judge Evans
withlheld documents from the Defend ants improperly . Judge Evans reviewed two
contacts in camera and ruled that the contracts would not be disclosed to the
Defendants . I recently obtained copies of the contracts through other legal actions,
and these contracts were extremely relevant and should have been produced .
ignored my report of hundreds of lies and counts of perjury by the Plaintiffs and
numerous false sworn pleadings, false pleadings, and improper pleadings by
Plaintiffs' attom:eys .
was biased against the Defendants and in Favor of the Plaintiffs .
9. - The nature of the testimony sought is to generate testimony from
Judge Evans that will establish facts to support my Motion to Recuse Judge Evans .
The issues are detailed in Exhibits #3 and #4 and the declarations and exhibits that
were,filed in this matter on April 24, 2009 and May 1 3, 2009 . Among other
3
th3.ngs, I have stated that 210 of the 410 statements in Judge Evans' Summary
Judgment Order were false, and I have documented many of these using the
evidence that was before the Court and ignored .
10 . The nature of the testimony sought is to make inquiries as to whether
Judge Evans or a clerk to Judge Evans may have been improperly influenced in
this utter .
11 . The relevance of the testimony sought to the legal proceedings is that
Judge Evans has not been impartial, has made illogical statements in her orders
that do not reflect the facts, has invented facts, and much more . In my opinion,
there Js no logical explanation for how a federal judge could have handled a case in
this nianner . The relevance of the testimony is that it should prove that Judge
Evan was hoodwinked by the Plaintiffs and/or was so biased against the
Defeahdants or in favor of the Plaintiffs that the judge was simply unfair to the
L7efeAdants for some reason that only Judge Evans knows .
12 . The testimony sought is not available from any other source or by any
other means . Judge Evans is the only person who reviewed the documents in
camera . Judge Evans is the only person who knows what she was thinking and
why the was so biased .
4
13 . As the request for testimony shall be provided to the federal judicial
pers¢nnel from whom testimony or production of records is sought at least fifteen
(15) :Working days in advance of the time by which the testimony is to b e required,
I am providing this subpoena to Judge Evans on May 20, 2009 with a proposed
deposition date of June 16, 2009 .
14 . I sent a letter to Judge Evans asking for a convenient time for the
deposition, and I have not received a response. This letter is attached as Exhibit
#4 .
15 . Judge Evans is asked to forward the subpoena and this declaration to
the determining officer so the determining officer may determine whether Judge
Evan may be deposed .
16 . The effect of this deposition in this particular case should be to lead to
recus~al of Judge Evans and reopening of this case so that justice may be done
17 . The mission of judges is to see that justice is done . In this case,
justice was not done, and Judge Evans was responsible for that . The federal
judiciary must not allow judges to withhold documents, turn a blind eye to massive
perjury, ignore the evidence before the Court, invent evidence, and show a
complete lack of impartiality . There can be no better use of the time of federal
judicial personnel than to expose the wrongdoing in this case .
5
18 . The testimony will assist the federal judiciary in the performance of
official duties .
19. The testimony is necessary to prevent the perpetration of fraud or
injustice in this case .
20 . The request is not unduly burdensome and is inappropriate under
applicable court or administrative rules .
21 . The request is within the proper authority of the party making it . The
subpoena was issued by the Clerk of the Court as is required for pro se defendants .
22. 1 believe my request meets the requirements of the Subpoena
Reg~latzona of the Judicial Conference as provided at
http:/,lyvww.uscourts .gov/courts/regulations :htm.
23 . This request was properly served .
24 . I do not believe the testimony would violate a statute, regulation, or
ethic4l rule .
25 . The testimony would not disclose confidential information from or
pertaining to a presentence investigation report or pertaining to an individual's
probation, parole, or supervised release, or would disclose any other information
that * confidential under any applicable statute or regulation .
6
26. The testimony could not be reasonably expected to result in the
appearance of the federal judiciary favoring one litigant over another, or endorsing
or supporting a position advocated by a litigant . The purpose of this deposition is
to obtain information because of the appearance that Judge Evans favored the
Plaintiffs over the Defendants.
27. This testimony does not seek information available from other
sources.
28 . This request does not seek testimony of Judge Evans as an expert
witnesses .
29 . This request does not seek personnel files, records or documents
pertaining to a current or former federal judiciall officer or employee .
FURTHER SA ITH AFk'IArTT NOT .
In accordance with 28 U .S .C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct .
Executed this 20th day of May 2009 .
-~_
William M. Windsor
7
Sworn to before me, this day of , 2009 .
Notary Public

ATLANTA DIVISION
MA-W OF THE MIST )

eoRJPoRa.TZON ~
and MAID OF THE MIST )
STEk,rBOAT COMPANY, LTD ., )
Plaintiffs, )
CIVIL ACTION NO :
v. }
1 .06-CV-0714-ODE
ALCATRAZ MEDIA, LLC, )
WILLIAM M . WINDSOR, )
Defendants. )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 20th day of May 2009 . I served the EIGHTH
DECLARATION OF DEFENDANT WILLIAM M . W INDSOR IN
SI.TPtORT OF MOTION TO RECUSE JUDGE EVANS by depositing the
same y in an envelope with proper postage affixed thereto and deposit ing in the
United States Mail and addressed as follows :
Carl Hugo Anderson, Jr ., Esq.

Sarah Bright, Esq .
Brett Mendell, Esq .
HAWKINS & PARNELL, LLP
4000 SunTrust Plaza
9

Marc W. Brown
Phillips Lytle, LLP
3400 HSBC Center
Buffalo, NY 14203
G . Brian Raley, Esq .

RALEY & SANDIFER, P .C .
Facsimile : (404) 995-9100
This 20th day of May 2009 .
UjAXv";7L,o Nak"
William M . Windsor
Pro Se
3924 Lower Roswell Road

Marietta, GA 30068
770-578-1094
Facsimile : 770-578-1057
10
Subpoena Regulat ions Adopted by Judi cial Conf ere n ce
At its March 2003 meeting, the Judicial Conference endorsed regulations governing responses to
subpoenas issued to federal judges and employees . By establishing procedures for litigants to follow to
obtain documents or testimony from offices within the judicial branch, as well as the procedures judges and
employees would follow if they receive subpoenas, these regulations accomplish three goals :
• they establish an administrative process for subpoena requests ;

• they impose general limitations on the nature of responses ; and
• they direct agency employees not to comply with subpoenas that are not approved through the
administrative process .
The regulations are principally procedural in nature,, and do not interfere with substantive decisions by
individual courts and officers as to the availability of official documents and testimony . For example, the
regulations provide that for a subpoena directed to a judge or a member of a judge's personal staff, that
judge would be the official authorized to determine the proper substantive response to the subpoena . For a
subpoena directed to a court unit or office, the determination would be assigned to the head of the unit or
office, in consultation with the chief judge of the court, when appropriate .
Thus, the only real change that these regulations accomplish is to provide the "determining officer" with
well-recognized procedural and substantive grounds to respond to a subpoena . The following is the full text
of the subpoena regulations, as adopted by the Judicial Conference in March 2003 .
Testimony of Judiciary Personnel and Production of

Judiciary Records in Legal Proceedings
As adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States in March 2003
Section 1 . Purpose .
(a) These regulations establish policy, assign responsibilities and prescribe procedures with respect to :
(1) the production or disclosure of official information or records by the federal judiciary, and (2) the
testimony of present or former judiciary personnel relating to any official information acquired by any such
individual as part of that individual's performance of official duties, or by virtue of that individual's official
status, in federal, state, or other legal proceedings covered by these regulations .
(b) The purpose of these regulations is, among other things, to : (1) conserve the time of federal judicial
personnel for conducting official business ; (2) minimize the involvement of the federal judiciary in issues
unrelated to its mission ; (3) maintain the impartiality of the federal judiciary in disputes between private
litigants ; (4) avoid spending the time and money of the United States for private purposes ; and (5) protect
confidential and sensitive information and the deliberative processes of the federal judiciary .
Section 2. Authority .
These regulations are promulgated under the authority granted the Director of the Administrative Office
of the United States Courts, under the supervision and direction of the judicial Conference of the United
States, to "[s]upervise all administrative matters relating to the offices of clerks and other clerical and
administrative personnel of the courts," 28 U .S .C .
§ 604(a)(1) ; to "[p]erform such other duties as may be assigned to him by . . .the Judicial Conference of
the United States," 28 U .S .C . § 604(a)(24) ; to "make, promulgate, issue, rescind, and amend rules and
EXHIBIT
=- - ,~ --
regulations . . . as may be necessary to carry out the Director's functions, powers, duties, and authority," 28
U .S .C . § 604(f) ; and to "delegate any of the Director's functions, powers, duties, and authority . . , to such
officers and employees of the judicial branch of Government as the Director may designate," 28 U .S .C . §
602(d) .
Section 3 . Def i nitions .
(a) Request . An order, subpoena, or other demand of a court, or administrative or other authority, of
competent jurisdiction, under color of law, or any other request by whatever method, for the production,
disclosure, or release of information or records by the federal judiciary, or for the appearance and testimony
of federal judicial personnel as witnesses as to matters arising out of the performance of their official duties,
in legal proceedings . This definition includes requests for voluntary production or testimony in the absence of
any legal process .
(b) Judicial personnel . All present and former officers and employees of the federal judiciary and any
other individuals who are or have been appointed by, or subject to the supervision, jurisdiction, or control
of, the federal judiciary, including individuals hired through contractual agreements by or on behalf of the
federal judiciary, or performing services under such agreements for the federal judiciary, such as
consultants, contractors, subcontractors, and their employees and personnel . This phrase also includes
alternative dispute resolution neutrals or mediators, special masters, individuals who have served and are
serving on any advisory committee or in any advisory capacity, and any similar personnel performing
services for the federal judiciary .
(c) Legal proceedings . All pretrial, trial, and post-trial stages of all existing or anticipated judicial or
administrative actions, hearings, investigations, cases, controversies, or similar proceedings, including grand
jury proceedings, before courts, agencies, commissions, boards or other tribunals, foreign and domestic, or
all legislative proceedings pending before any state or local body or agency, other than those specifiecd in
section 4(b) .
(d) Information or records . All information, records, documents, or materials of any kind, however
stored, that are in the custody or control of the federal judiciary or were acquired by federal judicial
personnel in the performance of their official duties or because of their official status .
(e) Testimony . Any written or oral statement in any form by a witness arising out of the performance of
the witness' official duties, including personal appearances and statements in court or at a hearing or trial,
depositions, answers to interrogatories, affidavits, declarations, interviews, telephonic, televised, or
videotaped remarks, or any other response during discovery or similar proceedings that would involve more
than production of documents .
Section 4 . Applicability .
(a) These regulations apply to :
(1) All components of the federal judiciary and their personnel, except the Supreme Court of the United
States, the Federal Judicial Center, and the United States Sentencing Commission, and their personnel .
(b) These regulations do not apply to :

(1) Legal proceedings in which the federal judiciary or a court or office of the federal judiciary is a party .
(2) Legal proceedings, arising out of the performance of official duties by federal judicial personnel, in
which federal judicial personnel are parties .
(3) Legal proceedings in which federal judicial personnel are to testify while in leave or off-duty status
as to matters that do not arise out of the performance of official duties . These regulations do not seek to
deny federal judicial personnel access to the courts as citizens in their private capacities on off-duty time .
(4) Congressional requests for testimony or documents .
(5) Requests governed by the Regulations for Garnishment of Pay of Officers and Employees of the
Federal Judiciary, Guide to Judiciary Policies and Procedures, Vol . I-C, Chap . XI, Part A .
(6) Proceedings conducted under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, 28 U .S .C . § 372(c), under the
authority conferred on the judicial councils of the respective federal judicial circuits by 28 U .S .C . § 332, or
under the authority conferred on the Judicial Conference of the United States by 28 U .S .C . § 331 .
(7) Requests by members of the public, when properly made through the procedures established by a
court for that purpose, for records or documents, such as court files or dockets, routinely made available to
members of the public for inspection or copying .
Section 5 . Policy .
(a) Federal judicial personnel may not provide testimony or produce records in legal proceedings except
as authorized in accordance with these regulations .
(b) Testimony may be taken from federal judicial personnel only at the federal judicial personnel's place
of business, or at any other place authorized by the determining officer
designated in section 7(b) . Additional conditions may be specified by the determining officer . The time for
such testimony shall be reasonably fixed so as to avoid substantial interference with the performance of
official duties by federal judicial personnel .
(c) Nothing in these regulations shall restrict in any way any defenses, objections, or privileges that may
be asserted by federal judicial personnel in response to a request .
(d) These regulations are not intended to, and do not :
(1) Waive the sovereign immunity of the United States ; or
(2) Infringe upon or displace the responsibilities committed to the Department of Justice in conducting
litigation on behalf of the United States in appropriate cases .
(e) These regulations are intended only to govern the internal operation of the federal judiciary and are
not intended to create, do not create, and may not be relied upon to create any right or benefit, substantive
or procedural, enforceable in law or equity against the United States or against the federal judiciary or any
court, office, or personnel of the federal judiciary .
Section 6 . Contents and timeliness of a request .
(a) The request for testimony or production of records shall set forth, or shall be accompanied by an
affidavit setting forth, a written statement by the party seeking the testimony or production of records, or by
counsel for the party, containing an explanation of the nature of the testimony or records sought, the
relevance of the testimony or records sought to the legal proceedings, and the reasons why the testimony or
records sought, or the information contained therein, are not readily available from other sources or by
other means . This explanation shall contain sufficient information for the determining officer designated in
section 7(b) to determine whether or not federal judicial personnel should be allowed to testify or the
records should be produced . Where the request does not contain an explanation sufficient for this purpose,
the determining officer may deny the request or may ask the requester to provide additional information .
(b) The request for testimony or production of records, including the written statement required by
section 6(a), shall be provided to the federal judicial personnel from whom testimony or production of
records is sought at least fifteen (15) working days in advance of the time by which the testimony or
production of records 9s,to be required . Failure to meet this requirement shall provide a sufficient basis for
denial of the request .
(c) The determining officer designated in section 7(b) has the authority to waive the requirements of
this section (6) in the event of an emergency under conditions which the requester could not reasonably
have anticipated and which demonstrate a good faith attempt to comply with the requirements of these
regulations . In no circumstance, however, shall a requester be entitled to consideration of an oral or
untimely request ; to the contrary, whether to permit such an exceptional procedure is a decision within the
sale discretion of the determining officer .
Section 7 . Identity of determining officer .
(a) Federal judicial personnel shall not, in response to a request for testimony or the production of
records in legal proceedings, comment, testify, or produce records without the prior approval of the
determining officer designated in section 7(b) .
(b) The determining officer authorized to make determinations under these regulations shall be as
follows :
(1) In the case of a request directed to a federal court of appeals judge, district judge, Court of
International Trade judge, Court of Federal Claims judge, bankruptcy judge, or magistrate judge, or directed
to a current or former member of such a judge's personal staff (such as a judge's secretary, law clerk, or
courtroom deputy clerk), the determining officer shall be the federal court of appeals judge, district judge,
Court of International Trade judge, Court of Federal Claims judge, bankruptcy judge, or magistrate judge
himself or herself.
(2) In the case of a request directed to a former federal court of appeals judge, district judge, Court of
International Trade judge, Court of Federal Claims judge, bankruptcy judge, or magistrate judge, or directed
to a former member of a former judge's personal staff who is no longer a court employee and thus is not
covered by sections 7(b)(1) or (3), the determining officer shall be the chief judge of the court on which the
former judge previously served .
(3) In the case of a request directed to an employee or former employee of a court office (other than an
employee or former employee covered by section 7(b)(1)), such as the office of the clerk of court, the office
of the circuit-executive, the staff attorneys' and/or preargument attorneys' office, the probation and/or
pretrial services office, and the office of the Federal Public Defender, the determining officer shall be the unit
head of the particular office, such as the clerk of court, the circuit executive, the senior staff attorney, the
chief probation officer, the chief pretrial services officer, or the Federal Public Defender . In these instances,
the determining officer (except the Federal Public Defender, as provided below) shall, as provided by local
rule or order, consult with the chief judge of the court served by the particular office regarding the proper
response to a request . The Federal Public Defender, in the case of a request related to the defender office's
administrative function (but not requests related to the defender office's provision of representation
pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U .S .C . 3006A, and related statutes), shall, as provided by local rule
or order, consult with the chief judge of the court of appeals that appoints the Federal Public Defender
regarding the proper response to such a request .
(4) In the case of a request directed to an employee or former employee of the Administrative Office of
the United States Courts, the determining officer shall be the General Counsel of the Administrative Office .
(5) In the case of a request not specified in subsections (1) through (4) above (such as, for example, a
request made to federal judicial personnel as defined by section 3 ( b) above who are not current or former
judges or their staff, employees of a court office, or employees of the Administrative Office), the determining
officer shall be the officer designated to serve as the determining officer by the chief judge of the court
served by the recipient of the request . In these instances, the determining officer (if someone other than the
chief judge of the relevant court) shall, as provided by local rule or order, consult with the chief judge of the
relevant court regarding the proper response to a request .
Section 8 . Procedure when request is made .
(a) In response to a request for testimony or the production of records by federal judicial personnel in
legal proceedings covered by these regulations, the determining officer may determine whether the federal
judicial personnel may be interviewed, contacted, or used as witnesses, including as expert witnesses, and
whether federal judicial records may be produced, and what, if any conditions will be imposed upon such
interview, contact, testimony, or production of records . The determining officer may deny a request if the
request does not meet any requirement imposed by these regulations . In determining whether or not to
authorize the disclosure of federal judicial information or records or the testimony of federal judicial
personnel, the determining officer will consider, based on the following factors, the effect in the particular
case, as well as in future cases generally, which testifying or producing records will have on the ability of the
federal judiciary or federal judicial personnel to perform their official duties .
(1) The need to avoid spending the resources of the United States for private purposes, to conserve the
time of federal judicial personnel for the performance of official duties, and to minimize the federal
judiciary's involvement in issues unrelated to its mission .
(2) Whether the testimony or production of records would assist the federal judiciary in the performance
of official duties .
(3) Whether the testimony or production of records is necessary to prevent the perpetration of fraud or
injustice in the case or matter in question .
(4) Whether the request is unduly burdensome or is inappropr i ate under applicable court or
administrative rules .
(5) Whether the testimony or production of records is appropriate or necessary under the rules of
procedure governing the case or matter in which the request arises, or under the relevant substantive law of
privilege .
(6) Whether the request is within the proper authority of the party making it .
(7) Whether the request meets the requirements of these regulations .
(8) Whether the request was properly served under applicable court, administrative, or other rules .
(9) Whether the testimony or production of records would violate a statute, regulation, or ethical rule .
(10) Whether the testimony or production of records would disclose information regarding the exercise
of judicial or quasi-judicial responsibilities by federal judicial personnel in the decisional or deliberative
process .
(11) Whether the testimony or production of records would disclose confidential information from or
pertaining to a presentence investigation report or pertaining to an individual's probation, parole, or
supervised release, or would disclose any other information that is confidential under any applicable statute
or regulation .
(12) Whether the testimony or production of records reasonably could be expected to result in the
appearance of the federal judiciary favoring one litigant over another, or endorsing or supporting a position
advocated by a litigant .
(13) Whether the request seeks testimony, records or documents available from other sources .
(14) Whether the request seeks testimony of federal judicial personnel as expert witnesses .
(15) Whether the request seeks personnel files, records or documents pertaining to a current or former
federal judicial officer or employee, and (1) the personnel files, records or documents sought by the request
may be obtained from the current or former federal judicial officer or employee in question, or (2) the
personnel files, records or documents sought by the request would be made available to the requester with
the written consent or authorization of the current or former federal judicial officer or employee in question .
(16) Any other consideration that the determining officer designated in section 7(b) may consider
germane to the decision .
(b) Federal judicial personnel upon whom a request for testimony or the production of records in legal
proceedings is made shall promptly notify the determining officer designated in section 7(b) . If the
determining officer determines, upon consideration of the requirements of these regulations and the factors
listed in section 8(a), that the federal judicial personnel upon whom the request was made should not
comply with the request, the federal judicial personnel upon whom the request was made shall notify the
requester of these regulations and shall respectfully decline to comply with the request . In appropriate
circumstances -federal judicial personnel may -- through the Department of justice, or with the assistance of
retained legal counsel i f the Department of Justice is unavailable -- file a motion, before the appropriate
court or other authority, to quash such a request or to obtain other appropriate relief .
(c) If, after federal judicial personnel have received a request in a legal proceeding and have notified the
determining officer in accordance with this section, a response to the request is required before instructions
from the determining officer are received, federal judicial personnel shall notify the requester of these
regulations and inform the requester that the request is under review pursuant to these regulations . If
necessary, federal judicial personnel may -- through the Department of Justice, or with the assistance of
retained legal counsel if the Department of Justice is unavailable -- seek a stay of the request pending a final
determination by the determining officer, or seek other appropriate relief .
(d) If, in response to action taken under section 8(c), a court of competent jurisdiction or other
appropriate authority declines to stay the effect of a request pending a determination by the determining
officer, or if such court or other authority orders that the request be complied with notwithstanding the final
decision of the determining officer, the federal judicial personnel upon whom the request was made shall
notify the determining officer and shall comply with the determining officer's instructions regarding
compliance with the order or request . Unless and until otherwise instructed by the determining officer,
however, the federal judicial personnel upon whom the request was made shall respectfully decline to
comply with the order or request . See United States ex rel . Touhy v . Ragen, 340 U,S . 462 (1951) .
This is to certify that I have this day served upon the person
listed below a copy of the foregoing document by depositing in the
United States mail a copy of same inn an envelope bearing sufficient
postage for delivery :
Carl Hugo Anderson, Jr ., Esq .

Sarah Bright, Esq .
Hawkins & Parnell, LLP
4000 SunTrust Plaza
303 Peachtree Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30308
Marc A . Brown
Phillips Lytle, LLP
3400 HSBC Center
Buffalo, NY 14203

Raley & Sandifer, PC
Atlanta, GA 30326
This is to certify that I have this day served upon the person
listed below VIA Certified Mail a copy of same in an envelope
bearing sufficient postage for delivery :
William M . Windsor
Marietta, GA 30068
This 3rd day of June, 2009 .
, Z"~ / ~;
CHRIST HER J . HUBER
ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
RECEIVED IN C.CLERKS OFFICE1:09-cv-01543-WSD
Case Document 1-4 Filed 06/03/09 Page 1 of 1
U.S:R. Atlanta
uRIGINi"i'"
JUN d 3 7009
JAMES IV-TIT j`l, Clerk

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

j and MAID OF THE MIST STEAMBOAT
I r) COMPANY, LTD .,
CIVIL ACTION NO .
Plaintiffs, I Q4
.-U- _ f122
WSD
WINDSOR,
Defendants .
ORDER
Upon consideration of the United States District Judge Orinda
D. Evans' Emergency Motion to Quash Subpoena, a nd a1. 1l oppositions
and replies thereto, the Court finds that the subpoena should be
quashed, and it is hereby
ORDERED that the subpoena is QUASHED .
SO ORDERED this day of June, 2009 .
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Presented by :
zz--/
CHR TOP ER J . HUBER
Assistant U .S . Attorney
~ICI N
JS 44 ( R ev . 0 51 05 NDGA)
CIVIL COVER SHEET I 09-M 1 -0220
The J 5 44 c ivil cover sheet and th e in format ion c onta i ned herein neit he r replace nor supplem ent the fil in g a nd se rvice of p le ading s or othe r papers as required by law, except as provided by
loc al rules of c ourt. Th is form is re q uired for the use of the Clerk of Court for the p urpose of initiatin g the civi l do cket record (S EE INSTRUCT IONS ATTACHED)
(a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS
Maid of the Mist Corporation and Maid of the Alcatraz Media, L LC, Alcatraz Media, Inc . and Wil l iam M . Windsor
M ist Steamboat Company , LTD COUNT Y OF R ES ID EN CE O F F I RST L I STED D EF ENDAN T
(I N U .S . PLAIN TIFF CASES O N LY)
(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF
I ovnco'r u] 11 c MIA u M1= e rw 0=01
(c) ATTORNEYS ( F I RM NAM E, ADDRES S , AND ( ATTORNEYS (IF KN OWN)

TELE P H ON E NUMB ER)
See attached
WS D
II . BASI S OF JU RISDICTIO N III . CITIZE N SHI P OF P RINCIPAL P ARTIES
(PLAC E AN "R" IN ONE BOX FO R PL A INTIFF A ND ONE BOX FOR DEFENDANT)
( FOR D IVERS ITY CASES ONLY)
1 U .S . Governm ent X 3 Fed eral Q uestion
P lain t i ff (E1 ,S . Government Not a Party) PTF DEF PTF DE F
Cit izen of This State O 1 0 1 Incorpo rated of Princi pal P lace 0404
of Business in This State
02 U .S . Governm ent 04 D iversity Cit ize n o f Another State 02 132 Incorporated a n d P rincipa l Pl ace El 5 0 5
Defendant (In dic ate Ci tiz ensh ip of of Busi ness In Another Place
P arties in I tem II I Cit izen or Subject of a 0 3 D 3 Foreign N ation C36 C36
Foreign Country
IV . ORIGIN (PLACE AN X IN O NE BOX ON LI()

TRANSFE RR ED F ROM APPEAL TO DIST RICT
∎ I ORI G INA L o 2 R E MOVED FROM o 3 REMANDED FROM A 4 REINSTATED OR G 5 ANO T H ER DIS TRICT 136 MULTI DISTR ICT 07 JUDGE FROM
MAGI STRATE
PROCEEDING STATE COURT APPELLA T E COURT REOPENED (SPECIFY DI STR I C T) LITIGATION J UDGE J UDGMENT
V. CAUSE OF ACTIO N ( CIT E THE U.S. CIVIL STATU E UN DER WHICH YOU ARE FILI NG AND WRIT E A BRIEF S TATEMENT OF CA U S E . DO NO T CITE J URIS DICTIONAL
STATUTES UNLE S S DIVERSITY.)
Miscel laneous action to quash sub poena issued to J udge Orinda D . Evens
(IF CO M PLEX , CHECK REASON BELOW)
J 1 . Unusually large number of parties . ( ~ 6 . P roblems locating or preserving evi dence.
( ) 2. Unusually large number of claims or defenses . ( / 7 . Pending parallel investigation or actions by government.
3. Factual Issues are exceptionally complex . j ~ 8 . Multiple use of experts .
4. Greater than normal volume of evidence . ( ~ 9 . Need for discovery outside United States boundaries .
( } 5. Extended dis c overy period is needed . ( ) 10 . Existence of h ighly techni c al issues and proof .
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUN T S APPLYING IFP ~~ MAG : JUDGE (I FP)
JUDGE UDGE NATURE OF SUIT___ _ _ __„ GAUSS

{Referr a l} OF ACTION
V~i7 8 Cl 0 ..,~ C ,P`f f b

ICJ 517
VI . NATURE OFCase
SUIT1:09-cv-01543-WSD
(PLACE AN X IN ONE Document
BOX ONLY) 1-5 Filed 06/03/09 Page 2 of 3
CONTRACT - " 0 " MONT HS DISCOVERY BANKRUPTCY - " 0 " MONTHS DIS COVERY SOCIAL SECURITY - "0" MONTHS DISCOVERY
TRACK TRAC K TRACK
( ) 150 RECOVERY OF OVERPAYMENT & ( ) 422 AP PEAL 28 USC 158 ( ) 861 HIA (1395ff)
ENFORCEME NT OF JUDGEME N T ( ) 423 WIT H DRAWAL 28 USC 157 ( ) 862 BLACK LUNG (923)
( ) 152RECOVERY OF DEFAULTED STUDENT ( ) 863 DIWC (405(g))
LOANS (EXCL. VETERANS) CIVIL RIGHTS - "4" MONTHS DIS C OV ERY ( ~ 863 DIWW (405(g))
( ) 153 RECOVERY OF OVERPAYMENT OF TRACK ( ) 864 SSI D TITLE XVI
VETERAN'S BENEFITS ( ~ 441 VOTING ( ) 865 R SI (405(g))
( ~ 442 EM PLOYM E NT
CONTRACT-"4" MONTHS DISCOVERY ( ) 44 3 HO U SI NG ACCOMMODATIONS FEDERAL TAX SU IT S - " 4" MON THS
TRACK ( ) 444 WELFARE DISCOVERY TRACK
( ) 110 INSURANCE ( ~ 440 OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS { ~ 870 TAX ES (U .S . PLAI N TIFF OR
( ) 120 MARINE ( ) 445 AM ERICANS with DISA Bl.fTIES- DEF EN DE NT)
( ) 130 MILLER ACT Employment f 1 871 IRS -TH ERD PA RTY 26 USC 7608
( ) 140 NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ( ) 446 AMERICANS with DISABLITIES-
( ) 151 MEDICARE ACT Other OTHER STATUTES - " 4" MO NTHS DISCOVERY
( ) 160 STOCKHOLDER ' S SUITS TRACK
( ~ 190 OTHER CONTRACT . PRISONER PETITIONS -" 0" MONTHS ( ) 400 STATE REAPPORTIONMENT
( ~ 1 95 CONTRACT PRODUCT LIABILITY DISCOVERY TRACK ~ 430 BANKS & BANKING
{ ) 196 FRANCHISE ( ) 510 MOTIONS TO VACATE SENTE NCE { J 450 COMMERCE/ICC RATESlEC7 .
( ) 530 HABEAS CORPUS ( ) 460 DEPORTATION
REAL PROPERTY - "4" MO NTHS DIS COVE RY ( ) 535 HABEAS CORPUS DEATH PE NALTY ( ) 470 RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND
TRACK ( ) 5 40 MA N DA M US & OTHER CORRUPT ORGA N IZATIONS
( ~ 210 LAND CO N DE MN ATION { ) 550 CIVIL R IG H TS (Filed Pro Se) ( ) 480 CONSUMER CREDIT
( ) 220 FO RE C L OS URE ( ) 540 PRISON CONDITION(S) (Filed Pro Se) ( ) 490 CABLE /SATELLITE TV
( ) 230 RENT LEASE & EJECTMENT ( ) 810 SELECTIVE SERVICE
( ) 240 TORTS TO LAND PRISONER PETITIONS - " 4 " MONTHS ( ) 875 CUSTOMER CHALLENGE 12 USC
( ~ 245 TORT PRODUCT LIA B ILITY DISCOVERY TRACK 3410
( ) 290 ALL OTHER REAL PROPERTY 550 CIVIL RIGHT S (Fi led by Couns el ) ( } 891 AGRICULTURAL ACTS
( ) 5 55 PRISONERS CONDITIONS ( Fi l ed ( ) 892 ECONOMIC STABILIZATION ACT
TORTS-PE R SO NAL INJURY - "41" MONTHS byC ounsel) ( ) 893 ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
D ISCOVERY T RACK { ) 894 ENERGY ALLOCATION ACT
( ) 310 AIRPLANE FOR FEITU RElPENAtTY - "4" MONTHS { ) 895 FREEDOM OF INFORMATIO N ACT
( ~ 315 AIRPLANE PRODUCT LIABILITY DISCOVERY TRACK ( } 900 APPEAL OF FEE DETERMINATION
{ ) 320 ASSAULT, LIBEL & SLANDER } 810 AGRICULTURE UNDER EQUAL ACCESS TO
{ ) 330 FEDERAL EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY 820 FOOD & DRUG JUSTICE
{ ) 340 MARINE ( ) 625 DRUG RELATED SEIZURE OF ( ) 950 CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATE
( ) 345 MARINE PRODUCT LIABILITY PROPERTY 21 USC 881 STATUTES
{ ) 350 MOTOR VEHICLE 830 LIQUOR LAWS ( } 890 OTHER STATUTORY ACTIONS
{ ) 355 MOTOR VEHICLE PRODUCT LIAB ILITY ( ) 640 R .R . & TRUCK
( ) 360 OTHER PERSONAL INJURY 650 AIRLINE REDS . OTHER STATUTES - "8" MONTHS DIS C OVER Y
( ) 362 PERSONAL INJURY - MEDICAL 660 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETYIHEALTH TRAC K
MALPRACTICE ( ) 690 OTHER } 410 ANTITRUST
( ) 365 PERSONAL I N JURY - PRODUCT 850 SECURITIES l COMMODITIES I
LIABILITY LABOR - "4" MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK EXCHANGE
{ ) 368 ASBESTOS PERSONAL INJURY 710 FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT
PRODUCT LIABILITY J 720 LABORIMGMT . REL ATIONS OTHER STATUTES - "0" MONTHS DISCOVERY
( ) 730 LABORIMGMT . REPORTING & TRACK
TORTS - PERSONAL PROPERTY - "4" DISC L OSURE ACT ( ) A RB ITRATIO N
MONTHS DISCOVERY TRACK ( } 740 RAILWAY LABOR ACT (CON FIRMNACATEIORDERIMODIFI)
} 370 OTHER FRAUD ( ) 790 OTHER LABOR LITIGATION
( ) 371 TRUTH I N LE N DI N G 791 EMPL . RET . INC . SECURITY ACT (Note; Please mark underlying Nature o f Suit
( ) 380 OTHER PERSONAL PRO PERTY as well)
DAMAGE PROPERTY RIGHTS - "4" MONTHS
( ) 38 5 PRO PERTY DAMAGE PRO D UCT DISCOVERY TRACK
LIABILITY ( ) 820 COPY R IGHTS * PLEASE NOTE DISCOVERY
840 TRADEMARK TRACK FOR EACH CASE
TYPE . SEE LOCAL RULE
PROPERTY RIGHTS - "8" MONTHS
D ISCOVERY TRACK
26. 3
( ) 830 PAT ENT
VII . REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT :

( ) CHECK IF THIS 1 S A CLASS ACTION UNDER F . R . C iv . P . 23 DEMAND $
JURY DEMAND ( ) YES ( ) NO (CHECK YES ONLY IF DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT )

VIII . RELATED/REFILED CASE(S) IF ANY
JUDGE DOCKET NO.
CIVIL CASES ARE DEEMED RELATED IF THE PE NDI N G CASE INVOLVES : (CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX)
( ) 1 . PROPERTY INCLUDED I N AN EARLIER NUMBERED PENDING SUIT .
2 . SAME I SSUE OF FACT OR ARISES OUT OF THE SAME EVEN T OR TRANSACTION INCLUDED IN AN EARLIER NUMBE RE D
PENDING SUIT .
( )3, VALIDITY OR INFRINGEMENT OF THE SAME PATENT , COPYRIGHT OR TRADEMARK INCLUDED IN AN EARLIER NUMBERED
PENDING SU I T .
( ) 4. APPEALS ARI SING OUT OF THE SAME BANKRUPTCY CASE AND ANY CASE RELAT E D THERET O WH ICH HAVE BEE N D EC I DED BY
THE SAME BANKRUPTCY JUDGE .
( ) 5. REPETITIVE CASES FILE BY PRO SE LITIGANTS
( ) 6. COMPANION OR RELATED CASE TO CASE (S ) BEING SIMULTANEOUSLY FILED (INCLUDE ABBREVIATED STYLE OF OTHER CASE ( S) ) :
( ) 7. EITHER SOME OR ALL OF THE PARTIES AND ISSUES I N THIS CASE WERE PREVIOUSLY INVOLVED I N CASE
NO. ,
Civil Cover Sheet Attachment
(c) Attorneys
Carl Hugo Anderson, Jr ., Esq .

Sarah Bright, Esq .
Hawkins & Parnell, LLP
4000 SunTrust Plaza
303 Peachtree Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30308
404-614-7400
Marc A . Brown
Phillips Lytle, LLP
3400 HSBC Center
Buffalo, NY 14203
716-504-5755

Raley & Sandifer, PC
Atlanta, GA 30326
404-995-9000
FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE

u .s. D .c. Attanta
JUG! - 8 2 009
ATLANTA DIVISION
JAMES ". CEN, Clerl(
MAID OF THE MIST 91Y :
Dapu*y clerk
CORPORATION
STEAMBOAT COMPANY, LTD .,
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO:
V.
1 :09-MI-0220-WSD-WEJ
ALCATRAZ MEDIA, LLC,
WILLIAM M . WINDSOR,
Defendants .
NOTICE OF F ILING OF
NO TICE OF APPEARANCE O F DEFENDANT WILLIAM M. WINDSOR
Defendant William M . Windsor hereby gives notice of the filing of NOTICE
OF FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF DEFENDANT WILLIAM M .
WINDSOR, for consideration by the Court in connection with this matter .
Respectfully submitted, this 8th day of June 2009 .
%ft. ~
r
_~
William M . Windsor
Pro Se

Marietta, GA 30068
Telephone : 770-578-1094
Facsimile: 770-578-1057
Email: bill@billwindsor .com

ATLANTA DIVISION
MAID OF THE MIST

CORPORATION
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO :
V.
1 :49-MI-0220-WSD-WEJ
Defendants .
CERTIFI CATE OF DEFENDAN T
Defendant William M . Windsor hereby certifies that he has prepared the
within and foregoing document in accordance with LR 5 .1, NDGa ., and LR 7.1D,
NDGa . Specifically, Defendant certifies that he has used 14 point Times New
Roman as the font in these documents .
Respectfully submitted, this 8t' day of June 2009 .
William M. Windsor
Pro Se
3

Marietta, GA 30068
Telephone : 770-578-1094
Facsimile : 770-578-1057
Email : bill@billwindsor.com

NORTHERN DISTRI C T OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISIO N
MAID OF THE MIST

CORPORATION
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO :
V.
1 :09-MI-0220-WSD-WEJ
Defendants .
I hereby certify that on the 8th day of June 2009, I served NOTICE OF
FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF DEFENDANT WILLIAM M .
WINDSOR by depositing in the United States Mail with sufficient postage
addressed as follows :
Carl Hugo Anderson, Jr ., Esq.

4000 Suntrust Plaza
303 Peachtree Street
Telephone : 404-614-740
5
Facsimile : 404-614-7500
Email : canderson@hplegaLcom
Sarah Bright, Esq .

4000 Suntrust Plaza
Telephone : 404-614-7400
Facsimile : 404-614-7500
Email : sbright@hplegal .com
Marc W. Brown, Esq .

PHILLIPS LYTLE
3400 HSBC Center
Buffalo, NY 14203
Telephone: 716-504-5755
Facsimile : 716-852-6100
Email : mbrown@phillipslytle .com
CHRISTOPHER J . HUBER
75 Spring Street, S .W.
Telephone : (404) 581-6292
Facsimile : (404) 581-6181
Email : Unknown
Counsel for United States of America on
behalf of the Honorable Orinda Evans,
District Judge
This 8th day of June 2009 .
6
~ .
William M . Windsor
Pro Se

Marietta, GA 30068
Telephone : 770-578-1094
Facsimile: 770-578-1057
Email : bill@billwindsor .com
FILED 1~ c E~~s a~
.C. ~tfanf~F ~~
U.S .D
UNITED STATES DISTRIC T COURT JUN 8 2009

NORTHERN DIST RICT OF GEORGIA JAME~
10Ya Clark
ATLANTA DIVISION
MAID OF THE MIST

CORPORATION
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO:
V.
1 :09-MI-0220-W SD-WEJ
Defendants .
NOTICE OF APPEAR ANCE OF DEFEND ANT WILLIAM M . WINDSOR
COMES NOW DEFENDANT WILLIAM M . WINDSOR, and files this
Notice of Appearance and shows the Court as follows :
Notice is hereby given that William M . Windsor will represent himself pro
se in this matter .
The undersigned hereby requests that he receive copies of all notices, papers,
Pleadings, and orders filed or served in the above-captioned case .

Respectfully submitted, this 8th day of June, 2009 .

~ ....~
WILLIAM M. WIND SOR

Pro Se

Marietta, GA 30068
Telephone : 770-578-1094
Facsimile : 770-578-1057
2

ATLANTA DIVISION
MAID OF THE MIST

CORPORATION
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO:
V.
1 : 09-MI-0220-W SD-VVEJ
ALCATRAZ MEDIA, INC. and
Defendants .
CE RTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
As required by Local Rule 7.1D, N.D. Ga., I hereby certify that this pleading
has been prepared in Times New Roman 14-point font, one of the font and point
selections approved by this Court in Local Rule 5 .1 B, N .D. Ga.
WILLIAM M . WINDSOR
Pro Se

Marietta, GA 30068
Telephone : 770-578-1094
Facsimile : 770-578-1057
3

ATLANTA DIVISION
MAID OF THE MIST

CORPORATION
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO:
V.
1 : 09-MI-0220-W SD-WEJ
ALCATRAZ MEDIA, INC. and
Defendants .
I hereby certify that I have served the foregoing NOTICE OF
APPEARANCE OF DEFENDANT WILLIAM M . WINDSOR by depositing the
same with the United States Postal Service with sufficient postage and addressed
as follows :
CHRISTOPHER J . HUBER
ASSISTANT U .S. ATTORNEY
75 Spring Street, S .W.
Telephone: (404) 581-6292
Facsimile : (404) 581-6181
4
Email : Unknown
Counsel for United States of America on
behalf of the Honorable Orinda Evans,
District Judge
Carl Hugo Anderson, Jr., Esq.

4000 Suntrust Plaza
Telephone : 404-614-7400
Facsimile: 404-614-7500
Email: canderson@hplegaLcom
Sarah Bright, Esq .

4000 Suntrust Plaza
Telephone : 404-614-7400
Facsimile : 404-614-7500
Email: sbright@hplegal .com
Marc W. Brown, Esq.

PHILLIPS LYTLE
3400 HSBC Center
Buffalo, NY 14203
Telephone : 716-504-5755
Facsimile : 716-852-6100
Email : mbrown@phillipslytle.com
This 8th day of June , 2009.
5
WILLIAM M. WINDSOR
Pro Se

Marietta, GA 30068
Telephone : 770-578-1094
Facsimile : 770-578-1057
Email: bill@billwindsor .com

Human Rights Alert

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Rights Alert

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Digitally signed by

Human Rights Alert Joseph Zernik

11-11-12 Maid of the Mist Corporation et al v Alcatraz Media, LLC, et al (1:09-cv-01543)

2) Execution of Summons and Complaint

b) Writ of Execution, Dkt # - none

• The Writ of Execution was “issued”, but not “entered”, and

• The notion of Oral Order is false on its face.

U.S. District Court

Carl Hugo Anderson , Jr.

Sarah Louise Bright

Carl Hugo Anderson , Jr.

Sarah Louise Bright

Date Filed # Docket Text

06/08/2009 5 NOTICE Of Filing, Notice of Appearance of William M. Windsor (Attachments: # 1 Notice of

07/13/2009 Notification of Docket Correction re 34 MOTION for Reconsideration re 32 Order on Motion

PACER Service Center

2 Notice of Appearance 06/04/2009

4 Order Staying Case 06/08/2009

5 Notice of Filing 06/08/2009

7 Notice of Filing 06/08/2009

10 Notice of Filing 06/10/2009

12 Notice of Filing 06/10/2009

Case Reported Statistically 06/10/2009

14 Notice of Filing 06/15/2009

16 Notice of Filing 06/18/2009

19 Notice of Filing 06/22/2009

21 Response to Motion 06/22/2009

22 Notice of Filing 06/22/2009

24 Response to Motion 06/22/2009

25 Notice of Filing 06/22/2009

Notification of Docket Correction 06/23/2009

27 Response in Opposition to Motion 06/25/2009

28 Response to Motion 06/26/2009

29 Reply Brief 06/26/2009

30 Response in Opposition to Motion 06/29/2009

31 Response in Opposition to Motion 06/29/2009

32 Order on Motion to Quash 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion for Hearing 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion to Supplement 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion to Disqualify Attorney 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion for Hearing 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion for Hearing 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion to Disqualify Judge 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages 06/30/2009

44 Notice of Appeal 09/15/2009 02/26/2010

32 Order on Motion for Hearing 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages 06/30/2009

32 Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney 06/30/2009

Clerks Certificate of Mailing 09/03/2009

33 Clerk's Judgment 06/30/2009

Clerks Certificate of Mailing 06/30/2009

11 Motion for Hearing 06/10/2009 06/30/2009

Notification of Docket Correction 06/30/2009

Terminated Case 06/30/2009

35 Notice of Filing 07/10/2009

37 Notice of Filing 07/10/2009

Notification of Docket Correction 07/13/2009

38 Response in Opposition to Motion 07/22/2009

39 Response in Opposition to Motion 07/22/2009

Submission to District Judge 08/17/2009

Submission to District Judge 08/28/2009

Submission to District Judge 08/31/2009

42 Order on Motion for Reconsideration 09/03/2009