- Joined
- Jul 18, 2017
Ahhh, now this is Content. Helping to pay for this is providing me more joy then my Netflix subscription. Greer files a Rule 60 motion, focusing on excusable neglect.Thanks for the notifying. Here's the doc (for everyone else):
View attachment 5834438
View attachment 5834439
View attachment 5834440
It will now.
What's the excuse, Mister Greer? Did the dog eat your homework that was due in class almost a month ago?

My neighbors live far enough away from me that we've never met, but I swear they can hear me laughing from across the fields and wood line. Greer is going with "I'm a fucking retard your honor! I'm so retarded I did not know how things work! Now here is me, the poor retard, filing a cited Rule 60 motion for excusable neglect! So retarded!"

My dude, if you wanted to go this route you would have been better off not citing anything at all and actually submitting this motion in writing, using a highlighter pen. But Greer is a special kind of retard apparently. He's the kind of retard that wants to come off as smart.

WTF does this have to do with the case Greer? This is a case for contributory copyright infringement. You aren't petitioning the Court of the United States for a restraint order, or a defamation award. You are asking the court to force Josh to pay for infringing your COPYRIGHT. What does stalking and harassment, have to do with copyright? Whether or not people laughing at you online is stalking and harassment is a seperate issue to whether or not you were economically harmed by people posting a link to a google drive containing the subject of their mockery.
Everything else in this motion is something that could have been brought up in a timely manner a MONTH ago. Its superfluous at this point.