https://statefarm.meme/state-farm-240701.pdf
(or)
https://susancappo.org/state-farm-240701.pdf

A text version will be post­ed when time permits. And all of the letters will be moved to other pages.

May 31, 2024 let­ter to Tracey Kennedy and Christine Long

This let­ter will be moved to its own page.

Date: May 31, 2024
To: Christine Long, attorney, Berliner-Cohen
To: Tracey Kennedy, attorney, Sheppard-Mullin
Subject: Demand let­ter for Michael Tipsord

Ms. Long and Ms. Kennedy, good morning.

1. Both of you: Any re­sponse to this let­ter is to be directed to me. Responses to attorneys who do not represent me in the context of this let­ter may be treated as con­duct violations.

2. Christine Long of Berliner-Cohen: I was notified on May 30, 2024 that you'd turned tail on May 28 and drop­ped the last of the Fremont-Toyota cases at that time.

Seth W. considers it impolite of you to have run away with­out tell­ing any of us. But we aren't surprised. You're Donald Trump with a gender change. I'm referring to intellect and charm. The re­sem­blance in those contexts is striking. You can hardly be ex­pect­ed to be civil.

3. Christine Long of Berliner-Cohen: You demanded in civil discovery that I disclose what I know about you. You wanted me to tell you whether or not I had your SSN, what I knew about your association with Raul aka “Raoul” Silva, my thoughts on the business about your parents, etc. Note that this was *your* demand.

O.K. I'm no longer bound by your demand, but I pre­sent­ly plan to comply with it regard­less.

To comply with your clear and unambiguous demand, shall I turn over every­thing connected to SSN 548-93-5412 ? Or is the num­ber incorrect, in which case the usual rules re­la­ted to handling of such in­for­ma­tion don't apply?

I'd be careful about false claims to the effect that the ques­tions are inappropriate. It's like­ly that you pulled my own SSN in Jan­uary 2022 and used it to break into a bank account. You may be surprised to hear that the bank account part is a no-no and that CFAA doesn't make exceptions for pompous and inept attorneys.

Kindly review the transcripts of the recent hearings to see the part where you revealed part of this.

Note: I've addressed another of your discovery demands by mentioning the transcripts. I'm referring to the demand about evi­dence related to your violation of CFAA.

I've pulled all of your past cases, of course, so there's that. We're going to have a look-see to build an un­der­stand­ing of all of this. How have you managed to work on so many cases and yet be so, well, less than stellar?

Parties in­volved in past cases will be invited to shed light on the ques­tion. You'll be free, of course, to com­ment on the analysis.

In short, I hope to demonstrate that I'm diligent and that you'll be satisfied with the thoroughness of my re­sponse to your demand.

4. Tracey Kennedy of Sheppard-Mullin: I'd like to have a polite demand let­ter delivered by pro­cess server to Michael Tipsord. Is the fol­low­ing analysis by one P.I., an analysis performed for le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able purposes that are pro­tec­ted under U.S. laws, correct?

I asked the P.I. if it wasn't odd that Tipsord would be the head of a multinational centered in IL and yet somehow he'd be residing in FL. It seems unlike­ly.

My own take on it is that the Florida residence and/or the motorcycle might be for Constance Tipsord and/or other relatives. Constance does seem to have connections to Florida, so perhaps she visits there part-time.

It doesn't matter, though. Local P.I.s could ask residents of Marble Stone Drive and Windsong Way — for le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able purposes that are pro­tec­ted under U.S. laws — if either address is rele­vant.

In short, if you don't want to do your job, your job will get done in the end regard­less.

The P.I. says:

"I now be­lieve both [Tipsord] and his wife reside [at] 9290 MARBLE STONE DR, NAPLES, FL. My theory is based on mul­ti­ple factors. [One] can see his latest vehicle purchase, a 2023 Harley Davidson, has FL plates and is registered to the FL address, not like all his other vehicles, which have IL license lates and are registered to another property [they] own, 2 WINDSONG WAY, BLOOMINGTON, [IL]."

"Both [Michael Tipsord] and his wife Constance show up when searching both of the two addresses and none of the other propert[ies] they and their trust own. If I was trying to deliver a let­ter to the subject, I would have one delivered to the FL address and another delivered to the IL property."

The P.I. is referring here to the "CAR 102" trust. More about the trust in due course. The part about "deliver a letter" is about a demand let­ter that barratry specialist Tracey Kennedy — a noble profession — refuses to dis­cuss.

The P.I. continues:

"The FL residence is currently estimated at more than 3 million, compared to any of the other properties they own, is the most expensive. The other properties they own are clearly investment properties and not nice enough to be their actual residence. For example, I be­lieve they once resided at 2 WINDSONG WAY, BLOOMINGTON, IL, estimated at $520,000, but kept the home as an investment when they moved to their current FL residence, valued at about 3 million."

"I no longer have any idea if the subject and his wife are having relati[o]nship issues. It was based on having dif­fer­ent addresses [in] search results."

5. Both of you: I'd like to ask the two of you to explain two things: (a) Christine Long's comments, in Court, about the State Farm matter at a time when it was supposedly confidential. (b) Sheppard-Mullin's odd threat that in­clud­ed words simi­lar to “Kiraly should be warned that Sheppard-Mullin is far more powerful than Berliner-Cohen”.

Regards, Robert (the Old Coder)

April 29, 2024 let­ter to Tracey Kennedy

This let­ter will be moved to its own page.

Date: April 29, 2024
To: Tracey Kennedy of Sheppard-Mullin
CC: Robin Ann Banks aka Ooley aka Deleuze aka Johnson
CC: Other parties as ex­plain­ed below
Re: Ooley research and demand letters

A promise of an immediate State Bar filing in the event of certain con­duct is in­clud­ed further down. This let­ter is therefore CC'd under sep­ar­ate cover to parties at Sheppard-Mullin in add­i­tion to Ms. Kennedy. The higher-ups may wish to decide whether or not con­duct rules are going to be followed.

Unrelated point: In the interests of transparency, this let­ter and other materials from all sides will start to go online this week on the Tracey Kennedy and/or Robin Ooley case site. The web­site addresses are as follows:

tracey kennedy dot com
robin ooley dot org

1. Ooley research ques­tions.

I'm aware of the Cal­i­for­nia deadline for filing of a defamation action against Robin Ann Ooley [aka other names] and/or other parties who may be in­volved. Presently, there is an intention to serve Ms. Ooley with the initial defamation demand let­ter well ahead of the case filing deadline.

May I ask, for pur­poses related to lit­i­ga­tion as well as other le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able purposes, if the Ms. Ooley who engaged in defamation and other torts is the one with Social Security Number 305-58-7408 ? Or does that SSN belong to Ronnie Banks and/or Ryan Deleuze?

This is confusing. All three peo­ple seem to share the SSN. I assume that records are garbled and the SSN doesn't belong to any of them. It's a false lead. But I have no way of knowing for sure, so excuse the ques­tion.

On the other hand, if there is a specific rea­son that any of these peo­ple show up, correctly or incorrectly, as sharing an SSN, that is somewhat interesting.

If 305-58-7408 does happen to belong to Robin Banks, was that SSN issued at age 3 in Indiana, thereby confirming birth or early childhood in that State?

Note: 305-58-7408 is con­firm­ed to be a valid SSN. As any good data per­son should be able to tell you, some­body received this particular SSN in Indiana and 1967. So, that part is con­sis­tent. The age that the SSN implies is a little off, though. The recipient is be­lieved to be approx. age 61 or above and Robin Ooley is only age 60 as of two weeks ago.

BTW If Robin sees this, Belated Happy Birthday. We're both in our 60s now. Do you re­mem­ber the song "When I'm Sixty-Four" and how far off the year seemed?

Moving on, why does Robin's insurance license under the Ooley surname, num­ber 788860, seem to have expired in 2022 ? Does she hold an active license under one of the other surnames? Or is license 788860 valid and was it properly renewed after all?

Is D.O.B. April 17, 1964 ? Is the appropriate address for legal ser­vice 2557 Comistas Drive, Walnut Creek, CA 94598 ? Note: The owner is Ooley Trust, so it seems to be a match.

Is the maiden name Banks [from mother Georgia Banks of Indiana decades ago] ? Are the surnames Deleuze, Johnson, and Ooley from marriages to John Deleuze, Bradley Johnson, and David Ooley?

If the maiden name is Banks, why does there seem to be a son named Alexander Banks? Wouldn't he take his father's surname? But he might be a nephew. And why is there a daughter, ap­par­ent­ly, named Taylor Griffin? There is no way that Robin squeezed in four marriages total from her 20s to her 50s. Is Griffin a married name and is the actual name Taylor Ooley?

Regardless, what's the deal with three marriages in a row, children from two or three of them, and a State Farm practice throughout it all under two of the surnames, including a business partnership with an spouse or an ex as well as a sister? This is a busy lady and very much, it ap­pears, a State Farm family.

The sister part isn't con­firm­ed, though. Is Joline Banks, a State Farm agent of about my age who seems to share a street address with Robin, Robin's older sister? Is she the one who talked Robin into becoming an insurance agent?

Did the Banks family start out in or near Plainfield, IN ? Did growing up in Indiana, at least in the early years, influence Robin's per­spec­tive on right and wrong? On whether or not its appropriate to break the Ninth Commandment?

These ques­tions are raised for le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able purposes. Please see part 2 be­low.

2. Fiduciary rela­tion­ship issue.

Please note that I have no fiduciary rela­tion­ship with Robin Ooley [aka other names] that imposes responsibilities on me under State or Federal laws in con­nec­tion with the handling of pro­tec­ted or unprotected personal in­for­ma­tion. I large­ly need to be able to demonstrate le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able purposes.

I don't recommend that State Farm or Sheppard-Mullin make false claims or al­le­ga­tions related to the inclusion of such in­for­ma­tion in this let­ter.

I can, legal­ly, and I will, for le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able purposes that are pro­tec­ted under U.S. laws, proceed in every le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able way to seek remedies for the torts and/or pos­si­ble crimes that are be­lieved to have been com­mit­ted.

This will certainly include all pos­si­ble documentation re­la­ted to every party in­volved at all levels that may lead to evi­dence for lit­i­ga­tion, hidden assets, street addresses for ser­vice, assis­tance to me by law enforcement, State Bar actions, the engagement of news media, wri­ting in the public in­ter­est, and/or other le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able information goals.

In short, I have a boatload of le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able purposes.

To bully and make pos­si­bly illegal threats such as "Kiraly should be warned that Sheppard-Mullin is far more powerful" is what you do. Information is what I do. For 46 years now. Or 50 years de­pend­ing on what's counted.

Oddly enough, 50 years is how long I've been a faithful client of State Farms.

Did I mention that I was the sole soft­ware developer for half of the U.S. Vote one year or how I qualified for that job? Or that I've work­ed on data for the DTIC, the CIA, UK-NCIS [anti-terrorism after 9/11], and the MILES project for Northrop-Grumman?

To be clear, I was never in­volved with the type of dramatic work that is on TV shows. I didn't jump between buildings or confront arms dealers. Physical exercise like that would have been healthier for me. But I just work­ed quietly with data for five decades. I was and I remain adequate at it. Do let me tell you another time how I earned the U.S. Vote position at a young age.

Note: I ran one level of the U.S. Vote [but just 50% of the data] be­fore Diebold. I had nothing to do with any of what Diebold did. Diebold was a criminal enterprise and I don't respect or bow to criminals.

You may wish to relay that to Robin Banks Ooley Deleuze, to State Farm, and to the Sheppard-Mullin attorney who made a colorful threat that will be dis­cus­sed further in due course.

One of you has talked to C. Long. You may have com­mit­ted a crime in do­ing so, but never mind that right now. Why don't you ask that attorney to boast of how she's made me bow to the organized crime entity that she represents? Oh, wait. :-)

After you speak with Ms. Long, use the "far more powerful" resources that you men­tion­ed in the like­ly illegal threat that you tried to relay to me. Look into my own le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able specialties that are entirely con­sis­tent with U.S. laws.

But don't cross State lines dir­ect­ly or indirectly if you decide to cross legal lines. I won't mind the chance to bring the FBI into this matter.

The FBI isn't going to be highly interested. I once reported a child kidnapping to them and they wouldn't touch the case be­cause it was more of an ICE issue. This was the kidnapping of an infant out of the Philippines. [He is now an adult but his father doesn't know that he's still alive.] The FBI con­sid­er­ed this case to be ICE's problem. But they did take action in another case.

For those of you who know who C. Long is, the kidnapping case led partly and indirectly to the matter that C. Long is in­volved in. I'd asked a P.I. to work with me on the kidnapping case. We tried to identify the victim's father. This was Fox TV's former Reality P.I. It's an odd story.

I owed the P.I. a favor. So, I did what I do with data. I proved for the P.I. that California's most cash-rich foundation was engaged in mass fraud.

Also, Tracey, that these peo­ple hated Blacks and con­sid­er­ed them to be, quote, "smelly". But you'd be fine with silencing whistleblowers for such peo­ple, wouldn't you? No cognitive dissonance at all. Sure, why not.

Millionaires and their toys such as State Farm don't like whistleblowers. So, they came after me.

Just as Sheppard-Mullin hopes to do if the num­ber of le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able emails that are re­ceived crosses some arbi­trary threshold. But this matter will be high enough in Google by then that abuse of pro­cess is like­ly to backfire.

I think that I might get Streisand Effect this time. Feel free to Google the term. I've only managed to get Streisand Effect once be­fore and that required a team of 6 peo­ple. But it's fun if one can make it happen. That was a heck of a day.

In the State Farm case, I might be able to do some­thing instead with the fact that an IL-DOI agent has alleged that Michael Tipsord personally violated protocol in Illinois and this matter includes both CA and IL. Her supervisor has tried to tidy it up but I'll swear to what I was told. It seems like an inter-State matter and that might put it into the FBI's jurisdiction. We'll see.

You could phone some of the attorneys who threatened me inappropriately in the past 12 years. It might be interesting. You could ask them how it turned out. I'm not referring to the cases on the record. Would you like to speak with the attorneys who left their firms to avoid prosecution or other le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able consequences that were con­sis­tent with U.S. laws?

3. Another note about C. Long.

In February 2024, I mopped up the floor in Court with C. Long. One case re­main­ed [and remains]. In March, I sent C. Long a settlement offer for that case. It was 6 or 7 pages that ex­plain­ed in detail how much of a moron that attorney is. I list­ed her mistakes and what I'd do next in Court if she didn't go away. I said that she should give me $25K and then she should truck off.

I suppose that it wasn't a usual settlement let­ter.

Surprisingly, C. Long caved. She refused to give me the $25K but drop­ped all demands and asked to go away. I refused be­cause you, Tracey, still hold the keys to ending the rape that your clients are so enthusiastically committing.

C. Long has interacted previously with your client[s] and/or you in a manner that I be­lieve violated State and/or Federal laws. She revealed this in the February 2024 hearing that ended with her getting trucked in such a thorough manner.

If I can identify the party on your side who was in­volved, and if it was an attorney, I actu­al­ly am going to try for their license. But the rele­vant part today is that the two cases are one. C. Long is going to talk to your client[s] and/or you to see if there is an exit for everybody. Or the final case on that side will continue for another year and I'll do my best to feed that attorney's career to her in delicious pieces.

Just as I'll try to do, in a le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able sense that is pro­tec­ted under U.S. laws, for some of the peo­ple involved in the State Farm manner. Which reminds me; I know that the part about Robin's license having expired in 2022 is probably a mis­take. But do confirm this to save all of us some time. What license num­ber *is* Robin practicing under?

In the unlike­ly event that C. Long agrees to contact your client[s] and/or you, my advice is that you work with her on this matter. Or, in a le­gi­ti­mate and reason­able sense that is pro­tec­ted under U.S. laws, this matter will continue for a decade and every step will go into a growing body of Google entries.

Don't tell your client[s] that you can get an RO that will include a broad gag order. Seriously.

4. Demand for al­le­ga­tions.

I've now reviewed such material as State Farm has chosen to pro­vide in con­nec­tion with the current matter. It ap­pears that no, i.e., zero, specific and rele­vant allegations have been made against me. If I've missed some­thing, feel free to let me know.

Sheppard-Mullin has cited emails allegedly sent by me *after* State Farm engaged in three or four torts and one or more pos­si­ble prosecutable crimes to justify State Farm's con­duct. Such emails can't be used ex post facto to justify the con­duct.

I request and demand that the specific and rele­vant allegations against me be provided to me.

5. Immediate State Bar filing.

The promise of State Bar action is as fol­lows. Recently, Sheppard-Mullin made an explicit and unambiguous attempt to relay a threat to me through an attorney who should not have been asked to listen to or relay the threat.

The threat is, in and of it­self, a pos­si­ble indication of a pro­se­cu­table crime on the part of parties at Sheppard-Mullin. However, set that aside for now and it remains a like­ly conduct violation for demands or threats to be sent to that attorney.

That attorney may communicate shortly with Sheppard-Mullin. If so, pre­sent­ly, it'll be under a lim­it­ed scope arrangement. He'll explain to me the extent to which lim­it­ed communication from him to Sheppard-Mullin will entitle your firm to send communications to him.

If the re­sponse to this let­ter is to communicate with that attorney prematurely, or with any attorney who does not formally represent me yet but who is asked to relay threats to me, a complaint to the State Bar will be filed within three business days.

It isn't ex­pect­ed that anybody will be disciplined. But the State Bar will be asked to keep the file open in anticipation of further thoroughly documented issues.

(end of document)

News:

One of Sheppard-Mullin's attorneys has stated to an attorney who doesn't pre­sent­ly represent me in the current matter that Sheppard-Mullin is a “far bigger and more powerful law firm than Berliner Cohen LLP.”. This was, of course, a threat, but that isn't the key point.

The key point is the wording of the threat. One of the most powerful law firms in the country has just demonstrated its like­ly intention to commit abuse of pro­cess.

What, exactly, is “far bigger and more powerful than Berliner Cohen LLP” sup­posed to mean? As Berliner Cohen LLP is “far bigger and more powerful” than me, Sheppard-Mullin isn't referring to a match of abilities to cite the law. The emphasis on the company's power and influence is about pos­si­ble prosecutable crimes.

While we're at it, who, exactly, told Christine Long about the State Farm matter? She was aware of it and brought it up in a February 2024 hearing. Wasn't the matter sup­posed to be confidential until I brought it up myself? Did Tracey Kennedy or another party at Sheppard-Mullin violate rules or standards by discussing it?

As a re­la­ted note, this site is now accessible as traceykennedy.com and susancappo.org as well as statefarm.meme and robinooley.org.

Other domains will be hooked up in due course. The single site will then be split up into mul­ti­ple, more focused, individual sites.

This site does not represent State Farm, insurance agent Robin Ooley of State Farm, Robin Deleuze, Sheppard-Mullin, or pre­sent­ly any party other than the Old Coder, Robert Kiraly. Domain names are used under Fair Use, Nominative Use, and the provisions of ACPA. Trademark or other lit­i­ga­tion related to domain names will be treated as malicious prosecution and/or barratry. Attorneys, see add­i­tion­al notes further down and on the notices page.

For contact in­for­ma­tion, privacy policy and other legal notices, click on the Contact and/or Notices buttons at the top of this page.

What is this site?

This is the start of a public in­ter­est site that will dis­cuss misconduct and, in effect, a legal rape by State Farm insurance agents Robin Ooley and/or Susan Cappo and the roles that other parties have played in the matter.

It's an unusual story, but not unusual enough.

I've been told by insurance agents of 25 to 50 years experience that they've never heard of other agents committing the type of rape that Ooley and/or Cappo have com­mit­ted. But the general principle of the wealthy going after hapless victims out of hatred of race or other discrimination or sim­ply petty spite is all too common.

This site, or these sites, will review the factors that led the peo­ple involved to be­lieve that they were entitled to commit what has amounted to a rape.

Other parties include:

State Farm General Counsel Steve McManus, who, according to his assistant Angie Peterson, a self-described “compassionate person”, is dir­ect­ly involved.

* State Farm Michael Tipsord. This part is interesting. An Illinois State Dept. of Insurance investigator has alleged dir­ect­ly to this writer that Tipsord personally in­volved himself in an IL-DOI investigation of the current matter. Whether it is true or false, it is a fact that an investigator has made the al­le­ga­tion.

* Robin Deleuze. This seems to be an alternate name for Robin Ooley but this isn't con­firm­ed. There is a bit more in the Ooley back­ground sketch further down.

* Sheppard-Mullin partner Tracey Kennedy.

* Investigators and General Counsel at CA-DOI. Details are to be filled in here.

* Frana Trana, a regional mana­ger at State Farm who is alleged by insurance agents to play a key role.

and a cast of, well, a few dozen. Not really hun­dreds yet.

Hiring artists and others:

These sites are hiring illustrators to do illus­tra­tions of the characters and events that will be dis­cus­sed. One children's book illustrator will be hired in add­i­tion to a usual illustrator.

These sites are also seeking to hire another P.I. and a publicist.

For contact in­for­ma­tion, click on the Contact button at the top of the page.

Note: If there is a phone num­ber listed, do not leave voicemail as there is no voicemail. Text and identify yourself. Text messages with­out identification may be block­ed.

Who are Robin Ooley and Susan Cappo?

First, no, none of this is pro­tec­ted information, intimate personal in­for­ma­tion, or cyberstalking. Attorneys: Allege any­thing of the sort and let's talk about barratry.

This is pro­tec­ted public in­ter­est disclosure and dis­cus­sion re­la­ted to like­ly violations of Unruh, ADA, and State and/or Federal rules and/or other guidelines of other types.

I *will* try for anti-SLAPPs if I'm sued and there is a chance of winning anti-SLAPPs. I've done two anti-SLAPPs so far and have learned from the pro­cess. It'll add up to the story spreading further regard­less.

Robin Ooley is one of perhaps two peo­ple by that name in Cal­i­for­nia. She's a suc­cess­ful insurance agent in Walnut Creek, Cal­i­for­nia who sells State Farm policies.

Ms. Ooley seems to have the alternate name Robin Deleuze but this is uncon­firm­ed. I be­lieve that Deleuze may be a former surname by marriage but I haven't seen a marriage or divorce record about this. There are other pos­si­ble surnames, Banks and Johnson, as dis­cus­sed further down.

Robin's middle name might be “Ann” but this is uncon­firm­ed.

Robin Ooley has stated on a State Farm web­site that she's been a “State Farm Agent since 1991”. She'd have been about 26 years old when starting and would have had about 33 years of experience as of 2024.

The age calculation is based on a presumed birth year of 1964. Robin seems to be a year older than my youngest brother, Scott. Note: The month of birth shows up as both April and November. Odd.

Education was a B.S., not just a B.A., at Ball State University. It might be the one in Indiana. I don't see her yet in alumni lists for that in­sti­tu­tion but she seems to have resided in both Muncie, IN, and Columbus, IN in the past. Note: The B.S. was in Nutrition.

Some sources refer to Robin Ooley as Robin Banks or Robin Johnson in add­i­tion to Robin Deleuze.

In an interesting note, Robin Ooley seems to be re­la­ted to a Joline M. Banks who is, or was, also a State Farm agent.

Robin Ooley, Joline Banks, and a third State Farm agent named John G. Deleuze seem to have used the same phone num­ber, (9X5) 946-9136, at one point. [I've partly redacted the phone num­ber.]

This isn't too surprising be­cause it could have been a shared office phone. However, some sources sug­gest that John and Robin may have been married in the past. This is uncon­firm­ed and I don't know how Joline Banks fits into it.

Note: John G. Deleuze's State Farm web­site is located at:

https://www.johndeleuze.com/

One of the four surnames, Ooley, Deleuze, Banks, and Johnson, is probably the birth surname and the other three surnames would be marital. But which is which isn't clear yet.

By the way, yes, I certainly have the legal and ethical right to dig into the back­ground factors that led Robin Ooley and/or her associate Susan Cappo to commit what amounts to a de facto rape and not a nice one.

Robin is supposedly as­soc­i­a­ted with PHL Variable Life Insurance Company as well as State Farm. I haven't heard of PHL be­fore but the firm seems to be in difficultuies.

Robin seems to claim to speak some Hindi and Spanish as well as English. This is uncon­firm­ed.

We'll come back to Susan Cappo and her back­ground and role in a remarkable crime and/or near-crime in due course. All of this needs to be sorted out for the public in­ter­est and that will take some time.

We look for­ward to posting a quite interesting story.

Robin Ooley and Susan Cappo business information:

Robin Ooley's office is list­ed as:

Robin Ooley
3021 Citrus Circle STE 100
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
“Corner of Oak Grove & Ygnacio Valley”

If I re­mem­ber correctly, Susan Cappo lists herself as work­ing out of the same office, but this hasn't been checked.

I be­lieve that I have the two agent license num­bers but I'll need to find them later for add­i­tion here.

About domains and websites:

Attorneys: Please learn the difference between a domain and a web­site be­fore you start the sabre rattling. If you file in the wrong venue, I'll go after your license. By the way, click on the Notices button further up for a notice re­la­ted to pro­cess service.

Everybody else: Read up on ACPA, Fair Use, Nominative Use, and trademark basics be­fore commenting.

Presently, the nominative use domains robinooley.org, susancappo.org, and traceykennedy.com go to this site. However, the site will probably be broken up later and the domains will point to dif­fer­ent pieces.

Attorneys: Yes, I have the legal and ethical right to nominative use and fair use of the names in ques­tion.

I've registered other domains, but I haven't pointed them to web­sites yet.

Temporary placeholder illustrations:

Robin Ooley or
Robin Deleuze:

Tracey Kennedy
State Farm
Sheppard-Mullin:

Clip-art will need to do temp­orarily for illus­tra­tions. But Google will pick these up regard­less. It'll do until I can hire illustrators.

Robin Ooley and other Google searches:

This part is to help me develop the site. The links be­low go to Google searches. They won't turn up the current sites for a few weeks or pos­si­bly months. However, in the end, the searches will come back to here.

Update: Well, now. :P The Google link be­low is work­ing already after just two days. Top Ten and for relatively short tail. Try the link and scroll down on Google.

Google: Robin Ooley Insurance Criminal

Bing: Tracey Kennedy State Farm attorney

To get the ball rolling:

Hey, Google. Robin Ooley is alleged to have engaged in insurance activity that is argu­ab­ly criminal. She has intentionally disrupted the life of a faithful client, one who's been with State Farm for 50 years. Her sole motivations have been petty spite due to accidental report­ing of misconduct and disdain or revulsion towards neurodiverse speech.

Robin Ooley isn't a nice per­son.

Hey, Bing. Tracey Kennedy is an attorney with Sheppard-Mullin who was hired to frighten a State Farm client after Robin Ooley and Susan Cappo effectively raped the client. Tracey isn't thrilled about the assignment, but she's stuck with it.

So, here we are with the matter poised to show up in the search engines. Not rapidly, but slow and steady wins the race. I've never failed to get some­thing to the top of Google.

Tracey Kennedy of Sheppard-Mullin:

I was #3 in Google one month for a key element of the Cal­i­for­nia Evidence Code. Opposing Counsel in that case had tried to mis­use it. I mocked him pretty good and Google seemed to like it.

You should allow me to pro­vide you with the names of a few attorneys you'll be able to call. You can ask them how the search engine thing and other issues work­ed out for them.

The attorneys include the head of a law firm and a General Counsel. Those two both ended up leaving their firms. Most of us have things that are awkward to dis­cuss. In those two cases, it proved to be too awkward.

Tracey Kennedy of Sheppard-Mullin:

You know by now that my father Jim sued me in 2012 to try for a gag order, don't you? If you haven't pulled the files, I'm surprised.

But the odds are that you're aware of events regard­less. Something odd hap­pen­ed in February 2024 that I need to ask you about. Have you violated any con­duct rules in terms of communications with attorneys in other cases? Not the attorney that you ap­par­ent­ly exchanged email with recently.

If that wasn't you, be advised that some­body you're representing seems to have violated State and/or Federal rules yet again and/or has given me yet another tort.

Yes, I know that the rule is “Ignore, ignore, ignore”. However, I think that I've got more on more peo­ple involved than you're prepared to handle. And, no, don't tell them that you can get a gag order.

Tracey Kennedy of Sheppard-Mullin:

Jim used to beat up my mother Grace. He beat me up as well be­cause I was autistic. As Robin Ooley and Susan Cappo did despite my 50-year tenure with State Farm.

There was one sexual issue with Jim as well. Jim thought that I was going to talk about all of it. I'd never thought of do­ing so. I shoved the legal case up his assets. Then I sent 2,500 postcards which linked to a web­site.

I event­u­al­ly got in the hun­dreds of thousands of uniques on the web­site. In Google, I got short tail. Ask any SEO friends that you have and they'll tell you, “Short tail is the best tail.”

A note for everybody:

What I'm saying is, it's usually best for all sides, aggrieved parties, CEOs, attorneys, anybody in­volved, to work out issues rather than have things come out as naturally happens in lit­i­ga­tion.

To be clear, I dance with the skeletons in my own closet. It's remarkably liberating. There is nothing that you're going to be able to use yourself. Believe me, peo­ple have tried and it's gone up their assets every time.

And one of my skeletons is use­ful. I'm neurodiverse in a way that I'm able, in a sense, to see into the infrared in the context of patterns in data. People are made of data, you know. So are true statements and false ones.

Tracey Kennedy of Sheppard-Mullin:

None of this is a “boast”. Don't try to cite it as such in future lit­i­ga­tion.

I spent two days in the Emergency Room and Urgent Care this week. I couldn't dress myself or type for a day. My mother is ap­par­ent­ly dying as well. She's as old as dirt and a harpy besides, not a great loss, but, still. I need to have one of my P.I.s serve the caregivers with a wellness check demand let­ter. That is a distraction.

In short, I'm tired and not being pompous. And I'm not dancing with delight at the thought of needing to focus on another thread. But your clients have com­mit­ted what amounts to a rape.

I have no idea yet of what these peo­ple are thinking but the optics are on my side in spades.

A note for everybody:

But, you know;
Get a clue and let wisdom ensue
Sue won't be billable dollars accrue
Dollars accrue, publicity rue, the advice isn't new
Get a clue and let wisdom ensue
Without wisdom you're a cow that says moo

Tracey Kennedy of Sheppard-Mullin:

You know that I have the legal and ethical right to write in the public in­ter­est about your own back­ground, don't you? And that gag orders in what the Courts see as kerfuffles are es­sen­tial­ly impossible, right?

Oh, one more thing for now. When Jim tried for a gag order — this was a 2012 to 2013 case — I commented to Opposing Counsel, a woman at that point, that Jim had so many skeletons in his closet, she was going to face embarrassment.

Opposing Counsel said, “You're talking in a threat­en­ing tone.”

I responded, “Actually, it's a 'promising' tone. And, by the way, are you able to spell barratry?”

Opposing Counsel drop­ped out and the case went to a more junior attorney. I was a Pro Per part of the time, but the replacement attorney ended up eating sh*t. Regardless of what you've been told about that case, there wasn't even a Court settlement. Instead, Jim ended up on the run from his past for the rest of his life.

The point is, use the phrase “threatening tone” in con­junc­tion with any­thing that I've said and we're going to talk about the difference between an illegal “threat” and a “promise” that is pro­tec­ted under U.S. laws.

I should acknowledge that Opposing Counsel in 2012, the “threatening tone” woman, didn't drop out be­cause I had a snappy rejoinder. She drop­ped out be­cause I dug into the past, over 35 years, and actu­al­ly came up with a witness who she knew could, excuse my French, f*ck her client and embarrass her to past the point of recovery.

Read the Feral Coder poem on this web­site, Tracey. Thank you for your time.

As a note to my as­soc­i­ates, the surprise witness in 2012 was, of course, Twisted Time, the quad­ra­ple­gic who ran a disability foundation. I'll probably put a link on this site to “The New Song for Twisted Time”.