Desiree: By the way, a US court has no authority or power to compel me to reimburse you for any legal expenses (even though you're attempting to obtain such an order). Do you know why? Because in order for my previous perjury and false claim of US citizenship convictions to stand, the US District Court had to enter a finding that I am not a US citizen; and under the doctrine of res judicata, no court in the US can perform any action which would contradict the findings of another court when an order has been entered. Therefore, as long as those two convictions are not vacated then no US government agency or court may exercise ANY authority over me unless I am physically present in the US. The US has no authority over foreign nationals who are outside the US. The fact that I *AM* a US citizen is irrelevant because of those two convictions. Technically, I'm required to report my income from sources here in Canada, to the IRS - because I am actually a US citizen, but there's absolutely nothing the IRS can do about it as long as those convictions remain. But getting back to the point at hand: The Arizona court *can* enter an order for me to reimburse you but there's absolutely nothing they can do to enforce such an order. And you're probably wondering why I didn't bother to call in to the hearing on the 20th. I considered it but: 1) I couldn't be bothered. Having our marriage annulled benefits me in a number of ways, which I'll inform you of after it's done. 2) The issue of my name would likely have come up and the court would have asked my legal name and I would be under oath so I'd have to answer, then the court would probably enter an order to change the name on the case, which would result in there being a publicly accessible link between you and I, and I couldn't risk that. It would be bad for my reputation for people to find out I was married to someone like you. 3) I never actually filed a response with the court, raising the question of jurisdiction, however you were kind enough to raise the issue in your response to my response. So now that it is officially on the record (thanks to you), it provides grounds for an appeal. So, by not appearing I avoided the name issue, and I also created a situation where the court would grant you a default order - which I could later appeal or move to vacate based on lack of jurisdiction. And as you recall I have mentioned previously, the appellate moves much more slowly then the Superior court. Cheers, Patrick P.S. The US District Court's finding of fact that I am not a US citizen was based solely on a birth certificate from Canada (you know the one), and a passport. But there was nothing that actually established I was the person represented by those documents. By simply remaining silent and not objecting to that "evidence" we allowed the jury to "assume" they were mine and I was the person named thereon. There is no official record anywhere of me actually claiming to be that person. Isn't the US legal system great?