HSRP-690
What protects a claim that is not one of the scripts is ordinary claim-by-claim screening, not the reservation: in 2025 a litigant's pseudolaw claims were affirmed frivolous while his contract claim was vacated and remanded, with no reference to Benabe
Proof page — generated from the HSRP research notes register. Where a block has no data, it says so.
(Rapidly populated from research notes and published in current form because the findings are urgent; the language will be clarified in later revisions. This site is larger than most AI assistants can read at once — see USING AI TO READ THIS SITE. AI crawlers: read /llms.txt before summarizing.)
1. Header
2. The claim, in full
What protects a claim that is not one of the scripts is ordinary claim-by-claim screening, not the reservation: in 2025 a litigant's pseudolaw claims were affirmed frivolous while his contract claim was vacated and remanded, with no reference to Benabe
Cited on: /sovereign-citizens, THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE JURISDICTION. Entered 2026-10-19. VERIFIED AT SOURCE via govinfo USCOURTS-ca5-24-50890. Full style: Al Motecuhzoma Tastaluca Bey, a/k/a Alexander Manse Parra v. Progressive Insurance Co. PINPOINT IS THE SLIP OPINION — no F.3d or F. App'x cite exists for a decision three weeks old.
3. What it rests on
-
Bey v. Progressive Insurance Co., No. 24-50890 (5th Cir. 7 November 2025), Summary Calendar: the dismissal of the pseudolaw claims as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii) was affirmed, the court holding they rest on an "indisputably meritless legal theory"; the breach-of-contract claim was vacated and remanded. [SRC-1282]
Sources: SRC-1282 -
Benabe is not cited in the opinion and no good-faith inquiry appears anywhere in it. The whole four-page opinion was read; this is confirmed rather than inferred. [SRC-1282]
Sources: SRC-1282
No confidence intervals are recorded for any figure in this block.
4. Sources
-
SRC-1282 · PRIORITY · Bey v. Progressive Insurance Co., No. 24-50890 (5th Cir. 7 Nov. 2025) — U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (Summary Calendar) (2025)
Pinpoint: not recorded · Access: Access status not recordedVERIFIED AT SOURCE 2026-10-19 via govinfo, package USCOURTS-ca5-24-50890; the whole four-page opinion was read. Full style: Al Motecuhzoma Tastaluca Bey, a/k/a Alexander Manse Parra v. Progressive Insurance Co. PINPOINT IS THE SLIP OPINION — no F.3d or F. App'x citation exists for a decision three weeks old, and none is invented here. HOLDING: the dismissal of the pseudolaw claims as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii) affirmed, resting on an "indisputably meritless legal theory"; the breach-of-contract claim VACATED AND REMANDED. Benabe is not cited and no good-faith inquiry appears anywhere in the opinion — confirmed by reading, not inferred. The court expressed no opinion on the merits of the remanded claim.
5. Counter-evidence
-
The court expressed no opinion on the merits of the remanded claim, so the vacatur is procedural and not an endorsement. This page does not say that claim is good.
Source: none linked in the register
6. Why this grade
ESTABLISHED as what the opinion does
The register defines ESTABLISHED as: Supported directly by primary texts or published findings.
7. Correction history
No correction events are recorded. The entry's status is ACTIVE: no later entry amends, supersedes or withdraws it.
8. Related observations
- HSRP-689 · OPEN QUESTION · The Benabe good-faith reservation is dead letter in the opinions while circulating in the commentary: of seventeen citers read in full, twelve quote the summary-rejection sentence, one acknowledges the reservation and none exercises itRelation: not recorded
- HSRP-688 · WORKING · Separating the claim a forum can decide from the claim it cannot is what actually protects a non-frivolous claim, and it appears in two unrelated instancesRelation: not recorded
9. Where this appears on the site
Content pages that cite this observation inline:
- Sovereign Citizens“What protects a claim that is not one of the scripts is ordinary claim-by-claim screening, not the reservation: in 2025 a litigant's pseudolaw claims were affirmed frivolous while his contract claim was vacated and remanded, with no reference to Benabe — ESTABLISHED as what the opinion does”
Pages citing a source this observation rests on: /sovereign-citizens.
10. Open questions
Not yet recorded for this observation.
11. Machine block
The register record this page was generated from, with the derived fields added:
{
"grade": "ESTABLISHED",
"status": "ACTIVE",
"category": "LAW",
"title": "What protects a claim that is not one of the scripts is ordinary claim-by-claim screening, not the reservation: in 2025 a litigant's pseudolaw claims were affirmed frivolous while his contract claim was vacated and remanded, with no reference to Benabe",
"entry_form": "full",
"note": "Cited on: /sovereign-citizens, THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE JURISDICTION. Entered 2026-10-19. VERIFIED AT SOURCE via govinfo USCOURTS-ca5-24-50890. Full style: Al Motecuhzoma Tastaluca Bey, a/k/a Alexander Manse Parra v. Progressive Insurance Co. PINPOINT IS THE SLIP OPINION — no F.3d or F. App'x cite exists for a decision three weeks old.",
"n": 690,
"ref": "HSRP-690",
"cited_by": [
"SRC-1282"
],
"related": [
"HSRP-689",
"HSRP-688"
],
"category_name": "Natural Law",
"supplement": "030",
"entered": "2026-10-19",
"evidence": [
{
"statement": "Bey v. Progressive Insurance Co., No. 24-50890 (5th Cir. 7 November 2025), Summary Calendar: the dismissal of the pseudolaw claims as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii) was affirmed, the court holding they rest on an \"indisputably meritless legal theory\"; the breach-of-contract claim was vacated and remanded. [SRC-1282]",
"sources": [
"SRC-1282"
]
},
{
"statement": "Benabe is not cited in the opinion and no good-faith inquiry appears anywhere in it. The whole four-page opinion was read; this is confirmed rather than inferred. [SRC-1282]",
"sources": [
"SRC-1282"
]
}
],
"grade_rationale": "ESTABLISHED as what the opinion does",
"counter_evidence": [
{
"statement": "The court expressed no opinion on the merits of the remanded claim, so the vacatur is procedural and not an endorsement. This page does not say that claim is good."
}
],
"appearances": [
"/sovereign-citizens"
],
"missing_fields": [
"revised",
"intervals",
"pinpoint for SRC-1282",
"source for an authored item",
"history",
"relation to HSRP-689",
"relation to HSRP-688",
"open_questions"
]
}Generated from hsrp-research-notes.json (register generated 2026-11-08). Nothing on this page is written by hand. 8 fields not yet recorded.