Is #100 FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL COUR D'APPEL FEDERALE. 2 oct 01208 © § é ome— a Court File No. A-48-16 FREDERICTON, NB. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL, BETWEEN: DAVID RAYMOND AMOS Plaintiff/Respondent on Cross Appeal and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant/Appellant on Cross Appeal SSS RESPONSE OF DAVID RAYMOND AMOS TO THE COSTS SUBMISSIONS OF HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN DAVID RAYMOND AMOS NATHALIE G. DROUIN P.O. Box 234 Deputy Attomey General of Canada Apohaqui, NB per: JAN JENSEN ESP 3G2 Department of Justice Suite 1400, Duke Tower 5251 Duke Street Halifax, NS B3J 1P3 ‘Telephone No: (902) 800-0369 ‘Telephone No: (902) 426-817 Fax No: (506) 432-6089 Fax No: (902) 426-2329 Email: David. Raymond.Amos@gmail.com Fil: JanJensen@justice.ge.ca Plaintiff on his own behalf Counsel for the DefendantOVERVIEW 1. The Administrator of the Federal Court of Appeal (The COURT) is well aware that Her Majesty the Queen (The CROWN) and David Raymond Amos (AMOS) on July 18th, 2018 received the latest corrections of the Judgment and the Reasons for Judgment of The Honourable Mr. Justice Webb, The Honourable Mr. Justice Near and The Honourable Madam Justice Gleason dated October 30, 2017. This was the fourth attempt of the COURT to correct its errors before AMOS could submit an application for an Appeal of this matter to the Supreme Court of Canada in a timely fashion as per its rules which should have been on or about September 18th, 2018. However this latest malicious action of the CROWN appears to have delayed the plaintiff's pursuit of justice in a higher court until sometime after October 20th, 2018. FACTS 2. True AMOS talked to Mr. Bruce Preston after receiving his directions and strongly suggested that he read what the CROWN had submitted and compare it to the facts of this matter. 3. True. The exhibits attached to Lorri Warner's Affidavit are used in support 4. False. Whereas he is named within the motion the CROWN wished to dispute. (Exhibit "A") Justice René LeBlanc was well aware of his conflict of interest with AMOS. Justice Leblanc falsely claimed that he had no idea of copy of the wiretap tape on file in the docket of Federal Court even though Andrew Baumberg a lawyer acting on behalf of the COURT admitted to its existence in writing (Exhibit "E').5. False. AMOS made no such motion whatsoever. 6. False. The COURT was responding to the actions of the CROWN. 7. False The contents of the Appeal Book were contested because of the conflict of interest with Justice David Stratus while the Canadian Judicial Council was ignoring the concerns of AMOS and merely telling him to file another lawsuit. 8. False The memorandum was filed and served one day late merely because AMOS had miscalculated the days in a month. However the CROWN has never corrected its signed Motion to Dismiss on behalf of the wrong party and never did sign its Motion to begin again de novo yet the COURT ignored its mistakes. 9. True. Justice Webb did dismiss the appeal for being one day late and no doubt never read the memorandum explaining the delay even though he should have been made aware of his own conflict of interest with AMOS for months. (Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "E"). 10. True 11. True. The COURT should have studied very closely every document that was properly filed and then complained of by the CROWN within Exhibit "M"