55

IT SEEMS LIKE THIS GUY KEPT ACTING TO THIS COURT , LIKE HE DID TO THE LOWER ONES, FOR A LONG TIME THAT HE IS TRYING TO SETTLE BUT I KEEP REFUSING HIS HONEST ATTEMPTS UNTIL HE GOT THEM TO DENY MY PETITION IN SUPPORT OF HIM. IF SO, THEN ASIDE FROM HOW THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT EVEN IF THE CLAIM WAS CORRECT, THEY STUPIDLY JUDGED THINGS HERE. 

NO ONE WANTS TO REALLY REACH A PERSON WOULD ACT THE WAY THIS GUY DID. HIS ACTIONS WERE MUCH MORE FOR SHOWING THOSE WITH HIM A VERY EXAGGERATED LEVEL OF HIS TRUE READINESS TO SETTLE. THE IDIOTS DID NOT KNOW THAT THIS GUY KEEP MANIPULATING AND DRAGGING THINGS IN THE MARKET FOR YEARS AND YEARS WHILE HIDING HIS TRUE INTENTION. IN FACT, ANYONE WITH A LITTLE BIT OF THINKING WOULD HAVE SEEN HOW HIS CONTINUOUS PHONE CONTACT ATTEMPTS ACTUALLY SUPPORTS WHAT I AM SAYING HERE RATHER THAN HIS CLAIM. FOR, IF I, FOR EXAMPLE, WANT TO CONTACT SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT PICKUP HIS PHONE AND FELT INSULTED BY THAT I WOULD EITHER STOP MY ATTEMPTS TO CONTACT HIM OR TRY ANOTHER FORM LIKE THE MAIL OR EMAIL. BUT HIS INSISTENCE ON SELECTING THAT INACCESSIBLE PATH SHOWS AN ATTEMPT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE FROM ITS INACCESSIBILITY RATHER THAN ITS ACCESSIBILITY WHICH SHOWS HOW MUCH HIS REAL OBJECTIVE IS TO SHOW WILLINGNESS TO SETTLE RATHER THAN REALLY SETTLE.

NOT ONLY THAT, BUT HIS ATTEMPT TO STRETCH DEALING WITH THAT REFUSED PATH AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE BY FIRST REFUSING TO LEAVE ANY MESSAGE EMPHASIZES MORE THAT INTENTION OF HIS.

AFTER HE PLAYED HIS GAMES IN THE DISTRICT COURT HIS INTEREST FOR THE REMAINING PATH BECAME TO COVER FOR WHAT WAS DONE FOR HIM IN THAT COURT. SO, DID THAT MARKET GUY, IF HIS READINESS TO SETTLE IS ANYWHERE CLOSE TO WHAT HE CLAIMS, MISSED THAT PERIOD AND STARTED TO HAVE THAT DESIRE TO SETTLE AFTER HE UNNECESSARILY ADDED ALL THE BAD ACTIONS FROM THE APPELLATE COURT?