CASE SUMMARY In Superior Court: 17 June 2014, complaint filed. Primarily antitrust, unfair competition for disappearing Plaintiff's website. 13 August 2014, Defendant files Demurrer (late by 30 days). 29 August 2014, Defendant files Motion to Strike per 425.16. It is filed late (72 days after the complaint but this is unnoted by court). 10 September 2014, Plaintiff S. Louis Martin files rebuttal to Demurrer and 425.16-based Motion to Strike. 13 November 2014, Motion to Strike granted. (1) Judge Ernest Goldsmith commits perjury in signing the order written by Google, stating that Plaintiff falied to file Opposition, and fails to follow rules per ccp 425.16 in deciding Plaintiff's probability of prevailing. (2) Google supposed to prepare "proposed order" but fails to do so. 19 Noberber 2014, "Notice of Entry of Judgment" entered, but no judgment is contained in this entry, only the strike order. (Note this is the first "Notice of Entry of Judgment"; another is filed when Defendant files the "proposed order" as ordered by the presiding judge of the court. The second entry contains the judgment.) 10 December 2014, Motion to Vacate Strike Order filed by Plaintiff Martin. 27 January 2015, Request for Continuance filed by Plaintiff. Basis: need more time for investigation by Concil on Judical Performance of Judge Goldmith's perjury and FBI investigation of Google hacking attacks. 3 February 2015, Motion to Vacate Strike Order and Request for Continuance denied. 8 April 2015, Presiding Judge of Court John Stewart orders Google to show cause for failure to file "proposed order". 16 April 2015, Defendant Google complies by filing the "propsed order" for judgment. 23 April 2015, new (second) Notice of Entry of Judgment appears in ROA. 30 April 2015, Plaintiff Martin files Motion to Vacate the Judgment. 29 June 2015, the Motion to Vacate the Judgment is denied, Judge Joseph presiding. (Commits perjury when signing clearly false order written by Google stating that Plaintiff failed to address ccp 663. Easy to prove.) 29 July 2015, Notice of Appeal appears in ROA. In Appeals Court: 23 July 2015, Civil Case Information Statement Filed by Plaintiff. 19 August 2015, Google files Motion to Dismiss. 26 August 2015, Plaintiff files Oposition. 22 September 2015, Plaintiff files Opening Brief and Appellant's Appendix early (was scheduled for 28 September 2015). 1 October 2015, Google files Application for Extension for its responding brief. 1 October 2015, Court grants extension (same day as filed). 6 October 2015, Plaintiff files Opposition based on CRC 8.63 (a) (1), (2), and (3), and (b) (1) and (2). Good cause not shown. 8 October 2015, Court grants dismissal early (not due till 16 October 2015), which appears punitive for Plaintiff's filing strong Opposition on 6 October 2015. 21 October 2015, Petition for Rehearing filed. 29 October 2015, Petition for Rehearing denied. In Supreme Court of California 17 November 2015, Petition for Review filed. Notes: To date Google has prevented any substantive issues from being discussed in court. And no judge has ever asked one question of the Plaintiff. Court has shown extreme prejudice in ignoring all Google untimeliness and smacking the Plaintiff for the single instance when Pro Se Plaintiff filed the Motion to Vacate the Strike Order late, confusing the Small Claims deadline for Civil. Orders, denials, and judgments have been written by Defendant Google and contain false statements that judges Goldsmith and Quinn have not hesitated to sign. And, yes, the Plaintiff is a little angry. His business was disappeared by Google and now his attempt to sue Google is being disappeared by Google and the Court! The Plaintiff thought justice looked more like justice, not injustice delivered in the form of an insult.