Hidden Bank Account Evidence

* ILCS */*-* Sec. *-* a. All objections to pleadings shall be raised by motion. The motion shall point out specifically the defects complained of, and shall ask for appropriate relief, such as: that a pleading or portion thereof be stricken because substantially insufficient in law, or that the action be dismissed, or that a pleading be made more definite and certain in a specified particular, or that designated immaterial matter be stricken out, or that necessary parties be added, or that designated misjoined parties be dismissed, and so forth. b. If a pleading or a division thereof is objected to by a motion to dismiss or for judgment or to strike out the pleading, because it is substantially insufficient in law, the motion must specify wherein the pleading or division thereof is insufficient

OK can you reread my motion to strike respondents motions and partition and tell me. how should I finish it off and what would be proper for me to request other than requesting that they be stricken as they are misleading.

Well, I wanna request. that's the judge. grant me in receiving the hidden bank records as I did already. Submit to subpoena. on the bank. And I wanna request that their motions are stricken.

So is this considered as my. request of relief.

I also want to request. that the petition for full coverage of educational expenses and all other expenses listed within the petition be granted

What else can I request as relief Can I request that the respondent and his attorney be held in contempt for. attempting to mislead. the court by stating false misleading statements in

Can you tell me if this is correct and if it is the proper sighting? that I wrote in my motion IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION IN RE THE PARENTAGE OF: A.K, J.K, S.K., minor children, ) ) LULA KOROTKOV, ) Petitioner, Pro Se ) ) and ) No: 2021D051242 ) NASER BEGANOVIC, ) Respondent. MOTION TO STRIKE. RESPONDENTS. MOTIONS TO QUASH SUBPOENAS. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND PETITION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE Now Comes the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, proceeding pro se, pursuant to the Illinois Civil Code of Procedure. Hereby files this Motion to Strike, Respondents’ Motions to Quash Subpoenas, Motion for Sanctions, and Petition for Rule to Show Cause. The Petitioner hereof states as follows: *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA SERVED ON BANK OF AMERICA a. The statement in the respondent’s motion to quash the subpoena served on Bank of America is misleading and false. The claim that Naser is an authorized user and not the account holder of the recently discovered hidden Bank of America account in question is incorrect. b. In the case of a joint account, both individuals are considered account holders. Therefore, the claim that Naser is just an authorized user is misleading and false. c. This false statement is a calculated effort to mislead the court and hinder the discovery process aimed at uncovering both Naser’s ‘under the table’ income, and his actual monthly income. d. The recently unearthed bank records from a hidden account with Bank of America play a pivotal role in this case, which revolves around child support payments and full coverage of educational expenses. The child support payments established on November *, *, did not reflect Naser’s true monthly income. Similarly, his actual monthly income was not disclosed on June *, *, when educational expenses were being considered for full coverage or when the child support payments were being modified. These decisions were based on inaccurate information presented to the court by Naser and his Attorney. Lisa Calderon, who has been unemployed since *, cannot claim the money in that account. It rightfully belongs to Naser. These hidden bank records will also prove that Naser is not $*,* in debt. They will also prove that Lisa Calderon is not financially helping Naser, but is, in fact, benefiting at the expense of my children’s welfare and education. e. These hidden bank account records are also crucial in this case as they will provide evidence of whether Naser is receiving under-the-table income from any other sources that are unknown. As is evident in Naser’s Chase bank records, they provide direct evidence of income cycling, diversion, and concealment. All the money from his Chase accounts that are sent to Lisa Calderon by Zelle to her Huntington Bank account is then transferred to Naser’s recently discovered hidden bank account with Bank of America. As was also evident in his Chase Bank records, his Chase Bank accounts are left with balances of $*.*, creating the illusion that he has no money. The bank records from his recently discovered hidden account will also provide direct evidence that the income he receives under the table from the two known sources were also directed to the hidden account where we will get to see the frequent cash deposits and Zelle payments received from Edina, who was never personally involved with Naser. *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA SERVED ON PERFORMANCE FINANCE a. Naser, was ordered on June *, *, to open a FAFSA account and submit applications to the Parent PLUS loan, which he has not done. He falsely stated to the judge on the same day that he has poor credit. b. The statement in Naser’s motion to quash the subpoena served on Performance Finance is misleading and false. The documents and records that are claimed to be wholly unrelated to the pending litigation are, in fact, crucial. Especially given that the only issues that remain to be determined pertain to the contribution to the college expenses, which hinges on the parties’ eligibility for the Parent PLUS Loan. These loan records are crucial in this case as they will determine Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan. Naser did not open a FAFSA account to submit applications to the Parent PLUS loan. Instead, he obtained an emergency order of protection on July *, *, with false, misleading statements and allegations in order to evade submitting applications to the Parent PLUS loan. He deliberately caused a third missed college tuition payment, depriving the boys of a college education while he fully covered and is covering college tuitions for Lisa Calderon’s adult sons who are over the age of 22 years old c. The loan records from Performance Finance are crucial in this case to determine Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan. These records will also contradict Naser’s false claim of having poor credit. *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT RULE * a. Naser's motion for sanctions is a strategic diversion from the pivotal issues in this case. These include the recent discovery of Naser's hidden Bank of America account, the unresolved question of Naser's eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan, the intentional misrepresentation of the judge’s instructions in the court order by his attorney, and Naser’s attempt to obtain an emergency order of protection with false allegations, which was subsequently denied on July *, *. b. These motions, which lack grounding in fact and documented evidence, contravene Illinois Supreme Court Rule * and are deliberately designed to delay proceedings and mislead the court. c. The issues raised in Naser's motion for sanctions are irrelevant to the current issues in this case and serve to distract from the key issues at hand. d. The unethical behavior exhibited by Naser and Ms. Abellar, including the filing of these baseless motions and the attempt to obtain an emergency order of protection based on false allegations, has resulted in unnecessary missed college tuition payments. *. Motion to Strike Respondent’s Petition for Rule to Show Cause Naser’s petition for rule to show cause is frivolous and is a strategic diversion. It is deliberately designed to distract, mislead, and delay the proceedings, which is in direct violation of Rule *. This petition introduces multiple scenarios and situations that are intended to confuse the court and are irrelevant to the current issues in this case. Naser himself is in direct violation of not following the judges’ instructions from June *, *, to open a FAFSA account and submit his applications to the Parent PLUS loan. He was also asked to provide documentation of his eligibility to me within a week. Just as I had submitted applications to the Parent PLUS loan on July *, *, and provided his attorney with the results. Naser’s petition for rule to show cause is also misleading, as it’s meant to create the illusion that Naser followed the judges’ instructions that were stated to him on June *, *. When in fact, the judge’s instructions were deliberately misrepresented in his attorney’s drafted court order, dated July *, *. As Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan remains undetermined. * ILCS */*-* Sec. *-* a. All objections to pleadings shall be raised by motion. The motion shall point out specifically the defects complained of, and shall ask for appropriate relief, such as: that a pleading or portion thereof be stricken because substantially insufficient in law, or that the action be dismissed, or that a pleading be made more definite and certain in a specified particular, or that designated immaterial matter be stricken out, or that necessary parties be added, or that designated misjoined parties be dismissed, and so forth. b. If a pleading or a division thereof is objected to by a motion to dismiss or for judgment or to strike out the pleading, because it is substantially insufficient in law, the motion must specify wherein the pleading or division thereof is insufficient. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court: *. Grant the petitioner’s motion to strike respondent’s motions to quash subpoenas, motion for sanctions, and petition for rule to show cause *. Grant the petitioner’s request for the discovery of Naser’s recently discovered hidden bank account records from Bank of America. *. Grant the petitioner’s request for the discovery of Naser’s loan records from Performance Finance. *. Order the adjustment of child support payments based on the true income. *. Grant the petition for full coverage of educational and all other expenses listed within the petition. *. Hold the respondent, Naser Beganovic, and his attorney, Ms. Abellar, in contempt for attempting to mislead this honorable court.

So now my question is, if I am wanting to also. include in this motion. that the respondents motions and petitions should be stricken. as the respondents attorney is actually collaborating with the respondents girlfriend Lisa Calderon

Just show me how I would properly cite that in my motion

I wanna state something like this. I would also like to bring to this honorable court's attention. that it was confirmed by naser's Mother. that is in fact, Lisa Calderon collaborating with ms. abellar

The judge is already aware that the non custodial parents girlfriend has been interfering in this case. As the non custodial parents, mother, has confirmed that it is, in fact, Lisa Calderon collaborating with the attorney. So these motions and petitions should be stricken.

I also needed to state that it was. confirmed by the non custodial's mother that it is in fact Lisa Calderon collaborating with the attorney.

Can I also politely informally respectfully? state in this motion before the? wherefore To express my concern That the non custodial parent and his attorney. are aware that this court. has been making all the rulings and decisions in their favor without A single grounded in fact. documented evidence. Despite their Submission of misleading. motions to the. court. Despite their pattern of dishonesty, deliberate delays and deliberate misrepresentation and misleading This court has helped. the non custodial parent. inflict further Hardship children. my children. hindering their access. to a college education. I urge dishonorable court to prioritize. the children's welfare and future of my three children over the misleading assortions. of the opposing party. I am prepared if necessary to escalate These concerns to the Illinois judicial Inquiry board.

Can you read my text? and tell me if it is proper or does it sound threatening at the end?IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION IN RE THE PARENTAGE OF: A.K, J.K, S.K., minor children, ) ) LULA KOROTKOV, ) Petitioner, Pro Se ) ) and ) No: 2021D051242 ) NASER BEGANOVIC, ) Respondent. MOTION TO STRIKE. RESPONDENTS. MOTIONS TO QUASH SUBPOENAS. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND PETITION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE Now Comes the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, proceeding pro se, pursuant to the Illinois Civil Code of Procedure. Hereby files this Motion to Strike, Respondents’ Motions to Quash Subpoenas, Motion for Sanctions, and Petition for Rule to Show Cause. The Petitioner hereof states as follows: *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA SERVED ON BANK OF AMERICA a. The statement in the respondent’s motion to quash the subpoena served on Bank of America is misleading and false. The claim that Naser is an authorized user and not the account holder of the recently discovered hidden Bank of America account in question is incorrect. b. In the case of a joint account, both individuals are considered account holders. Therefore, the claim that Naser is just an authorized user is misleading and false. c. This false statement is a calculated effort to mislead the court and hinder the discovery process aimed at uncovering both Naser’s ‘under the table’ income, and his actual monthly income. d. The recently unearthed bank records from a hidden account with Bank of America play a pivotal role in this case, which revolves around child support payments and full coverage of educational expenses. The child support payments established on November *, *, did not reflect Naser’s true monthly income. Similarly, his actual monthly income was not disclosed on June *, *, when educational expenses were being considered for full coverage or when the child support payments were being modified. These decisions were based on inaccurate information presented to the court by Naser and his Attorney. Lisa Calderon, who has been unemployed since *, cannot claim the money in that account. It rightfully belongs to Naser. These hidden bank records will also prove that Naser is not $*,* in debt. They will also prove that Lisa Calderon is not financially helping Naser, but is, in fact, benefiting at the expense of my children’s welfare and education. e. These hidden bank account records are also crucial in this case as they will provide evidence of whether Naser is receiving under-the-table income from any other sources that are unknown. As is evident in Naser’s Chase bank records, they provide direct evidence of income cycling, diversion, and concealment. All the money from his Chase accounts that are sent to Lisa Calderon by Zelle to her Huntington Bank account is then transferred to Naser’s recently discovered hidden bank account with Bank of America. As was also evident in his Chase Bank records, his Chase Bank accounts are left with balances of $*.*, creating the illusion that he has no money. The bank records from his recently discovered hidden account will also provide direct evidence that the income he receives under the table from the two known sources were also directed to the hidden account where we will get to see the frequent cash deposits and Zelle payments received from Edina, who was never personally involved with Naser. As per the information provided, neither the Illinois Supreme Court Rule * nor the Illinois Statute * ILCS */*-* explicitly state that the I the petitioner am required to notify Naser or his attorney Ms. Abellar about subpoenaing Naser’s hidden bank records. It is the responsibility of the institutions (Bank of America and Performance Finance) to provide such notices. According to the Illinois State Statute and Supreme Court rules, once a subpoena for bank records is stamped by the circuit clerk, it becomes a legally binding document. As the pro se petitioner in this case, I have the right to issue this subpoena in accordance with these laws. This is part of my lawful pursuit of relevant information pertaining to the ongoing child support case and full coverage of educational expenses. *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA SERVED ON PERFORMANCE FINANCE a. Naser, was ordered on June *, *, to open a FAFSA account and submit applications to the Parent PLUS loan, which he has not done. He falsely stated to the judge on the same day that he has poor credit. b. The statement in Naser’s motion to quash the subpoena served on Performance Finance is misleading and false. The documents and records that are claimed to be wholly unrelated to the pending litigation are, in fact, crucial. Especially given that the only issues that remain to be determined pertain to the contribution to the college expenses, which hinges on the parties’ eligibility for the Parent PLUS Loan. These loan records are crucial in this case as they will determine Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan. Naser did not open a FAFSA account to submit applications to the Parent PLUS loan. Instead, he obtained an emergency order of protection on July *, *, with false, misleading statements and allegations in order to evade submitting applications to the Parent PLUS loan. He deliberately caused a third missed college tuition payment, depriving the boys of a college education while he fully covered and is covering college tuitions for Lisa Calderon’s adult sons who are over the age of 22 years old c. The loan records from Performance Finance are crucial in this case to determine Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan. These records will also contradict Naser’s false claim of having poor credit. *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT RULE * a. Naser's motion for sanctions is a strategic diversion from the pivotal issues in this case. These include the recent discovery of Naser's hidden Bank of America account, the unresolved question of Naser's eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan, the intentional misrepresentation of the judge’s instructions in the court order by his attorney, and Naser’s attempt to obtain an emergency order of protection with false allegations, which was subsequently denied on July *, *. b. These motions, which lack grounding in fact and documented evidence, contravene Illinois Supreme Court Rule * and are deliberately designed to delay proceedings and mislead the court. c. The issues raised in Naser's motion for sanctions are irrelevant to the current issues in this case and serve to distract from the key issues at hand. d. The unethical behavior exhibited by Naser and Ms. Abellar, including the filing of these baseless motions and the attempt to obtain an emergency order of protection based on false allegations, has resulted in unnecessary missed college tuition payments. *. Motion to Strike Respondent’s Petition for Rule to Show Cause Naser’s petition for rule to show cause is frivolous and is a strategic diversion. It is deliberately designed to distract, mislead, and delay the proceedings, which is in direct violation of Rule *. This petition introduces multiple scenarios and situations that are intended to confuse the court and are irrelevant to the current issues in this case. Naser himself is in direct violation of not following the judges’ instructions from June *, *, to open a FAFSA account and submit his applications to the Parent PLUS loan. He was also asked to provide documentation of his eligibility to me within a week. Just as I had submitted applications to the Parent PLUS loan on July *, *, and provided his attorney with the results. Naser’s petition for rule to show cause is also misleading, as it’s meant to create the illusion that Naser followed the judges’ instructions that were stated to him on June *, *. When in fact, the judge’s instructions were deliberately misrepresented in his attorney’s drafted court order, dated July *, *. As Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan remains undetermined. *. I would like to respectfully draw the court's attention to the fact that Naser had a concealed account with Chase Bank, which came to light in March *, thanks to information provided by his mother. Similarly, I have recently discovered another hidden account of Naser's with Bank of America. *. It has been confirmed by Naser's mother that Lisa Calderon played a key role in convincing her son to secure an emergency protection order from Kane County. However, in a hearing in Kane County on July *, *, Naser informed Judge Campbell that it was his attorney who had advised him to obtain the emergency protection order. *. Moreover, Naser's mother has substantiated that Lisa Calderon is the one who has been collaborating with Ms. Abellar to strategize for this case, including the decision-making process regarding which motions should be filed and what their content should be. This implies that the deliberate misrepresentation of the judge's instructions in Ms. Abellar's court order drafted on July *, *, Naser's procurement of an emergency order of protection on July *, *, and Ms. Abellar serving me with these frivolous motions and a petition that all contain false and misleading information just an hour after Judge Campbell denied the emergency order of protection on July *, *, were all premeditated actions. These actions appear to be designed to impose further hardship on my children and to deprive my sons of the college education they have worked so hard to earn. *. Regrettably, it seems that the opposing party has been able to exploit a series of deliberate tactics without repercussions. The court, perhaps swayed by their legal representation, has consistently favored them, despite a clear pattern of dishonesty, intentional delays, misleading and false statements, and calculated misrepresentation. This strategy has unfortunately resulted in the infliction of further hardship for my three children and has jeopardized my sons’ college education. Given that the opposing party appears to have recognized a trend of rulings and decisions in their favor, I implore this esteemed court to prioritize the welfare and future of my children over the deceptive claims of the opposing party. If deemed necessary, I stand ready to escalate these concerns to the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board for further examination. * ILCS */*-* Sec. *-* a. All objections to pleadings shall be raised by motion. The motion shall point out specifically the defects complained of, and shall ask for appropriate relief, such as: that a pleading or portion thereof be stricken because substantially insufficient in law, or that the action be dismissed, or that a pleading be made more definite and certain in a specified particular, or that designated immaterial matter be stricken out, or that necessary parties be added, or that designated misjoined parties be dismissed, and so forth. b. If a pleading or a division thereof is objected to by a motion to dismiss or for judgment or to strike out the pleading, because it is substantially insufficient in law, the motion must specify wherein the pleading or division thereof is insufficient. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court: *. Grant the petitioner’s motion to strike respondent’s motions to quash subpoenas, motion for sanctions, and petition for rule to show cause *. Grant the petitioner’s request for the discovery of Naser’s recently discovered hidden bank account records from Bank of America. *. Grant the petitioner’s request for the discovery of Naser’s loan records from Performance Finance. *. Order the adjustment of child support payments based on the true income. *. Grant the petition for full coverage of educational and all other expenses listed within the petition. *. Hold the respondent, Naser Beganovic, and his attorney, Ms. Abellar, in contempt for attempting to mislead this honorable court.

Like this.IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION IN RE THE PARENTAGE OF: A.K, J.K, S.K., minor children, ) ) LULA KOROTKOV, ) Petitioner, Pro Se ) ) and ) No: 2021D051242 ) NASER BEGANOVIC, ) Respondent. MOTION TO STRIKE. RESPONDENTS. MOTIONS TO QUASH SUBPOENAS. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND PETITION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE Now Comes the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, proceeding pro se, pursuant to the Illinois Civil Code of Procedure. Hereby files this Motion to Strike, Respondents’ Motions to Quash Subpoenas, Motion for Sanctions, and Petition for Rule to Show Cause. The Petitioner hereof states as follows: *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA SERVED ON BANK OF AMERICA a. The statement in the respondent’s motion to quash the subpoena served on Bank of America is misleading and false. The claim that Naser is an authorized user and not the account holder of the recently discovered hidden Bank of America account in question is incorrect. b. In the case of a joint account, both individuals are considered account holders. Therefore, the claim that Naser is just an authorized user is misleading and false. c. This false statement is a calculated effort to mislead the court and hinder the discovery process aimed at uncovering both Naser’s ‘under the table’ income, and his actual monthly income. d. The recently unearthed bank records from a hidden account with Bank of America play a pivotal role in this case, which revolves around child support payments and full coverage of educational expenses. The child support payments established on November *, *, did not reflect Naser’s true monthly income. Similarly, his actual monthly income was not disclosed on June *, *, when educational expenses were being considered for full coverage or when the child support payments were being modified. These decisions were based on inaccurate information presented to the court by Naser and his Attorney. Lisa Calderon, who has been unemployed since *, cannot claim the money in that account. It rightfully belongs to Naser. These hidden bank records will also prove that Naser is not $*,* in debt. They will also prove that Lisa Calderon is not financially helping Naser, but is, in fact, benefiting at the expense of my children’s welfare and education. e. These hidden bank account records are also crucial in this case as they will provide evidence of whether Naser is receiving under-the-table income from any other sources that are unknown. As is evident in Naser’s Chase bank records, they provide direct evidence of income cycling, diversion, and concealment. All the money from his Chase accounts that are sent to Lisa Calderon by Zelle to her Huntington Bank account is then transferred to Naser’s recently discovered hidden bank account with Bank of America. As was also evident in his Chase Bank records, his Chase Bank accounts are left with balances of $*.*, creating the illusion that he has no money. The bank records from his recently discovered hidden account will also provide direct evidence that the income he receives under the table from the two known sources were also directed to the hidden account where we will get to see the frequent cash deposits and Zelle payments received from Edina, who was never personally involved with Naser. As per the information provided, neither the Illinois Supreme Court Rule * nor the Illinois Statute * ILCS */*-* explicitly state that the I the petitioner am required to notify Naser or his attorney Ms. Abellar about subpoenaing Naser’s hidden bank records. It is the responsibility of the institutions (Bank of America and Performance Finance) to provide such notices. According to the Illinois State Statute and Supreme Court rules, once a subpoena for bank records is stamped by the circuit clerk, it becomes a legally binding document. As the pro se petitioner in this case, I have the right to issue this subpoena in accordance with these laws. This is part of my lawful pursuit of relevant information pertaining to the ongoing child support case and full coverage of educational expenses. *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA SERVED ON PERFORMANCE FINANCE a. Naser, was ordered on June *, *, to open a FAFSA account and submit applications to the Parent PLUS loan, which he has not done. He falsely stated to the judge on the same day that he has poor credit. b. The statement in Naser’s motion to quash the subpoena served on Performance Finance is misleading and false. The documents and records that are claimed to be wholly unrelated to the pending litigation are, in fact, crucial. Especially given that the only issues that remain to be determined pertain to the contribution to the college expenses, which hinges on the parties’ eligibility for the Parent PLUS Loan. These loan records are crucial in this case as they will determine Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan. Naser did not open a FAFSA account to submit applications to the Parent PLUS loan. Instead, he obtained an emergency order of protection on July *, *, with false, misleading statements and allegations in order to evade submitting applications to the Parent PLUS loan. He deliberately caused a third missed college tuition payment, depriving the boys of a college education while he fully covered and is covering college tuitions for Lisa Calderon’s adult sons who are over the age of 22 years old c. The loan records from Performance Finance are crucial in this case to determine Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan. These records will also contradict Naser’s false claim of having poor credit. *. MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT RULE * a. Naser's motion for sanctions is a strategic diversion from the pivotal issues in this case. These include the recent discovery of Naser's hidden Bank of America account, the unresolved question of Naser's eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan, the intentional misrepresentation of the judge’s instructions in the court order by his attorney, and Naser’s attempt to obtain an emergency order of protection with false allegations, which was subsequently denied on July *, *. b. These motions, which lack grounding in fact and documented evidence, contravene Illinois Supreme Court Rule * and are deliberately designed to delay proceedings and mislead the court. c. The issues raised in Naser's motion for sanctions are irrelevant to the current issues in this case and serve to distract from the key issues at hand. d. The unethical behavior exhibited by Naser and Ms. Abellar, including the filing of these baseless motions and the attempt to obtain an emergency order of protection based on false allegations, has resulted in unnecessary missed college tuition payments. *. Motion to Strike Respondent’s Petition for Rule to Show Cause Naser’s petition for rule to show cause is frivolous and is a strategic diversion. It is deliberately designed to distract, mislead, and delay the proceedings, which is in direct violation of Rule *. This petition introduces multiple scenarios and situations that are intended to confuse the court and are irrelevant to the current issues in this case. Naser himself is in direct violation of not following the judges’ instructions from June *, *, to open a FAFSA account and submit his applications to the Parent PLUS loan. He was also asked to provide documentation of his eligibility to me within a week. Just as I had submitted applications to the Parent PLUS loan on July *, *, and provided his attorney with the results. Naser’s petition for rule to show cause is also misleading, as it’s meant to create the illusion that Naser followed the judges’ instructions that were stated to him on June *, *. When in fact, the judge’s instructions were deliberately misrepresented in his attorney’s drafted court order, dated July *, *. As Naser’s eligibility for the Parent PLUS loan remains undetermined. *. I would like to respectfully draw the court's attention to the fact that Naser had a concealed account with Chase Bank, which came to light in March *, thanks to information provided by his mother. Similarly, I have recently discovered another hidden account of Naser's with Bank of America. *. It has been confirmed by Naser's mother that Lisa Calderon played a key role in convincing her son to secure an emergency protection order from Kane County. However, in a hearing in Kane County on July *, *, Naser informed Judge Campbell that it was his attorney who had advised him to obtain the emergency protection order. *. Moreover, Naser's mother has substantiated that Lisa Calderon is the one who has been collaborating with Ms. Abellar to strategize for this case, including the decision-making process regarding which motions should be filed and what their content should be. This implies that the deliberate misrepresentation of the judge's instructions in Ms. Abellar's court order drafted on July *, *, Naser's procurement of an emergency order of protection on July *, *, and Ms. Abellar serving me with these frivolous motions and a petition that all contain false and misleading information just an hour after Judge Campbell denied the emergency order of protection on July *, *, were all premeditated actions. These actions appear to be designed to impose further hardship on my children and to deprive my sons of the college education they have worked so hard to earn. *. * ILCS */*-* Sec. *-* a. All objections to pleadings shall be raised by motion. The motion shall point out specifically the defects complained of, and shall ask for appropriate relief, such as: that a pleading or portion thereof be stricken because substantially insufficient in law, or that the action be dismissed, or that a pleading be made more definite and certain in a specified particular, or that designated immaterial matter be stricken out, or that necessary parties be added, or that designated misjoined parties be dismissed, and so forth. b. If a pleading or a division thereof is objected to by a motion to dismiss or for judgment or to strike out the pleading, because it is substantially insufficient in law, the motion must specify wherein the pleading or division thereof is insufficient. *. Regrettably, it seems that the opposing party has been able to exploit a series of deliberate tactics without repercussions. The court, perhaps swayed by their legal representation, has consistently favored them, despite a clear pattern of dishonesty, intentional delays, misleading and false statements, and calculated misrepresentation. This strategy has unfortunately resulted in the infliction of further hardship for my three children and has jeopardized my sons’ college education. Given that the opposing party appears to have recognized a trend of rulings and decisions in their favor, I implore this esteemed court to prioritize the welfare and future of my children over the deceptive claims of the opposing party. If deemed necessary, I stand ready to escalate these concerns to the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board for further examination. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court: *. Grant the petitioner’s motion to strike respondent’s motions to quash subpoenas, motion for sanctions, and petition for rule to show cause *. Grant the petitioner’s request for the discovery of Naser’s recently discovered hidden bank account records from Bank of America. *. Grant the petitioner’s request for the discovery of Naser’s loan records from Performance Finance. *. Order the adjustment of child support payments based on the true income. *. Grant the petition for full coverage of educational and all other expenses listed within the petition. *. Hold the respondent, Naser Beganovic, and his attorney, Ms. Abellar, in contempt for attempting to mislead this honorable court.

So if I also want to request. that. the respondents motions and partition be stricken. because of third party interference. How would I do that