Here is the latest update December 7, 2009, from Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, plaintiff in a lawsuit against North Carolina Board of Elections, and Elaine F. Marshall, Secretary of State For North Carolina. Following the update is a copy of the lawsuit.

“Sullivan v. Secretary of State for North Carolina, 08CVS1076
RE:  Obama Eligibility
 
12-4-09:  Hearing on Plaintiff’s motion to amend, alter or vacate Judge Cobb’s order of October 10, 2008, dismissing subject lawsuit with prejudice.
 
Judge Cobb called the case for hearing at 11:00 AM.  Present were myself and Brandon Truman, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the Defendant.  I made my statement in support of my motion to delete the words “with prejudice” from the order dismissing the case.  I wanted this done because my filing of the second complaint against Obama’s eligibility included as defendants both the secretary of state and the board of elections.  The “with prejudice” made any future complaint against the secretary of state filed by me, including mine, moot “res judicata”. 
 
I argued that the case had been dismissed, not on its merits, but on procedural arguments from the State.  I argued that the order had been drafted by the State’s attorney at the request of the judge, and that the term “with prejudice” had not been the subject of any discussion during the hearing on the complaint.  Further, the Rule governing dismissals makes it clear that dismissals for procedure in first complaints typically are considered to be without prejudice unless otherwise noted.  Such a dismissal on a second complaint in the same matter is typically “with prejudice”.  This was my first case in the series.  I had no way of knowing whether or not the attorney put those words into the order or if the judge had done that himself; since I was not given the privilege of reviewing the proposed order prior to its being given to the judge.  I also made a “point of order” on the court’s not being properly set, since, upon information and belief, the State’s attorney did not have a proper oath of office.  I did this without argument, just for the record.
 
The State’s attorney responded that he did not recollect adding that language to his order, but he might have.  He just couldn’t be sure.  He argued that the case was not only dismissed on procedural errors, but also due to the fact that the Secretary of State has no statutory duty to do that which I requested the court to order her to do.  He also introduced the dismissal order from my second Obama case showing its mootness since Obama had already been inaugurated.  I objected to that order as being irrelevant to the instant case, but the judge allowed it. 
 
I responded that I agreed there was no statutory duty of the Secretary to do as I requested, but that there was a higher, constitutional authority to do so. 
 
Judge Cobb denied the motion, telling me in no uncertain terms that it was he who put the words “with prejudice” into the order.  I had told the State’s attorney I would not appeal this ruling prior to the hearing.  I will put all my effort into Obama II.  The denial in this case means the second case will lose the Secretary of State as a defendant, leaving only the Board of Elections to carry the ball.  Again, the only argument in that case is the constitutional duty also.  I have a hearing being scheduled for later this month or early in January to hear a similar motion to amend, alter or vacate the dismissal order from last March, 2009.  It will be heard by Judge Osmond Smith III out of Caswell County.”

Plaintiff ) NOTICE AND DEMAND ) TO AMEND FINAL

Now come I, Lt. Colonel Donald Sullivan, Plaintiff, on behalf of myself and all others similarly situated, pursuant to Rule 59(a)(7), (8) and (e) and Rule 60 (b)(2), et seq., to notice and demand this court vacate, amend or alter its final order “signed” March 16, 2009, but dated October 2, 2009, and received by me on October 6, 2009, dismissing this action. This demand is based upon the newly discovered evidence infra, and upon the sworn duty of this court to “support and maintain the Constitution and laws of the United States” (Art. VI, Section 7, NC Const.).

On November 7, 2008, and on behalf of all those similarly situated, I filed a class action complaint in this instant matter with the Pender County Clerk of Court demanding injunctive relief in the matter of the citizenship of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., his eligibility to have been a candidate on the North Carolina ballot for the office of President of the United States of America, and his eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States of America. Defendants moved for a change of venue to Wake County; Motion was granted December 1, 2008. I filed in this action a Notice and Demand for a TRO on November 26, 2008, to prevent the NC Board of Elections from certifying the vote for the offices of President and Vice-President of the United States until the defendants had certified the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of President of the United States under Article II, Section 1. The Honorable R. Allen Baddour, Jr., presiding Superior Court Judge, denied said motion for TRO on December 15, 2008. On December 19, 2008, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss my complaint in its entirety pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to mootness, res judicata, and lack of standing; and pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. I filed by mail a Motion to Amend my Notice and Demand for Injunctive Relief on December 19, 2008, seeking to add as defendants the Governor and the General Assembly, delete Para. 8.7, and delete the attachment of the claims for relief to the timing of the inauguration of the President, since the unreasonable and calculated court delays in this matter had rendered that element moot (A demand for injunctive relief being an extraordinary remedy which is normally heard immediately rather than being handled routinely as in the instant matter). On January 19, 2009, I filed a Notice and Demand for Class Certification seeking to represent all voters of North Carolina. Hearing was held on March 16, 2009, on the defendantÕs Motion to Dismiss and my Motion to Amend. On September 16, 2009, the attorney for the defendant e-mailed for my review a copy of the proposed order dismissing my case and denying my Demand. On September 21, 2009, I submitted my Objections to the Proposed Order by return e-mail. The subject order dismissing this action was issued by the Honorable W. Osmond Smith, Jr., on October 2, 2009, and dated March 16, 2009, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The final order contained no changes from that originally proposed.

The following is a statement of newly discovered evidence which was not available to me prior to the hearing on the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and which was unknown and unavailable to me at that time:

1. A syndicated report by the Associated Press, published Sunday, June 27, 2004, by the Kenyan Standard Times and available in their electronic edition for that date at http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/ap-declares-obama-kenyan-born/ . The article, though well concealed by Google, may also be found posted at http://web.archive.org/web/20040627142700/eastandard.net/headlines/news26060403.htm  The AP reporter stated the following:

“Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat…” (Emphasis added).

One would expect that an AP reporter is too professional to submit a story which was not based on confirmed sources (ostensibly the Obama campaign in this case), the inference seems inescapable: Obama himself was putting out in 2004 that he was born in Kenya. This article was not refuted by the Obama camp. Further, during that same campaign in 2004, Mr. Obama, for the record and in response to Mr. Alan Keyes’ statement that Obama was not a Ònatural born citizenÓ, stated in quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”.

2. On September 4, 2009, an Affidavit was filed as evidence in a federal case with the United States District Court in Santa Ana, California, by Mr. Lucas Smith. In this affidavit, he certified the legitimacy of a certified copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., which he had personally obtained from Kenyan records. A copy of this birth certificate was filed concurrently with the affidavit, including a baby footprint, for the man who is currently referred to as President Barack Hussein Obama. The document is a legal affidavit that declares Lucas Smith to be of sound mind and judgment. Lucas Smith could go to jail if he lied on this affidavit.

3. On November 24, 2008, the following excerpts from an article by Chelsea Schilling appeared in the World Net Daily:

“A radio interview with Kenyan Ambassador Peter N.R.O. Ogego has been widely publicized since the ambassador called President-elect Barack Obama’s Kenyan birthplace a ‘well-known’ attraction – but the embassy is now telling WND the hosts misunderstood his comments.

“On Nov. 6, only two days after the election, Detroit radio talk-show hosts Mike Clark, Trudi Daniels and Marc Fellhauer on WRIF’s ‘Mike In The Morning’ called the Embassy of Kenya in Washington, D.C., to speak with Ambassador Ogego.

“The radio hosts were surprised when their light-hearted interview with Ogego reignited suspicions that Obama may have been born in Kenya.

“An assistant to the ambassador, referring to herself only as ‘Trudy,’ confirmed today that Ogego had indeed participated in the radio interview. But she said the show made leading statements and took the following comments out of context:

‘Fellhauer: “His birthplace, they’ll put up a marker there?”

4. Here’s what it says at Obama’s web portal, Fight The Smears:

5. A letter dated 2 Februrary, 2009, from Michael Angelus to US Senator Maria Cantwell (D., VA) submitted four attachments including the following:

A. The actual text of the THIRD CONGRESS in 1795;

B. The actual text of the FIRST CONGRESS in 1790;

C. The actual text of the Constitution from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789;

D. The actual text in a January 26, 2009 letter issued by United States Senator, Mark R. Warner.

Mr. Angelus also went on to include, Òand we also witness the apparent denial in the current United States Congress to address the phrase “natural born citizen.”

The purpose of the letter is to define what the Congress has concluded “natural born citizenship” to mean. Mr. Obama fails each of these tests for being natural born as required by Article 2, Section 1.

6. Upon information and belief, as one of his first acts as the newly installed “President”, Mr. Obama issued an executive order which sealed his personal papers, documents, records, transcripts, etc. from public scrutiny.

Any act repugnant to the Constitution is void ab initio. It carries no authority and creates no law. We learn this the first week of law school. Ignorance of the law, therefore, does not apply in this matter. I demand this court do its duty to the People, to this country and to themselves and confirm the constitutionality of the Obama “Presidency”. We have seen already the unintended consequences of enthroning an apparent imposter. There will be more unless we all do our duty. Honor requires no less.

Respectfully submitted this the Twenty-Ninth Day of October, 2009.

____________________________________ Donald Sullivan, Plaintiff, sui juris Lt. Col., USAFR(R) PO Box 3061 Wilmington, NC 28406 910-617-2559

ATTN: Susan K. Nichols, Special Attorney General