# orderedItems[].object.content
@gneilyo That's really cool! I'll check it out - thanks!

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
@gneilyo That's really cool! I'll check it out - thanks!

# orderedItems[].object.content
@gneilyo Oh wow - that's an attachment to you mobile device?

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
@gneilyo Oh wow - that's an attachment to you mobile device?

# orderedItems[].object.content
Netflix released a new documentary called "Buy Now!" and it is very very good.

I don't know how it got funded, because it actually tells the truth about a lot of controversial topics, such as: illegal dumping of hazardous waste, greenwashing fraud schemes, planned obsolescence, tech worker's personal responsibility to not help their employer cause harm in the world, & the importance of pushing through the pain of neoliberal cognitive dissonance.

Go watch it. Thanks.
https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=OVfZw_eqJW 8

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
Netflix released a new documentary called "Buy Now!" and it is very very good.

I don't know how it got funded, because it actually tells the truth about a lot of controversial topics, such as: illegal dumping of hazardous waste, greenwashing fraud schemes, planned obsolescence, tech worker's personal responsibility to not help their employer cause harm in the world, & the importance of pushing through the pain of neoliberal cognitive dissonance.

Go watch it. Thanks.
https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=OVfZw_eqJW 8

# orderedItems[].object.content
I'm working on documenting what Apple did to my hair for my lawsuit damages. It's still growing in all sorts of wild.

I have no money but I have a phone with an ok camera. Has anyone successfully used a cellphone as a digital microscope & used the images for a formal purpose?

Or, if I'd have to buy something, would the coin microscopes probably work ok for this? They're the cheapest.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
I'm working on documenting what Apple did to my hair for my lawsuit damages. It's still growing in all sorts of wild.

I have no money but I have a phone with an ok camera. Has anyone successfully used a cellphone as a digital microscope & used the images for a formal purpose?

Or, if I'd have to buy something, would the coin microscopes probably work ok for this? They're the cheapest.

# orderedItems[].object.content
Umm... Ok, so, who wants to be the one who has to inform Vietnam about Apple's actions trying to protect their secret fab & and their "snitches get stiches" routine at the Sunnyvale hellmouth?

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
Umm... Ok, so, who wants to be the one who has to inform Vietnam about Apple's actions trying to protect their secret fab & and their "snitches get stiches" routine at the Sunnyvale hellmouth?

# orderedItems[].object.attachment[].name
Vietnam: Apple urged to act on systematic persecution & imprisonment of climate leaders

# orderedItems[].object.content
I get excited thinking about discovery with Apple. One thing I want to see & is directly connected to their animus, is all the personality & behavior profiles they procured/created about me. It was probably expensive, & I expect they will initiate some helpful self-reflection.

https://www. vice.com/en/article/lazy-money-oriented-single-mother-how-union-busting-firms-compile-dossiers-on-employees/

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
I get excited thinking about discovery with Apple. One thing I want to see & is directly connected to their animus, is all the personality & behavior profiles they procured/created about me. It was probably expensive, & I expect they will initiate some helpful self-reflection.

https://www. vice.com/en/article/lazy-money-oriented-single-mother-how-union-busting-firms-compile-dossiers-on-employees/

# orderedItems[].object.content
Judge responded to my Motion for Reconsideration, saying he will not reconsider, & I'm still a bad person because I still have a gluttonous lust for more brief pages & also ampersands. He didn't order it but he basically ordered me to revise again by 11/26.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.140.0.pdf

If anyone wants to help edit, I'd appreciate it - I have way too many personal issues related to that stack of paper now. Complaint is linked below & appreciate any feedback.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.128.0.pdf

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
Judge responded to my Motion for Reconsideration, saying he will not reconsider, & I'm still a bad person because I still have a gluttonous lust for more brief pages & also ampersands. He didn't order it but he basically ordered me to revise again by 11/26.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.140.0.pdf

If anyone wants to help edit, I'd appreciate it - I have way too many personal issues related to that stack of paper now. Complaint is linked below & appreciate any feedback.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.128.0.pdf

# orderedItems[].object.attachment[].name
Previously, the Court denied Apple’s motion for involuntary dismissal; however, it also
sanctioned Ms. Gjovik by striking her fifth amended complaint (“5AC”) for failure to comply with
Court orders. The Court gave Ms. Gjovik leave to file a new 5AC so long as it complied with the
Court’s orders. Now pending before the Court is Ms. Gjovik’s motion for leave to file a motion to
reconsider.
The motion for leave is DENIED. Ms. Gjovik has failed to establish that she should be
given leave pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9(b).
Furthermore, even if the Court were to permit Ms. Gjovik to file her proposed motion to
reconsider, it is not persuasive on the merits. For example, Ms. Gjovik argues that her formatting
changes were not made in bad faith because Civil Local Rule 3-4(c) applies only to manual filings,
not electronic filings. At best, Ms. Gjovik’s argument has merit with respect to her failure to use
numbered lines.1
 See Civ. L.R. 3-4(c)(1) (“Papers presented for manual filing must be on 8½ inch
by 11 inch white paper with numbered lines . . . .”). However, the requirement of no more than 28 

# orderedItems[].object.attachment[].name
lines per page is not so restricted. See Civ. L.R. 3-4(c)(2) (“Text must appear on one side only and
must be double-spaced with no more than 28 lines per page . . . .”). Furthermore, under Ms.
Gjovik’s position, page limits would be meaningless because formatting requirements in the Civil
Local Rules could be entirely ignored for electronic filings. Cf. Wilson v. Citizens Ins. Co. of Am.,
No. 1:13-CV-470, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148277, at *2-3 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 17, 2014) (taking note
of Local Rule imposing formatting requirements – e.g., spacing, font size, number of lines of text;
“[t]he purposes of these requirements are obvious: to allow the Court to read the brief without
undue eye strain or format distractions and to insure that litigants do not avoid page limits through
creative but inappropriate font variation or spacing”).
The Court also notes that Ms. Gjovik’s repeated complaints about a page limit on her
pleading fall flat. It is not uncommon for courts to impose page limits, even for pleadings. See,
e.g., Sullivan v. Graham, No. 23-3153, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 11968, at *9 (10th Cir. May 17,
2024) (in case where pro se plaintiff claimed, e.g., conspiracy and fraud involving forty
defendants, rejecting plaintiff’s challenge to imposition of 50-page limit on his amended
complaint); Lewis v. Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 739 Fed. Appx. 585, 585-86 (11th Cir. 2018) (rejecting 

# orderedItems[].object.attachment[].name
from short or plain”). As the Court has stated before, nothing about this case suggests that Ms.
Gjovik should not be able to file a pleading in compliance with Rule 8 even if limited to 75 pages.
Finally, the Court acknowledges that Ms. Gjovik has refiled a 5AC which, as a facial
matter, is 75 pages. See Docket No. 138 (5AC). Ms. Gjovik indicates that this complaint is
largely the same as the stricken 5AC; “most changes were merely abbreviations and slight
rewording.” Docket No. 139-1 (Prop. Mot. at 2). The Court has not fully examined the new 5AC
but notes that abbreviations include using: “Pl.” instead of “Gjovik”; “&” instead of “and”; “env.”
instead of “environmental”; “gov.” instead of “government”; “discrim.” instead of
“discrimination”; and “admin.” instead of “administrative.” Although the Court is not prejudging
the matter, it advises Ms. Gjovik that it will not look favorably on the use of abbreviations if so
extensive as to constitute an attempt to effect an end-run around page limitations. See, e.g.,
Doubleday Acquisitions LLC v. Ab, No. 1:21-cv-03749-SCJ, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238573, at
*15 (N.D. Ga. July 1, 2022) (ordering that “the parties shall use the de

# orderedItems[].object.content
I didn't go to law school only to get formally sanctioned in court because I changed my margins &/or line spacing and did not even violate a federal or court rule about margins and/or line spacing - the court just doesn't like it.

This lawsuit is becoming increasingly Kafkaesque. Its a good thing there's already an appeal underway.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
I didn't go to law school only to get formally sanctioned in court because I changed my margins &/or line spacing and did not even violate a federal or court rule about margins and/or line spacing - the court just doesn't like it.

This lawsuit is becoming increasingly Kafkaesque. Its a good thing there's already an appeal underway.

# orderedItems[].object.content
@wesley83 Thank you! 🙏 The power imbalance is willld.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
@wesley83 Thank you! 🙏 The power imbalance is willld.

# orderedItems[].object.content
My lawsuit against Apple would be a lot easier if, like the opposing party, I also had 364 billion dollars.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
My lawsuit against Apple would be a lot easier if, like the opposing party, I also had 364 billion dollars.

# orderedItems[].object.content
Quick links!

Latest complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.138.0.pdf

Complaint diff: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.138.1.pdf

Motion to file motion: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.139.0.pdf

Motion to reconsider https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.139.1.pdf

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
Quick links!

Latest complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.138.0.pdf

Complaint diff: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.138.1.pdf

Motion to file motion: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.139.0.pdf

Motion to reconsider https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.139.1.pdf

# orderedItems[].object.content
I was extremely irritated about the court's decision yesterday, so instead of sleeping, I finished the revised complaint (which is not actually substantively different then the prior) & drafted a motion requesting reconsideration of the order & sanctions. They're now filed 11/20 to Dockets 138 & 139:
https://www. courtlistener.com/docket/67772 913/gjovik-v-apple-inc/

Thanks to the folks who helped proofread tonight! 💪

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
I was extremely irritated about the court's decision yesterday, so instead of sleeping, I finished the revised complaint (which is not actually substantively different then the prior) & drafted a motion requesting reconsideration of the order & sanctions. They're now filed 11/20 to Dockets 138 & 139:
https://www. courtlistener.com/docket/67772 913/gjovik-v-apple-inc/

Thanks to the folks who helped proofread tonight! 💪

# orderedItems[].object.attachment[].name
Plaintiff, Ashley Gjovik, respectfully submits the following Motion for Reconsideration of the court’s Nov. 19 2024 decision at Dkt. 137, along with her Fifth Amended Complaint – Abbreviated version at Dkt. 138.
2.
The court’s Nov. 19 2024 order at Dkt. 137 accuses the Plaintiff of manipulation, circumvention, subversion, evasion, and bad faith conduct. The court’s order issues sanctions against the Plaintiff and warns her of the potential for additional sanctions, including dismissal of her lawsuit. These measures are perceived as excessive and unjust, particularly given the circumstances of a trauma-affected individual representing herself against a large corporation in a case of substantial public interest concerning public safety issues.
3.
The court’s Nov. 19 2024 decision which concludes that the Plaintiff has acted in bad faith to such an extent that punishment is warranted, appears to rely primarily on a factual basis regarding the formatting of the Plaintiff’s Fifth Amended Complaint, specifically the use of: “31 lines of text per page,” “did not use numbered lines,” and has “narrowed page margins.” Dkt. 137. The Plaintiff hereby submits this Motion for Reconsideration to specifically challenge the court's findings regarding these alleged types of bad faith conduct.

# orderedItems[].object.attachment[].name
75 pages in length. An exhibit accompanies the latest Fifth Amended Complaint
to illustrate the differences between the Fifth Amended Complaints at Dkt. 128 and Dkt. 138, indicating most changes were merely abbreviations and slight rewording. Therefore, it is evident that the original Fifth Amended Complaint at Dkt. 128 also complied with the page limits established by the court.
6.
Further, the Plaintiff also believed that the formatting requirements related to 28 lines and the use of line numbers were applicable only to paper filings and not to electronic filings. This belief is supported by her communications with the Defendant, as demonstrated in Exhibit A at Dkt. 132-1. However, the court has posited that the Plaintiff held a contrary belief, despite the absence of any statements from the Plaintiff that would support such a claim.

# orderedItems[].object.attachment[].name
The court seems to dismiss the Plaintiff's arguments regarding the timeline of her formatting changes, treating it as her sole justification for compliance with the rules. This perspective overlooks the fact that this argument was a direct response to Apple's assertions that she altered the formatting of the Fifth Amended Complaint to conceal intentional misconduct related to line spacing and margins. However, Defendant’s factual allegations were false.
15.
Further, the Plaintiff's Opposition contended that the Defendant filed this motion in bad faith and as an additional attempt to harass her. Consequently, it is pertinent to note that the Defendant has employed similar formatting and has received warnings regarding single-spaced lines (which differs from the margin and line issue at hand). It is also relevant that the Defendant's counsel has submitted documents without line numbers. (Opp. at 7-9, Dkt. 134).

# orderedItems[].object.content
@alexr Yeah, in filings, but also transcripts. You might have been joking but during that last hearing when Apple did the jammer crap, he lost it on me. I couldn't even hear it at the time because of the connection issues.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
@alexr Yeah, in filings, but also transcripts. You might have been joking but during that last hearing when Apple did the jammer crap, he lost it on me. I couldn't even hear it at the time because of the connection issues.

# orderedItems[].object.content
I'M AUTISTIC, OMFG.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
I'M AUTISTIC, OMFG.

# orderedItems[].object.content
I'm having a moment right now about how Apple got the Judge to dismiss a ton of my claims simply because I was unable to adequately plead them within 75 pages, even if I could plead them otherwise & now the Judge says I'm prejudicing Apple by trying to adequately plead my claims

Either, I follow all the formatting rules & "practices" perfectly, but prob get my claims dismissed because there's not enough details - or I try to plead as many details as necessary, but get dismissed because of pages

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
I'm having a moment right now about how Apple got the Judge to dismiss a ton of my claims simply because I was unable to adequately plead them within 75 pages, even if I could plead them otherwise & now the Judge says I'm prejudicing Apple by trying to adequately plead my claims

Either, I follow all the formatting rules & "practices" perfectly, but prob get my claims dismissed because there's not enough details - or I try to plead as many details as necessary, but get dismissed because of pages

# orderedItems[].object.content
@alexr I've actually said that at least a dozen times now and he just screams at me in response.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
@alexr I've actually said that at least a dozen times now and he just screams at me in response.

# orderedItems[].object.content
He gave me until Nov 26 to file the complaint & gave Apple until Jan 7 to respond. He said they can file another motion to dismiss. He gave Apple until Jan 7 to file specifically, so if I'm early, it doesn't matter. When Apple files a 6th MTD in Jan, it will push us to March 2025

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
He gave me until Nov 26 to file the complaint & gave Apple until Jan 7 to respond. He said they can file another motion to dismiss. He gave Apple until Jan 7 to file specifically, so if I'm early, it doesn't matter. When Apple files a 6th MTD in Jan, it will push us to March 2025

# orderedItems[].object.content
The court just posted it's decision on Apple's Motion to Dismiss.

The court denied Apple's motion; but did say that it thinks I used 31 lines in bad faith, PTSD doesn't matter, I must be punished, I have to re-do the complaint at 28 lines, & Apple gets an extension until Jan 2025.

The decision is here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.137.0.pdf

I'd have to double check, but I believe Apple has not received a single warning or criticism from this court through this entire 1yr+ lawsuit, and I've received 20+.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
The court just posted it's decision on Apple's Motion to Dismiss.

The court denied Apple's motion; but did say that it thinks I used 31 lines in bad faith, PTSD doesn't matter, I must be punished, I have to re-do the complaint at 28 lines, & Apple gets an extension until Jan 2025.

The decision is here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.137.0.pdf

I'd have to double check, but I believe Apple has not received a single warning or criticism from this court through this entire 1yr+ lawsuit, and I've received 20+.

# orderedItems[].object.content
In a complete coincidence, Apple also requested that in the meantime, Apple should not have to file any response to my Fifth Amended Complaint - because of the emergency they just tried to manufacture.

Apparently I did an excellent job on my Fifth Amended Complaint!

11/7 Fifth Amended Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.128.0.pdf

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
In a complete coincidence, Apple also requested that in the meantime, Apple should not have to file any response to my Fifth Amended Complaint - because of the emergency they just tried to manufacture.

Apparently I did an excellent job on my Fifth Amended Complaint!

11/7 Fifth Amended Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/reca p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.128.0.pdf

# orderedItems[].object.content
No idea when the Court will issue a Decision. Apple filed their motion to dismiss originally as a full formal motion & with a hearing in January.

Then Apple filed another motion to declare the matter an emergency, and asked to hold the hearing this week.

My response to Apple argued the entire matter is a frivolous request & both motions should be denied.

On Friday, the Judge gave Apple 2 days to file anything else on the matter. Now assumably the Court is ruling on the motion itself.

# orderedItems[].object.contentMap.en
No idea when the Court will issue a Decision. Apple filed their motion to dismiss originally as a full formal motion & with a hearing in January.

Then Apple filed another motion to declare the matter an emergency, and asked to hold the hearing this week.

My response to Apple argued the entire matter is a frivolous request & both motions should be denied.

On Friday, the Judge gave Apple 2 days to file anything else on the matter. Now assumably the Court is ruling on the motion itself.