You wrote:

I was summoned by a bill collector and responded as per my rights under UCC 3.501. I sent
back the summons and wrote all over it, I refuse to contract, I do not accept this offer to
contract, I do not consent and I never intended to and I do not recognize you. I also wrote on
the outside of the envelope, No Signature, No Contract, No Consent. I sent a certified copy
back to the lawyer and a certified copy to the courts. and I recorded a copy at the recorder's
office showing I did not accept it within my 72 hour time frame. The court and the lawyer both
received the mail but the lawyer never signed for it and it was attempted to be delivered twice
and then they were notified it was sent back to the post office.
I received a letter from them showing they applied for default judgment because I did not answer
them. That would be expected.
I have proof via the certified mail that the mail was attempted. Also, I had sent them other
letters requesting they show me a contract and a cease and desist letter which they accepted. It
appears they purposely did not accept and sign for that letter because they knew it was my non
acceptance.
I responded to the second letter showing them proof that there were two attempts to deliver that
letter to them and no one signed for it. I also sent them copies of the recorded letter and copies of
the certified mail number to them and to the courts.
I am down to having 5 days left to respond as they said I have 10 days to respond or the
judgment will be issued.
My question is are they just trying to get me into court and get into that contract with them or
should I at this time go down and file a motion for dismissal. I also feel the summons was not
delivered correctly. They delivered it to a family friend visiting from another state. Arizona
statute says it must be delivered to someone who lives there. That is a defense against any
judgment and you need to use it.

Do I file a motion or should I see if my refusal works. I really don't want a default
judgement. Can they issue a default judgement if I responded to them by letter and to the courts
without going in and filing a response? Yes, but The court has the power to accept that as a
response. But since it does not rebut their complaint they will get a summary judgment instead
eventually. All That is what you should have expected. That is what they do under the rules.
When you are sued in court you either make some kind of response or you are in default
under the rules. You should have made and may still be able to make a:

MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT OR FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT

COMES NOW Brenda L. Miller, herein after “Affiant”, “Respondent, and, “Defendant”, for
purposes of this motion only and not as an acknowledgment of such legal position, appearing
specially to preserve any and all jurisdictional defenses that may be present in this case,
including defenses relating to lack of personal jurisdiction and lack of proper personal service as
well as preserving all defenses, thus, specially appearing in that capacity and, by and through
himself, file this his MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT OR FOR MORE DEFINITE
STATEMENT against MBNA America (Delaware) Bank, N.A., and would show unto the court
as follows, to-wit:

Defendant here affirms he does not give his consent to this action by this responsive pleading
and affirms he did not knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally enter into any contract that
may erroneously be construed as his consent to this action, and Pursuant to NY Code 38-3-
308, I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial
agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally that may erroneously be
construed as my consent to this action. And I do not accept the liability of the compelled
benefit of any such unrevealed contract or commercial agreement which may be construed as
compelling my consent to this action. And pursuant to NY Code 38-1-103 and 38- 3-308,
Defendant has and does hereby reserve all rights under common law and this code in termination
of any such contract that may erroneously be construed as establishing his consent to this action
which was not entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally by Defendant under full
disclosure that by such agreement he would be giving his consent and granting jurisdiction to
such action.

John Henry Doe directs this Court to take administrative notice of the following case law:

“Once jurisdiction is challenged it must be proven.” Hagins vs Levine 415 US 533 note
3 (1974)

There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction." Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215.
"Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time, even on final determination." (Basso v. Utah Power
& Light Co 495 2nd 906 at 910).

"The burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction." Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F2d 416.
"Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted."
Lantana v. Hopper, 102 F2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp 150.

"Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted."
Lantana v. Hopper, 102 F2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp 150.

Jane Miller Notices the court of this special appearance and that pursuant to case law cited
above, this MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT OR FOR MORE DEFINITE
STATEMENT is not to be construed as a submittal to the jurisdiction of this Court.

Defendant is aware Plaintiff has the legal recourse to withdraw this claim for whatever reasons
of its own they may so choose and Defendant here notifies the Court and the Plaintiff he will
make no opposition to it.
[[[[[ Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure 12(e) (f), (e) Motion for More Definite Statement
and (f) Motion to Strike provides If a pleading is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot
reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading, he may move for a more definite
statement. It states, “The motion shall point out the defects complained of and the details
desired. .....the court may order stricken from any pleading any insufficient defense.” ]]]]]]

[[[[[[[[CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION

435(b) (1) Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve
and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof,
436. The court may, upon a motion made pursuant to Section 435, or at any time in it discretion,
and upon terms it deems proper:
(a) Strike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted
in any pleading.
(b) Strike out all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of
this state, a court rule, or an order of the court.

437. (a) The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged
pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice. ]]]]]]]]

And [[your name]] states it is his intent to answer the complaint in full and to vigorously defend
his rights in this cause upon the clarification of the following matters sighted here or in the
alternative that this complaint would be struck as insufficient to require [[your name ]] to
formulate an answer.

By testimony in hearing, by documentary evidences not yet presently in the possession of the
Defendant, and by facts to be determined in oral examination and declarations on the
record, Defendant alleges, affirms and will show the Court Personal Service of Process and [[
conflicts in]] style of personal service are in error or at best ambiguous in legally determining
the In Personum identity, [[ location and jurisdiction]] of the Defendant in this case requiring
a more definite statement or the complaint should be struck.

By testimony in hearing, by documentary evidences not yet presently in the possession of the
Defendant, and by facts to be determined in oral examination and declarations on the
record, Defendant alleges, affirms and will show the Court Style of Service of Process in the
summons and Style of the Court in the complaint originally filed [date] are unclear and
ambiguous in establishing the legal jurisdiction of the Court in this case requiring a more
definite statement or the complaint should be struck.

By testimony in hearing, by documentary evidences not yet presently in the possession of the
Defendant, and by facts to be determined in oral examination and declarations on the
record, Defendant alleges, affirms and will show the Court Pursuant to the
Wisconsin Constitution and/or statutes there is ambiguity as to the jurisdictional standing,
nature and capacity of this Court or its officers as identified in the public records for the Court
to hear the claims of the Plaintiff requiring clarification of the Court and is a matter of which the
court is required to take judicial notice.

[your name] would show unto the Court, Plaintiff’s case results in an insufficiency of
pleadings that fails to establish standing of the Plaintiff to bring this suit and therefore is
improper and requires a more definite statement or in the alternative that this complaint
should be struck as insufficient to require [[your name ]] to formulate an answer.
This is just a template so a lot of states are named as you see. And There are other issues but
this is enough for you to get the idea. I am sure your state has such a provision in its
rules. Such a response will prevent default. When you get into hearing you can flesh out what
you are talking about here challenging jurisdiction if you know how to do it. You don’t want
to do it in writing because they can dance around that. You want the court’s failure or refusal
to establish what its jurisdiction really is on the record because they cannot legally move
forward to hear the case until they have.