1

Cody Robert Judy

Attorney Pro Se
3031 So. Ogden Ave. Suite #2
Ogden, Utah 84401
801-497-6655
___________________________________________________________________________________
DISTRICT OF UTAH UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
________________________________________________________________________

CODY ROBERT JUDY , MOTION: REQUEST
Plaintiff, FOR AMMENDED SERVICE OF PROCESS
By a Marshall or Someone Specially Appointed
28 U.S.C. 1915
v. Case No. 1:14cv00093
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA JUDGE: Honorable TED STEWART
aka BARRY SOETORO , DNC ,
ORGANIZATION FOR ACTION et al.,
Defendant(s)
__________________________________________________________________________________
Comes Now the Plaintiff, Cody Robert Judy, pro se, and submits this MOTION:REQUEST FOR
AMMENDED SERVICE OF PROCESS BY A MARSHALL OR SOMEONE SPECIALLY APPOINTED and Order for
Amended Service of Process.
ARGUMENT FOR THE MOTION REQUEST FOR AMMENDED SERVICE OF PROCESS
1- July 7
th
, Plaintiff filed the Civil Rights and Sherman/Clayton Act Complaint with the 20 Day
Summons and accompanying Order to Proceed Informa Pauperis.

2- July 8
th
Plaintiffs Motion was granted by Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead.


3- July 14
th
the Court recognized the Motion to Proceed without cost on the Docket and it was
filed on July 10
th
.

2

4- THIS COURT has denied Plaintiffs Service of Process by and through the Clerks NOTICE:
MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT upon Defendants by and through [Lauren Littlefield] an agent
of Defendant(s) who reported she was in did recognized to receive service for Barack Hussein
Obama, the Democratic National Committee, and Organization for Action who would fax it to
them in recognition of the Defendants being served the Complaint with a 20 Day Summons July
16,2014 as per the Summons directions that the individual named or an authorized agent for
them be served as was witnessed by the Return of Service signed by Ms. Judy and witnessed by
Plaintiff in an Affidavit.
5- This was also confirmed by the ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS NOTICE FOR DECISION signed by
U.S. District Judge Ted Stewart September 16
th
,2014.

6- Plaintiff has exhausted any financial ability to serve the Defendant(s) locally and has not the
resources to re-serve the Defendant(s) the Summons and Complaint, and does not believe the
Defendant(s) have been honorable in the obligation to provide an answer even if the Summons
and Complaint so served Lauren Littlefield by Ms. Judy was legally considered more of a
Request for Waiver applied by Rule 4(d) (ii)having the duty to avoid unnecessary expenses of
serving the summons subject to service under Rule 4(h) [to an officer, a managing or general
agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process.]

7- Defendants are well equipped with lawyers that could draft their own Waiver of service
having been notified of the Complaint and Summons by delivery and the witness of the RETURN
OF SERVICE and may have also been granted 60 days to respond but they have chosen not to do
this and instead avoid the SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT at least delivered to them through their
agent Lauren Littlefield by Plaintiff by and through Ms. Judy pursuant to F.R.C.P 4(h) (1) (B).

8- Defendants failure to recognize the SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT so served, and the Courts
Orders, severly handicaps the Plaintiff in the justice of the case filed with a violation of the U.S.C.
and Federal Acts this Court is authorized and has jurisdiction over.

9- According to F.R.C.P Rule 4(i)(4) Extending time the Court may authorize a party a reasonable
time to cure its failure of SERVICE as the Plaintiff has been notified of the Courts rejection of his
service to the Defendants, extending time although the 120 days pursuant to F.R.C.P Rule 4(m)
for service has not been reached in this case, but if it becomes necessary.
3


10- F.R.C.P Rule 4 (l) further stated Proving service by affidavit Ms. Judy provided hers in the
Return of Service; and Plaintiff also provided his Affidavit of witnessing her serve the Court
Stamped Summons and the Complaint.

11- F.R.C.P Rule 4 (l)(3) Validly of Service: Amended Proof. Failure to prove service does not affect
the validity of service. The Court may permit proof of service to be amended.

REQUEST FOR THE COURTS AGENT TO SERVE DEFENDANT(S)
1- As the Plaintiff has shown the Court in his best faith efforts to properly serve the agents of the
Defendants limited to his resources to get around locally, and it has not recognized this, Plaintiff
petitions and request the Court to issue the attached Summons and Serve them to the
Defendants per U.S. Marshal or authorized Court agent at the following addresses attached in
SUMMONS.
Signed and dated this ___ day of September, 2014.

Cody Robert Judy pro se /s/__________________________.