This document provides notification that the plaintiff will not be attending a January 23, 2020 court date in Clay County, Florida. It also requests a response by January 24, 2020 to a previous filing notifying the court of the plaintiff's non-attendance at a January 6 hearing and seeking more time to respond. Additionally, it notifies the plaintiffs that any response must comply with applicable statutes and rules, and that failure to do so could result in sanctions or a case being brought before international tribunals. The document asserts various errors and issues with the court proceedings.

1. CANCELLING THE CONTRACTS WITH THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S DESPOTISM “CORPORATION” EMPIRE
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE

3. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 1 of 26
IN THE CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR CLAY COUNTY, FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA1
– including RON
DeSANTIS (in his Official and Individual Capacity)
and applicable Officials/Employees in their Official
and Individual Capacity; CLAY COUNTY,
FLORIDA2
– including GAYWARD HENDRY,
MIKE CELLA, WAYNE BOLLA, DIANE
HUTCHINGS and/or GAVIN ROLLINS (in his/her
Official and Personal Capacity) and applicable
Officials/Employees in their Official and Individual
Capacity; TOWN OF ORANGE PARK,
FLORIDA3
– including CONNIE THOMAS (in her
Official and Personal Capacity) and applicable
Officials/Employees in their Official and Individual
Capacity; ORANGE PARK POLICE
DEPARTMENT (FLORIDA),– including GARY
GOBLE and/or J.T. ADAMS (in his/her Official and
Personal Capacity) and applicable
Officials/Employees in their Official and Individual
Capacity; BAKER DONELSON BEARMAN
CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ4
– including
JAMES M. TALLEY (in his Legal/Official and
Individual Capacity) and applicable
Officials/Employees in their Official and Individual
Capacity and JOHN/JANE DOES 1 – 5000
Plaintiffs
CASE ID: 2019 CT 001218
CRIMINAL TRAFFIC DIVISION
NOTICE OF NON-ATTENDANCE
AT JANUARY 23, 2020 COURT ACTION;
NOTIFICATION REGARDING
ANSWERING/RESPONDING TO
“Notice of Non-Attendance At January 6,
2020 Court Action; Request For Extension
of Time; Response Demanded By Friday,
January 24, 2020; and Notice Of Process
Begun Seeking International Judicial
Prosecution Through The Applicable
International Tribunals;”
REQUEST TO AFFORD PLAINTIFFS
UNTIL MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2020
TO RESPOND
VS.
VANBUREN LEWIS, JR
Defendant
1
State of Florida when mentioned includes its Officers, Officials, Employees, Agents, Legal Counsel, etc.
2
Clay County, Florida when mentioned includes its Officers, Officials, Employees, Agents, Legal Counsel, etc.
3
Town of Orange Park, Florida when mentioned includes its Officers, Officials, Employees, Agents, Legal Counsel, etc.
4
Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz when mentioned includes its Lawyers/Attorneys, Officers, Officials, Employees,
Agents, Legal Counsel, etc.

4. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 2 of 26
TO THIS COURT and ABOVED NAMED PLAINTIFF/PLAINTIFFS:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that WITHOUT waiving “PROTECTED” Rights and
“JURISDICTIONAL” defenses, etc., Vanburen Lewis, Jr. a/k/a Vanburen Lewis-BEY (“Lewis”) comes
in Love, Truth, Peace, Freedom and Justice and hereby states the following in support of this instant,
“NOTICE OF NON-ATTENDANCE AT JANUARY 23, 2020 COURT
ACTION; NOTIFICATION REGARDING ANSWERING/
RESPONDING TO ‘Notice of Non-Attendance At January 6, 2020 Court
Action; Request For Extension of Time; Response Demanded By Friday,
January 24, 2020; and Notice Of Process Begun Seeking International
Judicial Prosecution Through The Applicable International Tribunals;’
REQUEST TO AFFORD PLAINTIFFS UNTIL MONDAY,
FEBRUARY 17, 2020 TO RESPOND” (“NRA/RTNONA01/06/20”).
I. ERROR(S) OF THE CLAY COUNTY COURT:
Lewis hereby notify this “PRIVATELY HELD Company” (i.e. masquerading as a Court) of its
ERRORS pursuant to the applicable statutes governing mistakes/errors and efforts to deprive him due
process of laws, equal protection, etc. in his pursuit and entitlement to JUSTICE in said Company’s
issuance of the January 9, 2020, “NOTICE TO APPEAR” which conflicts with the Rules and/or
Statutes/Laws governing said matters in that on January 6, 2020, Lewis filed a timely instrument entitled,
“Notice of Non-Attendance At January 6, 2020 Court Action; Request For Extension of Time; Response
Demanded By Friday, January 24, 2020; and Notice Of Process Begun Seeking International Judicial
Prosecution Through The Applicable International Tribunals” advising of information he is requesting
RESPONSE from the Plaintiffs on by Friday, January 24, 2020, which CONFLICTS with the “Rush To
Judgment” this Company (i.e. masquerading as a Court) is attempting to engage in.
From Lewis’ research, the Clay County Court (Florida) is a “privately held company.” A
TIMELY notification regarding this Company’s LACK OF JURISDICTION to proceed, etc. has been
presented. Plaintiffs have been NOTIFIED of Lewis’ January 6, 2020 filing with this “privately held
company.”

5. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 3 of 26
Therefore, in the interest of Justice, Lewis hereby NOTIFIES this Company’s Officials (i.e. as
Judges, etc. who are also registered as “a privately held company”) that they are engaging in criminal acts
that are prohibited under the Statutes/Rules governing said matters.

6. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 4 of 26
The Clay County Court appears has ERRED in approving a “PROVISIONAL ORDER
APPOINTING PUBLIC DEFENDER” alleging that a “VanBuren Lewis, Jr.” has “requested to be
found indigent…;” however, there does not appear to be anything in the record of this “privately held
company” to support such an assertion and is THUS FALSE!
Lewis reassert his defense to such a frivolous instrument executed by the Clay County Court through
his:
Notice of Non-Attendance At January 6, 2020 Court Action; Request For
Extension of Time; Response Demanded By Friday, January 24, 2020; and
Notice Of Process Begun Seeking International Judicial Prosecution
Through The Applicable International Tribunals
that ONLY the person and/or person’s attorney can enter a plea. However, keep in mind that the
Attorney/Lawyer is an OFFICER of the Court and his/her FIRST priority is NOT to do anything that
will harm his/her profession as well as his/her ALLEGIANCE to the Court as well as the DESPOTISM

7. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 5 of 26
Empire (The SYSTEM) that have DEVISED such CRIMINAL scams for the purposes of
BLACKMAIL, EMBEZZLEMENT, etc. of your monies to FINANCE such Terrorist/War Crimes
activities. This is information your Lawyer and/or Attorney may NOT disclose to you in – that again –
that he/she is a PARTY to such crimes and is PROFITING from such 13th
Amendment SCAMS. WHY?
Because the Lawyers/Attorneys are OFFICERS of the United States’ DESPOT’s Terrorist Empire and are
in the BUSINESS of making MONIES for their EMPLOYER. Neither are they in such a DECEPTIVE
Profession to HURT themselves and that of their EMPLOYER.
Lewis further believes that this Clay County Court matter has been orchestrated for purposes of
entrapment to have him enslaved as well as for other reasons known to this “privately held company” for
purposes of having him:
(i) Incriminate himself or confess to guilt
(ii) Subjected to arbitrary Kidnapping (i.e. masked/disguised as an arrest or
detention, etc.) for purposes of depriving him his Freedom, Liberty and
other reasons known to this Court
(iii) Subjected to further forms of coercion, duress, threats, torture, and other
forms of cruelty, inhuman and/or degrading treatment.
Through this instant filing, Lewis hereby request that the Clay County Court provide him with
documentation to support this document by FRIDAY, January 24, 2020!

8. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 6 of 26
II. NOTIFICATION REGARDING ANSWERING/ RESPONDING TO
“Notice of Non-Attendance At January 6, 2020 Court Action; Request For
Extension of Time; Response Demanded By Friday, January 24, 2020; and
Notice Of Process Begun Seeking International Judicial Prosecution
Through The Applicable International Tribunals”
Plaintiffs (a/k/a hereinafter “you” and/or “your”) are hereby NOTIFIED that responsive
pleading(s) shall comply with the applicable Statute(s) and/or applicable laws governing said matters and
those responses to the “Notice of Non-Attendance At January 6, 2020 Court Action; Request For Extension
of Time; Response Demanded By Friday, January 24, 2020; and Notice Of Process Begun Seeking
International Judicial Prosecution Through The Applicable International Tribunals” served upon you
shall:
1. State in short and plain terms your defense(s) to each claim asserted and shall
admit or deny averments upon which you rely;
2. If you are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of an averment, you shall so state and this has the effect of denial. However, said
denials shall fairly meet the substance of the averments denied;
3. If you intend in good faith to deny only a part of a qualification of an
averment, then you shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny only
the remainder; and
4. Be subject to the provision of the applicable Rules/Statutes and/or Laws
governing said matters that allow removal and/or striking. An attorney who willfully
violates Rules/Statutes/Laws is subject to possible disciplinary action. Your autograph of
instruments/pleadings constitutes a certification of the following:
(a) That the attorney (or party) has conducted a reasonable inquiry;
(b) That he or she is satisfied that the paper/document/ instrument
is well grounded in fact;
(c) That the document/pleading/instrument has a basis in existing
law or that the attorney (or party) has a good faith argument to
amend or reverse existing law; and

9. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 7 of 26
(d) That the pleading/document/instrument is not interposed for
any improper purpose, such as harassment, threats,
intimidation, coercion, extortion, blackmail, furtherance of
conspiracy(s), delay or needless increase, etc. of his/her
opponent’s costs of litigation and/or to further burden taxpayers
with costs of litigation.
… If the document/pleading/instrument is signed in violation of the Statutes/Rules/Laws governing
said matters, appropriate sanctions/relief shall be sought to be imposed in the applicable
INTERNATIONAL Court(s) with Jurisdiction [since there is evidence to support that the United
States of America’s Judicial System and/or Government is a FRAUD!]
Therefore, may require that Lewis submit the applicable Order for recovery of injuries/harm
in an amount of reasonable relief and expenses caused by theses WAR Crimes and other Criminal
Acts leveled against him; which include reasonable attorney’s/legal fees and costs.

10. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 8 of 26

11. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 9 of 26
You are hereby further NOTIFIED that:
5. That you are to familiarize and/or acquaint yourself with the
Statutes/Rules/Codes, etc. governing responsive pleadings/instruments. Answers such as
“failure to state a claim,” “lack of subject matter jurisdiction,” provided for purposes of
misrepresentation, delay of proceedings, obstruction of justice, etc. will be subject to the
provisions of applicable Statutes/Rules/Codes – i.e. excerpts of the pleading requirements
used as a model in drafting the “Notice of Non-Attendance At January 6, 2020 Court Action;
Request For Extension of Time; Response Demanded By Friday, January 24, 2020; and
Notice Of Process Begun Seeking International Judicial Prosecution Through The
Applicable International Tribunals” (“NONA01/06/20”).

12. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 10 of 26

13. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 11 of 26

14. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 12 of 26

15. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 13 of 26

16. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 14 of 26

17. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 15 of 26

18. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 16 of 26

19. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 17 of 26
6. If your answer is not sufficiently definite in nature to give reasonable notice
of the allegations in the NONA01/06/20 sought to be placed in issue, the
Plaintiff’s/Plaintiffs’ averments may be treated as admitted (i.e. a corporate party’s denial
of “each and every allegation” did not give “plain notice.”) - - For reference purposes see:
Wright & Miller Federal Practice and Procedure Civil 3d § 1261.
7. A denial of knowledge or information requires that you only lack first-hand
knowledge of the necessary facts involved, but also that you lack information upon which
you reasonably could form a personal belief concerning the truth of the allegations/claims
set forth in NONA01/06/20. - - For reference purposes see: Wright & Miller Federal
Practice and Procedure Civil 3d § 1262.

20. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 18 of 26
8. Normally, you may NOT assert lack of knowledge or information if the
necessary facts or data involved are within your knowledge or easily brought within your
knowledge [i.e. An Answer denying information as to the truth or falsity of a matter
necessarily within the knowledge of the party’s managing officers is a sham, and will be
treated as an admission of allegation(s) of the NONA01/06/20]. The United States of
America’s (“USA”) Legal Counsel Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz has
been included as a Party in this action in that said Law Firm retains knowledge/information
and documents/instruments regarding the USA’s Nazis/Zionists hidden agenda of
Enslavement under such Codes as “Black Codes,” Scams as “STRAWMAN,” and
Supreme Court of the United States’ decisions in “Dred Scott vs. Sanford” that is
secretly/deceptively being implemented Globally under the guise of Adolf Hitler’s “NEW”
World Order Agenda in efforts to make the WHITE Race Supreme over “ALL” other
Races/Religions. - - For reference purposes see: Wright & Miller Federal Practice and
Procedure Civil 3d § 1262.
As of 01/16/20 Cut and Pasted From: https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/03/615286/US-is-a-rogue-state-that-must-be-
contained

21. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 19 of 26
9. An averment, that you are without knowledge or information sufficient to
form a belief as to matters that are common knowledge or of which you can inform yourself
with the slightest effort, will be treated as patently false and the effect and purpose will be
taken as such to merely delay justice. - - For reference purposes see: Reed v. Turner, 2
F.R.D. 12; and Squire v. Levan, 32 F. Supp. 437.
10. If the Answer/Response to the NONA01/06/20 is not in compliance with the
Statutes/Rules/Laws governing said matters, the appropriate actions will be sought before
the applicable INTERNATIONAL Tribunal(s) – i.e. Sanctions against you and/or your
attorney [if applicable], restitution/reparation as well as costs of legal services and fees to
defend sham/frivolous filings before this instant alleged County Court that is merely “a
PRIVATELY HELD Company” and is NOT a Court. Moreover, this Company and its
Employees are impersonating Government Agencies, Officers, etc. and are engaging in
WAR Crimes and other Criminal acts of and against Vanburen Lewis-BEY- - which he
strongly/fervently OBJECTS to being unjustly subjected to.

22. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 20 of 26
11. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: Vanburen Lewis-BEY does NOT wish to
contract with the “PRIVATELY HELD Company” – STATE OF FLORIDA nor its
subsidiaries that are also “privately held” companies for their Company State Identification
documents (known as a Driver’s License, Vehicle Registration, etc.).
42 U.S. Code § 1981. Equal Rights Under The Law
(a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have
the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts,
to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws
and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by
white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties,
taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
(b) “Make and enforce contracts” defined
For purposes of this section, the term “make and enforce contracts”
includes the making, performance, modification, and termination of
contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and
conditions of the contractual relationship.
(c) Protection against impairment
The rights protected by this section are protected against impairment
by nongovernmental discrimination and impairment under color of State
law.- - - As of 01/16/20 Cut and Pasted from:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1981

23. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 21 of 26
III. REQUEST TO AFFORD PLAINTIFFS UNTIL MONDAY,
FEBRUARY 17, 2020 TO RESPOND
Through this instant filing Vanburen Lewis-BEY in good faith demand that Plaintiffs be afforded
until February 17, 2020, if this privately held company (Clay County Court) insist on continuing
masquerading as a Court and Plaintiffs intent to engage said private Company in Criminal acts!

24. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 22 of 26
Again, Lewis hereby NOTIFIES the Clay County Court that he will NOT be present at the January
23, 2020 matter that has been NOTICED regarding a “STRAWMAN” referenced as “VANBUREN
LEWIS, JR.” and reassert the defense claims set forth in his January 6, 2020, instrument as well as this
instant NRA/RTNONA01/06/20. From Lewis’ research, it appears that there are case laws wherein the
Strawman defense is recognized and/or is being used.
The Plaintiffs will NOT be prejudice by the Clay County Court withdrawing and/or removing the
January 23, 2020 matter from its Docket and affording them the opportunity to submit their Responses!
Furthermore, the information Lewis seeks through Responses from the Plaintiffs’ to his, “Notice of Non-
Attendance At January 6, 2020 Court Action; Request For Extension of Time; Response Demanded By
Friday, January 24, 2020; and Notice Of Process Begun Seeking International Judicial Prosecution
Through The Applicable International Tribunals;” is a matter of Public Interests and is critical and relevant
information he seeks in this frivolous CRIMINAL matter that has been brought against a “STRAWMAN”
that is being used cause him injuries/harms. Lewis further believe that the information sought from
Plaintiffs through their Responses will fully exonerate him!

25. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 23 of 26
III. RELIEF SOUGHT
12. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: Vanburen Lewis-BEY hereby demands
relief for legal fees/rate per hour is $350; however, may be subject to change.
13. At this time, Lewis is willing to accept the following in settlement of this
matter:
This Settlement Demand is good until 12:00 p.m., FRIDAY, January 24,
2020. Otherwise, Lewis will proceed to seek relief through the applicable
INTERNATIONAL Tribunals (i.e. since the United States of America is NOT a
Government but merely “a privately held company”) to address such
SPECIAL/EXTRAORDINARY/HISTORICAL undertakings as the World and
Nations-Of-Color seek Lawful/Legal remedies to address the United States of
America’s DESPOTISM Corporation Empire’s Nazis/Zionists WAR Crimes that
are being carried out here within the Lands/Territories presently known as the United
States of America.

26. 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
Page 24 of 26
(a) As of 01/15/20: Legal Fees of approximately $8,487.50
(Conference, draft of Instruments, faxing/emailing, etc.)
(b) Punitive Damages of approximately $500,000
(c) Compensatory Damages of approximately $250,000
(d) Discretionary/General/Special/Liquidated/Consequential/
Foreseeable Damages of approximately $250,000
Plaintiffs are further hereby NOTIFIED that unless he/she serve and file a written responsive
pleading within the specified time, Lewis will seek judgement of and against Plaintiff/Plaintiffs by default
for the relief demanded in this matter through the applicable INTERNATIONAL Tribunal(s) in that there
is sufficient evidence to support that the United States of America is NOT a Government and its Courts are
“PRIVATELY HELD” Companies which have proven to bias/racist and prejudicial towards him as well as
other of the protective group under which he belongs!
PLEASE BE ADVISED: That due to the Public/Global Interest (Nationally/Internationally)
regarding such matters as it relates to: (a) facts surrounding the United States of America NOT being a
Government but merely a “PRIVATELY held company,” (b) STRAWMAN Scams – i.e. THEFT of