TONEY CONKES Oa pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. B. Suit Pending Before Judge Hittner Less than a week after filing this suit, Plaintiff Carol Davis filed a separate action in this Court before Judge Hittner, under Cause No. 4:08-cv-02784. A copy of the complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. The allegations in that case mirror the allegations in the instant case and involve the same irrational conspiracy theory. C. Reasons for O'Quinn's Appearance The O'Quinn Defendants have appeared in this case out of an abundance of caution, They are not specifically named in the caption or the body of the complaint, but Plaintiff has referenced them as a party in the caption of her October 7, 2008 certificate of financially interested parties, and the Clerk's Office has designated The O'Quinn Law Firm as a party on its PACER information screen. For that reason, the O'Quinn Defendants have appeared in this case.’ D. The Complaint Fails to State a Claim and Should Be Dismissed This case should be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, not only because the law provides no relief for Plaintiff's irrational grievances, but also because she has not, and cannot possibly, frame propgr pleadings to seek relief for her illogical complaints. See Walker v. South Central Bell Telephone Co., 904 F.2d 275, 277 (5th Cir. 1990). " The O'Quinn Defendants’ only connection to Plaintiff is that Plaintiff's ex-husband was previously represented by a firm lawyer in a car wreck case, Her ex-husband was not actually represented by John M. O'Quinn & Associates, P.L.L.C.; he was represented by a separate O'Quinn legal entity atthe time. 2 SouRCE-~ 4-08- ev- OA7E4 © 4 pga Lectrote 1-(WithieR fon se saa: ol Ai al, -A2RIQ fe tat\ fail Sourkee ~ $-08 -aV