In the Douglas County Court House state of Oregon

Plaintiff ; STATE of OREGON ”A corporateFiction”

“Not a real party of interest”

[“MICHEAL LEE WARD©”is the corporate legal fiction in all caps]

Micheal Lee Ward© in pro pia persona the living man on the land,

(Is Never the surety and never the trustee for the legal fiction state in all capital
letters”)

I me a living man on the land not on the Sea,not on the water

Doe’s Hereby submit this; in propia persona , ‘Sui Juris’

“A,, FORMAL CHALLENGE OF JURISDICITON, “

:”without prejudice by UCC1-308 (replaced 207)” “Non Assumpsit” “Exempt from
LEVY, “ “No assured value” “Unconscionable contracts” “without recourse”

Attention;

“I, me the man am here by special appearance only, in propia persona, to

Challenge jurisdiction of agency

“without prejudice by UCC1-308”formerly UCC1-207 reserved”

“ Agency of state is a commercial charter of Maritime jurisdiction; I hereby

refute agency terms of uniform commercial code 3-104 “Promise” and reject
“Unconditional” instruments as “Unconscionable” at UCC2-302
I me the man remain in propia persona having exercised The remedy

“without prejudice by UCC1-308 is proof of “dishonor” of negotiable instrument is

in dispute or fraudulently represented. I submit“There is No Contract”

“If no contract exists, there cannot be an “action”” to force acceptance of

obligation” “I remain in pro pia persona , “the terms “ {“both spoken out loud on
video arraignment“} “Without prejudice by UCC1-308 formerly UCC1 207” has
reserved all rights, ,and is same as when written above my signature ” is sign and
proof of dishonor by fraudulent unconscionable contracts” this places burden of
proof upon the agency.

My individual “Propia persona “terms are non- negotiable with agent/police

power upon them and must be accepted,. I

me the Citizen, is then protected by the very statute meant to subject him,

to jurisdiction of commercial agency for same is “non assumpsit”. “Agency

charter must follow U.C. Code or suffer the wrath of their father. “

Whenever the citizen is aware of a controversy regarding agency practice, they

may elect to protect their in pro pia persona citizenship status.

By Writing/autograph or signature upon a “required” “Unconscionable” unit of

“without prejudice by UCC1-308”, will render the unit non assumpsit and reserves
ALL rights upon the instrument. Their non assumpsit does not grant “satisfaction
and accord to agency. Thereby no expectation or “promise” at UCC3-104.3

I, me a man Do hereby remain in propia persona, Further declares “That when

The reservation of ALL rights Without Prejudice by UCC1-308 (replaced 207)”
means That “I have reserved ALL my rights including but not limited right to
contract, includes my Right ”Not to be compelled to perform Under Any Contract
or Commercial Agreement “ “That I did NOT Enter knowingly, with full disclosure,
voluntarily and intentionally.” “I do NOT Accept The Liability of the compelled
Benefit” ” of any Unrevealed Contract or Agreement”. Unconditional contracts
are “Unconscionable”
, to declare this matter VOID AB Initio on it face from the beginning due to your
tres passes upon rights dereliction of duty by oath and bad faith, fraudulent ultra
vire acts under color of law color of right.

I me the man remains in propia persona to Further declare ,;

“That the recourse Appears in the Uniform Commercial Code at 1-103.6 , (reads)
The CODE is complimentary to the common law, which remains in force, except
where displaced by the CODE, “Statute should be construed in Harmony with the
common law, unless there clear legislative intent to abrogate the common law
(UCC1-103.6. The supreme law of the land is the Constitution and Common law
remains in force here where recognized by the CODE if it did not recognize the
common law,{ the government would be obliged to enter the bankruptcy
information in the record” } I my insist that “the statutes by construedin harmony
with the common law. “Meaning “There can be NO CRIME WITHOUT AN Injured
Party of real interest” There can be no sanctions or penalty for this reservation of
a Right, Sherar V. Cullen

THIS COURT TRIBUNAL COMMERCIAL AGENCY HAS NO AUTHORITY OVER I,ME

THE MAN IN PROPIA PERSONA “the SECURED PARTY CREDITOR NOT THE FICTION
DECLARES YOU HAVE NO JURISDICTION, FROM THE FIRST MOMENT OF TRES PASS
DEPRIVATION OF A RIGHT IS OBSTRUCTION OF MY DUE PROCESS REMOVED ALL
JURISDICTION From the instruments and court, AND ANY ACTION THEREAFTER IS
ARBITRARY UNDER COLOR OF LAW COLOR OF RIGHT IN ULTRA VIRES,
CORAMNON JUDICE AND VOID AB INITIO,

MY BUSINESS HERE IS FINISHED ON THIS CASE #15CR 07872 IS A VOID ON ITS

FACE VOID VOID , VOID, NOT VOIDABLE BUT VOID A NULLITY WITHOUT POWER
WITHOUT AUTHORITY AND YOU HAVE NO CLAIM OF SUBSTANCE OVER ME,

“NO CONTRACT EXISTS”

BE NOTICED THAT NOTICE TO AGENT ISNOTICE TO PRINCIPLE AND VICE VERSA, IF

YOU OR ANY OFFICER OF THE COURT FROM THIS MOMENT ATTEMPT TO ACT
FURTHER ON THIS VOID MATTER IT WILL BE CAUSE FOR LIQUIDATION OF ALL OF
YOUR BONDS, INSURANCE, PROPERTIESPOSSESION BANK ACCOUNTS,
RETIREMENTFUNDS INVESTMENT FUNDS OR PENSIONS FOR MY REMEDY FOR TRE
PASS, THEREFORE MY BUSINESS HERE IS FINSIHED SO I SHALL LEAVE AND TAKE
MY FAMILY WITHME NOW. GOOD DAY WE ARE FINISHED.

challenge jurisdiction on this VOID Matter due to your repeated tres pass actions
of bad faith depriving me of rights from the beginning under color of law color of
right in ultra vires and are coramnon judice, without authority are VOID

This matter case # 15CR 07872 is VOID a Nullity, VOID AB initio on its face from
the beginning. VOID. Not voidable but VOID. There is no contract,

I me, am a man am here by special appearance only in propia persona,

as only a flesh and blood and bone man living on the land NOT on THE
SEA, as only a man living under common law on land may do, I claim all
of my protected liberties unalienable rights of the original constitution
of 1789 adopted 1791, and the honorable bill of rights attached
thereto. Including my rights to contractor or not to contract, and my
rights to identify myself as the living man appearing in the flesh am one
of the FREE Sovereign and independent people of the continental
united states, ”take notice “that I, me, a man do not understand
Chinese or legalese or secret law language of the dead, “I, me the living
man, Only speak or communicate with the living as only a living man
can do” I, me the man do not accept being identified by or as the NAME
IN ALL CAPITOL LETTERS, , me the living man am the secured party
creditor fo that account , I, me the man do not ever accept any role as
the SURETY or trustee for that name in all capital letters “MICHEAL LEE
WARD”[the estate] , because I, me the man am “NOT THE DEFENDANT
IN ALL CAPITOL LETTERS, I am the secured party creditor of that
account,

THAT ESTATE is A PRIVATE PROPERTY. And I do not wish to consent to

fraudulent probate behind my back. In fact, “I, me the LIVING MAN
here on the land, in propia persona DO NOT ACCEPT ANY ROLES AS
TRUSTEE OR SURETY. “ I am one of the beneficiaries of that Legal fiction
with an established substantial lien with controlling interest against the
fiction.

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 cranch) 137, 180 (1803)“The particular

phraseology of the constitution of the united states confirms and
strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to ALL written
Constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is “VOID”, and
courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument “ ‘In
declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the constitution
itself” is first mentioned; and not the laws of the united states
generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the
constitution, have that rank.

Schuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683., 1687 (1974) Note; by
law, a judge is a state officer. The judge then acts not as a judge, but
as a private individual (in his person). When a judge acts as a tre
passer of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge
lose subject matter jurisdiction and the judges orders are not voidable
BUT VOID , Ab initio, and of no legal force or effect in law.

The U.S. Supreme court stated that “when a state officer acts under a
state law in a manner violative of the federal Constitution, he comes
into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is
in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is
subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct.
The state has no power to impart to him any immunity from
responsibility to the supreme law of the land, authority of the united
states. “note whenever it mentions the law or the constitution it
means the supreme law of the land.”

Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) “alegations such as those

asserted by petitioner, however in artfully pleaded, are sufficient”
Which wehold toless stringent standards than formal pleading drafted
by lawyers”

[For Civil suits : Jenkins v. McKiethen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959) Picking
v. Pennsylvania R. Co “when plaintiff pleads (pro se) sui juris in suit for
protection of civil rights “The court should endeavor to construe
plaintiff’s pleadings without regard to technicalities.}

Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) “ the practice of law is a common

right. “Because of what appear to be lawful command on the surface,
many citizens because of their respect for what appears to be a lawful
command on the surface, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
rights due to ignorance” “Where there is no contract there is no
authority or judicial commercial power, Fraud vitiates everything US v.
Throckmorton.

On FRAUD and fictions

U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at 187 (1956) Supreme court of the united
states 1795 “inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an
abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can
interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having
neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and
attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that
NO government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc, can
concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and
the contracts between them.

I, me the living man, still remaining in propia persona am NOT A

CORPORATION OR LEGAL FICTION, Declares, I live, I breathe, I am the
living man, here by special appearance only, to challenge jurisdiction of
agency Without Prejudice by UCC1-308 formerly UCC1-207 Agency of
state is commercial charter of maritime jurisdiction,; I hereby refute
agency terms of uniform Commercial code 3-104 “promise” and reject
“Uncondtional” instruments as “Unconscionable” at UCC2-302.

Take notice herein that I am NOT an inhabitant as defined by the

Definitive Treaty of Peace 1783, one of those owed "essential
governmental services" under Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the
1789 Constitution, I am guaranteed the right of expatriation by the
Expatriation Act of 1868, the retention of your native political status
by the Geneva Convention Protocols of 1949, Laws of War, Volume II,
Article 3, and the right of Self-Declaration guaranteed by the United
Nations Universal Right of Self-Declaration.

I remain in propia persona I do further inform the court that the

essential government services which are owed to; me the man do not
allow consent for “you”, or this court of defrauding me, or mis—
administering my estate, by secret Probate behind by back without my
consent, or mischaracterizing I, me the man the living man in propia
persona as an inhabitant of the District of Columbia or any "federal
Territory" whatsoever. Or to “You, this Court to commit fraud by
misidentifying me, the living man, as a corpse, or corporation, or legal
fiction “EVER” (The dead can only communicate with the dead, I me,
the man am not dead) I am Not a corporation.

I must clearly state that I, me a man in propia persona by special

appearance only, I am the only one having any first hand knowledge of
my nature, intentions, motivations, will or any other matter of fact
concerning I me the man and that every word dropping from my living
lips is to be understood by the court as a Matter of Fact and all else that
anyone may say is only immaterial hearsay and presumption.

Further I me the man in propia persona am fully Exempt from All LEVY,

and any vessels in commerce operated in my name are tax pre-paid.

I travel for private purposes not for hire, and NON commercially and
who can say otherwise? I me the man in propia persona do hereby
state Matters of Fact known only to me myself the man on a firsthand
basis. All else is hearsay and presumption. I may add that the court's
presumption of jurisdiction over me the man and or my property are in
violation of both the Public Law and The Constitution and will not be
respected as anything but attempted personage and fraud against one
of their Priority Creditors and Benefactors.

I me the man, am a Priority Creditor of the court, the banks and the
corporations they employ, having the absolute right to offset any thing
that I me, the man may owe anybody against all that they already owe
me the man and I do hereby formally and properly wish by demand this
court honor the benefit of my exemption.

And further for the record

” Notice You may NOT Presume or Assume I, me the living man, has
consensually agreed to be subjected to the statutory law. I do not
consent ever, as my right to contract or not to contract I do not
contract with you.’ Without prejudice by UCC1-308 formerly 1-207,”
“non assumpsit”, “Unconscionable” and “without recourse”

“You” may NOT presume, that I, me the man have consensually agreed
“to be obligated for the debts of any legal fiction person which have
been created and named after them by third parties secretively
operating in a private capacity and merely claiming to represent, I me
the man living man is identity theft by a fiction and fraud upon the
court, I remain in propia persona am a victim of this fraud. “

This is your due notice that I, me the man in propia persona am one of
many of the living people inhabiting on the Continental land of the
united states, “NOT UPON THE WATER NOT UPON THE SEA”, thereby
“UCC1—103.6 applies supreme law of the land here I me the man here
by special appearance only presenting myself in propia persona as only
the living flesh man or woman can do,. And further that I me, the man
May NOT be addressed as if I belong to , or are responsible for, or
indebted in behalf of any legal fiction personas operated under my
given names by any international corporation> or by any spelling or
derivative whatsoever.!”
Any continuance or argument of any such claims and repugnant
practices will be deemed immediate cause to liquidate, all of your
bonds, insurance investment funds, certificates of deposit, retirement
funds, pensions, investments, other homes lands, stocks, boats, cars,
trucks, airplanes, jewelry and any and all properties of value which are
to be held in due course having been accepted for value herein and are
now held in due course for my remedy ,

I am self governed, I me a man obeying public Law of the Continental

United States including Revised statute 2561 and the Constitution.
Please respect the established jurisdictions of air, land, and sea---- and
be aware that YOU may be arrested and fined or worse for failure to do
so.

Here are the orders of the POPE Francis, that ALL “Public officials” that
are under the jurisdiction of the Vatican City do no longer have
immunity for the crimes they commit, primarily judges in America
which includes the BAR association.

I further give notice here regarding another case involving my name

and you Mr. William Marshall void judgment of June 20 2014, and make
challenge of jurisdiction and contract upon due diligence and due
process of that void act coramnon judice act as well. By denial of
indigent status for response by Court Clerks refusal to record any
documents for I me the man, and by Judge garrisons denial to waive
fees for response due to indigent status for custody case which was
adjudged by fraud upon the court by Plaintiff Amber Worthen. I submit
copies of the letter form the Douglas County Clerk Pat Hitt, admission of
denial to record documents affidavits and practicing law without a
license and obstruction of due process. In the matter of 14DO413CU.
Judgment is therefore VOID AB INITIO on its face from the beginning
and I me the man do hereby Demand the record be set right by
declaration of ruling finding s by USDC Court. To restore remedy I
submit my Ex-Amber Worthen has had unlawful custody of our child of
our loins which is my superior claim to custody and all parental rights
over and above any and all assumed rights of the state. Which I have
never waived parental rights or custody.

I me the man by special appearance only present myself in propia

persona in regards to VOID ACT 15CR07872 AND VOID ACT JUDGMENT
14DO413CU ARE BOTH VOID AB INITIO As to any argument regarding
the custody of my Child Sidney Mikella Ward from THIS VOID Judgment
14DO413CU is VOID for lack of jurisdiction and VOID on its face ab initio
for fraud upon the court. , all of; I me the mans biological children are
my creation, from my loins accepted and supported by I me the man,
belonging only to I me the man, and are not entrusted to anyone or
any-thing else by I me the man in propia persona; and that is a Matter
of Fact not subject to any fictitious claim or interpretation by the
court.

. Driving without a license? You were traveling for private purposes

and who can say otherwise? I ME THE MANIN PROPIA PERSONA am
stating Matters of Fact known to me, I me the man on a firsthand basis.
All else is hearsay and presumption. The right to operate a motor
vehicle privately and not for commercial purposes is a right NOT a
privilege and cannot be taken by any city, county or state void act pot
deface null and void laws which are notwithstanding unconstitutional.
And further to deny any protected right or liberty is obstruction of due
process and removes all jurisdiction and fraud vitiates everything.

And to all of the above aforesaid and more you I me the man may add
that the court's presumption of jurisdiction over me the man and my, I
me the mans property are in violation of both the Public Law and The
Constitution and will not be respected as anything but attempted
personage and fraud against one of their Priority Creditors and
Benefactors.

. Let the facts be known “you, this charade of a court is a tribunal

having no authority over the freeman sovereign I me the man, declare
these facts plainly and clearly so there is no further confusion or frauds
upon the court regarding I , me the man,

What this court you sir, Mr Williams have acted in Bad faith under
color of law color of right is FRAUDULENT DECEPTION of another
person, the intentional or malicious refusal to perform some duty or
contractual obligation. When the rights of someone else are
intentionally or maliciously infringed upon, such conduct demonstrates
bad faith. A government official who selectively enforces an
unconstitutional law against the members of a particular group or race
is thereby violating the civil rights of these individuals, is acting in bad
faith. I am of low income but have reserved all of my rights therefore to
declare my sovereignty is my right to declare and only my right.

Intentional dishonest act by not fulfilling legal or contractual obligations

thru bad faith, misleading another,, entering into an agreement without
the intention or means to fulfill it, or violating basic standards of
honesty in dealing with others. Most states recognize what is called
“Implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing” which is breached
by acts of bad faith, for which a lawsuit may be brought (filed) for the
breach (Justas one might sue for breach of contract) the question of
bad faith. Duplicity, dishonor, dereliction of duty, false pretension, false
swearing, of oath”, disloyalty to the states warring against the states by
perjury of oath, mala fides, misfeasance, misrepresentation double
dealing, recantation of oath of office to so perform all duties so as not
to deprive one of a right, sedition , subversive activity, violation of
allegiance, violation of duty and turpitude

Is more than rude and disrespectful it is “unconscionable” and is an tres

pass upon my rights, I me the man. and is a false claim being made
against myself and my property,

I me, the man am outraged by your dereliction’s of duty to defend my

perfect rights and liberties, by acts of sedition malicious prosecution
and tres pass, by tres pass upon my rights and conspiracy of any two or
more who are complicit against rights obstructing my due process and
rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness unfettered unmolested
degenerate gangsters in uniform pretending to have authority in
arbitrary acts of crime against I, me the man and the peoples, by pirates
on the highways and the land.

“How dare you, Quo Warranto” By What authority? You have No power
or authority over I me the man, because you have no authority or
absolute arbitrary powers over the freeman sovereign in America living
on the land of the free republican governed states

But I, me the man declares that once any person or judge judicial
ministerial who fails to defend the protected liberties rights of the
supreme law of the land is in trespass upon rights all jurisdiction is
removed and should dismiss. Any action or judgment after this fact are
under color of law color of a right and are in ultra vires, and are
coramnon judice. VOID AB INITIO (not merely voidable, but void from
the beginning)

further on the the 15th of October 2015, I me the man here by special
appearance only, did in fact challenge the jurisdiction on this matter
due to Mr William Marshall did in fact on record of video arraignment
september 11th 2015 I believe, did tres passes upon my rights protected
liberties of and in the constitution, of 1789 adopted 1791. By threats
coercion and obstruction and conspiracy against by two or more
parties, lost all jurisdiction. SEE Melo v. US 505 F2d 1026 the court lacks
jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but rather,
should dismiss the action.

All courts and judges judicials or ministerial are bound to give legal
effect to all public acts, in all courts in the united states of America by
the supreme law of the land.

“if we know the truth we must tell it if we don’t we must learn it, it is
critical to our spirit. It is not the function of government to keep the
citizen from falling into error , it is the function of the citizen to keep
the government from falling into error” America communications Ass’n
Douds v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382,442 All judges judicials officers of the
court are deemed to know the law.they are to respond in damages
“which means you sir are in debt to I me the man, you owe me, the
man injury by tres pass and damages

The law, and whenever it says the law it means the supreme law of the
land, just so were clear, the law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear
on the record of the administrative proceedings “Hagans v. Lavine, 415
U.S 533
As you know sir, “Fraud Vitiates everything, even the most solemn
contracts, documents and even judgments, US V. Throckmorton you
may also read US v.Lopez and Hagans v Levine US both VOID due to
lack of jurisdiction. In both cases void,

A judgment rendered by a court without personal jurisdiction over the

defendant is VOID it is a nullity.[A judgment shown to be void for lack
of personal service on the defendant is a nullity. [sramek v sramek, 17
kan. App. 2d 573, 576,77, 840 p 2d 533 (1992) , rev denied 252 Kan.
1093 (1993)

“A court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot

make a VOID Proceeding valid. I t is clear and well established that a
Void Order can be challenged in any court” Old Wayne Mut,L Assoc.v
McDonough, 204 US 8,27 S. Ct 236 (1907)

There is no discretion to ignore lack of jurisdiction Joyce v US 474 2d

215.

Court must prove on the record , all jurisdiction facts related to the
jurisdiction asserted” Latana v Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v New
York 37 F Supp. 150The law provides that once state and federal
jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven” Main v Thiboutot
100, S. Ct 2502 (1980)

“Jurisdiction can be challenged at anytime” and jusidiction, once

challenged cannot be assumed and must be decided. Basso vUtah
power & light co. 495 F 2d 906, 910.
The defense of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter may be
raised at any time even on appeal” Hill top developers v Holiday pines
service corp. 478 So 2d 368 (Fla 2nd DCA 1985)

The Treaty of Paris being referenced in this declaration of freedom

from color of law color of rights actions against I me the man is the final
one known as The Definitive Treaty of Peace, Paris, 1783

If the matter goes forward do this;

, one should subpoena the certification of the act by the state supreme
court. One should also subpoena the Attorney General of the state to
testify to the constitutionality of the act.

Because the law will not be certified as constitutional, and the state
Attorney will not testify to the constitutionality of the act, nothing
remains but for the court to dismiss your case