15.       The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is the only party able to make it illegal to use indecent wire communications and the FCC is extremely aware of this action and has the proposed supplemental complaint already.  Without the FCC, the wire frauds permitted done would continue exactly like they do now.

16.       The Plaintiff will appeal if the FCC is not allowed added as a party.  This supplemental brief should help the Court in realizing the bad-faith argument was nothing but a waste of billable time and that denial of the Joinder will be appealed the day that it is denied, in spite of this brief   The motion to certify that the Plaintiff is acting in bad-faith is asking the court to “super-deny” the motion that was already denied or denial of the order leaving no recourse for the plaintiff but to await the final rulings.  The Plaintiff will reserve appealing until the case is before the JURY or after the JURY ruling.  The May 20, 2010 order stated as follows.

The only ambiguity in the statute at issue here arises from the fact that it lists only two applicable disabilities, but contains a provision for "when two or more disabilities exist." The Court specifically addressed this ambiguity in its Order dated March 1, 2010, and found it did not inure to Neeley's benefit. Neeley offers neither factual nor legal argument that persuades the Court now to the contrary, and reconsideration on this basis will be denied.

           
17.       Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on March 1 alleged that the State ACA 16-56-116 was written prior to revisions in 1999 to no longer include prisoners in penitentiaries out-of-State. Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren addressed the ambiguity stating the Statute had been left “two or more” because it was meant at some time to protect insane minors who were in prison out-of-State. This rational did not consider the fact that there has never been an insane minor in prison anywhere in the United States to support the case stated as addressing the ambiguity.  These are almost as illogical as citing a case where denial of the motion to amend resulted in a new trial to support denial of Plaintiff’s motions to amend.  Applications of law are either logical or WRONG like these are.

18.       The claims Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren dismissed due to limitations were overruled by the Supreme Court already and were addressed as still existing in the orders on October 27, 2010 wherein NAMEMEDIA INC and Google Inc are each mentioned facing the claim of ‘cybersquatting’ together.