The Show Goes On

The Show Goes On

Open Letter To Attorney General William Barr

James Damiano

Mine Hill NJ 

07803

7/14/2019 

Attorney General Barr

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530-0001
 

Dear Attorney General Barr

I am the Plaintiff in James Damiano vs Bob Dylan for copyright infringement. After twenty four years of my lawsuit being fraudulently dismissed in summary judgement my patience is starting to wear thin. Please allow me to explain my reasons why.

For all intents and purposes I have identified my law-suit against Bob Dylan as “Bob Dylan’s Stealing of James Damiano’s Songs” in which, United States District Court Judge Jerome B. Simandle is complicit in assisting Bob Dylan in the Stealing of my songs through conflicts concerning ex FBI Director James Comey and his position as the United States Deputy Attorney General, Orin Snyder Esq. of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, and Mary Jo White, et al.

For the record James Comey was an attorney for the same law firm as Dylan’s lead attorney Orin Snyder, “Gibson Dunn & Crutcher”. 

To say the least an unprecedented colossal amount of evidence exists concerning Bob Dylan’s eleven year nefarious solicitation of my music.

Perhaps the most pronounced infraction is that it is judicially conclusive that Judge Simandle and Bob Dylan’s lead attorney Orin Snyder defiled the court by participating in a massive fraud and cover up where as Judge Simandle was partial to Bob Dylan in his determinations and decisions on every opinion, ruling and judgement made in this litigation.

Judge Simandles nefarious accomplishment was executed within the Judicial environment and in the Federal halls of justice.

Judge Simandle’s ruling on summary judgement in favor of Bob Dylan was one hundred percent inconsistent with the facts of the case which created the appearance of his partiality toward Defendant Bob Dylan. 

To reiterate, in a ten thousand page law-suit containing a DVD of thirty five hours of video-taped depositions incriminating to Bob Dylan He (Bob Dylan)  did not have one piece of evidence in which he could use or cite to defend himself with. 

To be explicit Dylan had zero as in none or no facts to defend himself with.

In fact as the internet expanded it has come to my attention that Dylan has been accused of plagiarism more than two hundred times in separate incidents. 

Certainly the Attorney General has basic knowledge of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, specifically Rule 56 ( c ) This is as basic as it gets. 

Judge Simandle’s final decision granting Bob Dylan summary judgement is ill founded and criminally illegal according to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:

FRCP (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure)

Rule 56. Summary Judgment. (a) Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment. … The court shall grant summary judgment only if the movant shows that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact.

In James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan there were eleven years of documents sent between parties, thirty five hours of video taped depositions of witness testifying about meetings set up for Plaintiff (James Damiano) to meet with  Bob Dylan backstage at concerts, and even an expert music analysis from a Harvard educated musicologist as can be viewed below of which was never refuted by Dylan. My point being is that if there were no issues of fact why then does Dylan utilize a “Gag Order” designating all discovery materials confidential?

Interestingly enough even after citing Rule 56 c in his decision Judge Jerome B. Simandle proceeded to judge “This court will accept as true Plaintiff’s allegations that Sony represented to him that he would be credited and compensated for his work if Dylan used it. 

Judge Simandle also stated “Plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants had access to his work. 

After citing the existence of Plaintiff’s material facts Judge Simandle proceeded to dismiss the suit in summary judgement. 

It is without doubt that should my stating these facts in a letter to you be false in any way, that you would be professionally required to initiate some form of reparation in favor of the alleged wronged party and of course likewise if my words prove to be true.  

All and every ruling of every motion in this litigation decided by this court were in favor of Defendant Bob Dylan, subjectively based only on the opinion of Bob Dylan’s counsel, Orin Snyder and held as truth over my Plaintiff (James Damiano’s) true material facts which said facts one hundred percent conclusively reveal the opposite of Judge Simandle’s findings, opinions and rulings. Judge Simandle granting Bob Dylan summary Judgement inaugurates fraud upon the court.

Threatening Letter from Bob Dylan

https://bobdylanexplained.yolasite.com

.

.

.