Well-Pleaded Complaints
@timorous.cishet.net
The Lady With The Hammer. Lawyer, Jersey City Enjoyer. 🏳️⚧️
Signal: @tornando.27
Signal: @tornando.27
came home from the city to a small very dead bird on the bedroom floor. cats milling around like nothing ever happened, who knows where that bird corpse came from, etc
they’re a menace to society
they’re a menace to society
November 8, 2025 at 8:07 PM
came home from the city to a small very dead bird on the bedroom floor. cats milling around like nothing ever happened, who knows where that bird corpse came from, etc
they’re a menace to society
they’re a menace to society
my franchise: exercised
November 2, 2025 at 7:03 PM
my franchise: exercised
second the notion
October 27, 2025 at 4:12 AM
second the notion
i think i’m going to need this later
October 8, 2025 at 5:15 PM
i think i’m going to need this later
So in James’s case it should make no difference that the property she allegedly got “by fraud” (🙄) was in EDVA. She has to have transmitted the forms in EDVA for there to be venue for § 1014.
October 7, 2025 at 9:58 PM
So in James’s case it should make no difference that the property she allegedly got “by fraud” (🙄) was in EDVA. She has to have transmitted the forms in EDVA for there to be venue for § 1014.
CA4 decided this year in a case called U.S. v. Mosby that venue for mortgage fraud (18 USC § 1014) lies only in the district in which the alleged false statement is submitted to the lender. Not where it’s written or signed. cases.justia.com/federal/appe...
![Of particular relevance to this appeal, in Sterling we held that "[a]cts which are
merely 'preparatory' to the underlying offense and its essential conduct... cannot provide a basis for venue." Id. (quoting United States v. Ramirez, 420 F.3d 134, 144 (2d Cir. 2005) (finding that for purposes of mail fraud, venue lies where an individual actually misuses the mails, and not where an individual only devises a scheme to defraud)). That is, preparatory conduct does not satisfy the first step of the venue inquiry because it is not the type of essential conduct that is required for the establishment of venue.
The controlling authority to discern the line between essential conduct and mere preparatory conduct for § 1014 is our decision in Reass v. United States, 99 F.2d 752 (4th Cir. 1938). In Reass, we reversed a defendant's conviction for violating 12 U.S.C.
§ 1441(a) (1932 ed.), the predecessor to § 1014. See United States v. Wells, 519 U.S. 482, 492 (1997) (discussing the history of § 1014). At the time, § 1441(a), criminalized knowingly making a false statement "for the purpose of influencing in any way the action of a Federal Home Loan Bank upon any application for loan." Reass, 99 F.2d at 752. In Reass, the defendant was convicted by a jury in the Northern District of West Virginia for preparing, filling out, and signing a fraudulent loan application, and then submitting it in person to a federal bank in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Id. at 753.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:mdildjyarhgkorvfh6kncavc/bafkreieaebt7kicdi2jvukt5564sgqhppifvjjsfqgzf2wjmoktlolcw4m@jpeg)
![Therefore, to establish venue pursuant to Sterling, the jury here had to find that Appellant transmitted the Gift Letter to her Florida mortgage lender from the District of
Maryland. Preparatory acts, such as preparing, filling out, or signing the Gift Letter do not suffice.
Applying this framework, the district court's venue instruction to the jury was erroneously overbroad. By instructing the jury that "filt [wals sufficient to [establish venue] if any act in furtherance of the crime occurred within the District of Maryland," J.A. 2439, the district court permitted the jury to establish venue based on mere preparatory acts.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:mdildjyarhgkorvfh6kncavc/bafkreibyator6h3dg3wexknoylxuumbnr5vpadhg56jtwsb3pgxl6465xm@jpeg)
October 7, 2025 at 9:58 PM
CA4 decided this year in a case called U.S. v. Mosby that venue for mortgage fraud (18 USC § 1014) lies only in the district in which the alleged false statement is submitted to the lender. Not where it’s written or signed. cases.justia.com/federal/appe...
there’s no way to make the radish cakes look appetizing but they are a perfect little snack
October 6, 2025 at 11:55 PM
there’s no way to make the radish cakes look appetizing but they are a perfect little snack
Judge Immergut didn’t leave that loophole, I think. although it’d be very funny if they try Title 32 troops next (“your honor, they’re not federalized!”)
October 6, 2025 at 4:39 AM
Judge Immergut didn’t leave that loophole, I think. although it’d be very funny if they try Title 32 troops next (“your honor, they’re not federalized!”)
I think paragraph 7 of KJI’s new TRO makes it substantially more likely it’ll get treated like a preliminary injunction by appeals courts
October 6, 2025 at 4:37 AM
I think paragraph 7 of KJI’s new TRO makes it substantially more likely it’ll get treated like a preliminary injunction by appeals courts
new TRO granted restraining Ds from deploying any NG from anywhere into Portland
October 6, 2025 at 3:22 AM
new TRO granted restraining Ds from deploying any NG from anywhere into Portland
“this is Judge Immergut Jake are we ready to go”
October 6, 2025 at 2:49 AM
“this is Judge Immergut Jake are we ready to go”
sometimes if you need something done you gotta do it yourself
October 6, 2025 at 1:31 AM
sometimes if you need something done you gotta do it yourself
christ of course this guy is the Ward E councilman
October 4, 2025 at 3:36 AM
christ of course this guy is the Ward E councilman
“ok grandpa let’s get you to bed”
October 3, 2025 at 11:47 PM
“ok grandpa let’s get you to bed”
Ed didn’t fast at all but he still had complaints
October 3, 2025 at 2:45 AM
Ed didn’t fast at all but he still had complaints
me too, buddy, me too
September 28, 2025 at 6:25 PM
me too, buddy, me too
OK so the H1-B proclamation cites 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) (important bits below):
September 19, 2025 at 11:07 PM
OK so the H1-B proclamation cites 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) (important bits below):
/Mosby/ (cases.justia.com/federal/appe...) isn’t perfectly clear on this point but I think the government would be on thin ice if James wasn’t in EDVA when she submitted the form in question
![“Therefore, to establish venue pursuant to Sterling, the jury here had to find that Appellant transmitted the Gift Letter to her Florida mortgage lender from the District of Maryland. Preparatory acts, such as preparing, filling out, or signing the Gift Letter do not suffice.
Applying this framework, the district court's venue instruction to the jury was erroneously overbroad. By instructing the jury that "filt [wals sufficient to [establish venue] if any act in furtherance of the crime occurred within the District of Maryland," J.A. 2439, the district court permitted the jury to establish venue based on mere preparatory
acts.”](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:mdildjyarhgkorvfh6kncavc/bafkreica76soo6ywxgvwkabueewgnrlxzuw5nrt2owcjmam33v6zgmj5ee@jpeg)
September 17, 2025 at 1:19 PM
/Mosby/ (cases.justia.com/federal/appe...) isn’t perfectly clear on this point but I think the government would be on thin ice if James wasn’t in EDVA when she submitted the form in question
if I were a MDFL clerk I would have a draft OSC on my judge’s desk by morning to show why this shouldn’t be yeeted to SDNY/SDFL. this is ludicrous venue pleading
September 16, 2025 at 4:23 AM
if I were a MDFL clerk I would have a draft OSC on my judge’s desk by morning to show why this shouldn’t be yeeted to SDNY/SDFL. this is ludicrous venue pleading
