whether-defendant-was-properly-served

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. THE DEFENDANT-APPELLEES ALDRIDGE/PITE,LLP WERE SERVED THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT BY A PROCESS SERVICE AND IT WAS FILED IN THE COURT, BUT ALDRIDGE/PITE LLP NEVER RESPONDED TO THE COURT AND IT WAS NOTICED IN THE DISMISSAL THAT ALDRIDGE/PITE LLP NEVER DID RESPOND TO THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT BUT THE FEDERAL JUDGE DU DISMISSED THE CASE WITHOUT THEM EVER REPLYING TO THE COURT! ~ 2. THE PLAINTIFF PRO-SE DID DO A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT ON THE MERITS BUT THE COURT REFUSED TO DO ANYTHING AND THEN ANOTHER DEFENDANT REPRESENTED BY HOUSER LAW FIRM FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS AND MY MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT WAS NEVER EVEN LOOKED AT BY THE COURT! THE PLAINTIFFS HAD THE DEFENDANTS STONE COLD CAUGHT AND ALL WAS PROVEN WITH EXHIBITS OF PROOF, WITH FACTS : AND WITH THE TRUTH OF THE CASE, BUT THE TRUTH, THE FACTS, AND THE PROOF NEVER WAS ENEN LOOKED AT! 3. THE PLAINTIFFS WERE GIVEN A LOAN MODIFICATION BY THE DEFENDANT PHH MORTGAGE SERVICES. THE PLAINTIFFS AGREED TO A $199,000 DOLLAR LOAN MODIFICATION AGREEMENT WITH $1289.00 PER MONTH FOR 30 YEARS WITH A 3 PERCENT LOAN. THE MODIFICATION AGREEMENT WAS TO BE LEGAL AFTER 3 MONTHLY PAYMENTS WERE MADE. THE 3 MONTHLY PAYMENTS WERE MADE IN FULL ON TIME AND THEN THE PLAINTIFFS WERE TO GET THE . FINAL LOAN MODIFICATION AGREEMENT THE PHH MORTGAGE SERVICES DID ADD ON A $150,000 DOLLAR..BALLOON PAYMENT AND THE GUY FROM INDIA ALSO ADDED ON A $10,000 DOLLAR PAYMENT TO HIMSELF. WELL, WE NEVER . APFREED TO ANY BALLOON PAYMENT AND THE NEW PAYMENT WENT TO THE DUESCH BANK WHO HAD NOTHING EVER TO DO. WITH THIS HOUSE LOAN!