Petitioners Object to the Respondents being allowed to make any response brief for the following reason.

The Appellees have never appeared nor responded to the Record on Appeal nor to the Appellant/s Brief appropriately noticed and "served" upon respondents/s, and subsequently filed in the N.C. Supreme Court on December 15, 1999. Therefore they have not complied with the Rules of Appellate Procedure and have "forfeited" any STANDING that they otherwise may have had to voice any objection now before the one supreme Court.

The maxims of law are self explanatory on this and were expounded on in the Lower State Court that being;

1. "Nihil Dicit. He says nothing. The name of the judgement which may be taken as of course against a defendant who omits to plead or answer the plaintiffs declaration or complaint within the time limited. In some jurisdictions it is otherwise known as judgement `for want of plea.'" Black's Law 5Th, page 942

2. "Nihil Dicit Judgement. Judgement entered against defendant, in proceeding in which he is in court but has not filed an answer, is a "nil dicit judgement"; all error of pleading being waived, court examines petition only to determine if it attempts to state a cause of action within the court's jurisdiction." Cite omitted Black's Law 5Th, page 943

This is what Petitioners demanded of Right and filed in the Lower State Court when Respondents never appeared in that Court to defend and the Court never reviewed or deliberated

except to deny Petitioners Pleadings. This shows that even the State's highest court denied us substantive Due Process or any "meaningful" hearing or lawful remedy.

For this court to allow any appearance by Respondents would be a violation of the United States Rules of Appellate Procedure as well as an act of prejudice to Plaintiff/s; since this would be tantamount to allowing the Respondents to "pick and choose" THEIR battlefield while depriving the Petitioner/s their right to a "record" in the lower Court. If the Respondent/s refuse to "play by the Rules"; they should not NOW be rewarded for their contemptuous conduct when the record below has not one shred of responsive pleading or appearance that the

Respondent phone companies took this case and its issues seriously at the courts below!

If this Court were to NOW change the Rules "just" for these Respondent/s while the Petitioner/s have abided by every manner of 'adversary process" would be prime facia proof that THEIR ARE NO RULES in effect but instead we are operating under the Rules of Conquest whereby every court in this country has forsaken the protections afforded Petitioners by Civil process and in reality the constitution is being operating under the war powers and the RULES of NECESSITY!

Date: Respectfully presented,

Albert Coombs