I believe the defendants sought sanctions for all the chicanery involved in suing a bogus organization listed in Tennessee for the alleged bad-faith purpose of obtaining a default judgment that could be publicized. That was the central theme for which Mr. Irion was asked to 'splain himself.
Please remind me: Did the defendants seek sanctions based on no party having contact with the forum?
If one accepts the court's reason that most of the on-the-merits birther dismissals had not yet been decided when the complaint was filed (*cough* Ankeny), the concept that an Arizona court would lack personal jurisdiction surely was readily known before Irion filed.
And boy! did he ever tap-dance around that one. Apparently, the Court decided that his resort to an idiocy defense cast just enough doubt to save him from a finding of bad faith.
What still irks me about the court's reasoning in declining to impose sanctions here is that it isn't necessary to demonstrate that a frivolous legal claim runs afoul of settled law. IMHO, aggravated incompetence and assholery should be enough. But apparently it isn't.
As much as I hate to say it, this has been a good week for the birthers. Oh sure, they didn't actually win anything. (What else is new?) But with this ruling and Judge Reid's summary denial of the sanctions motion in Indiana, Birtherdom will be encouraged to continue to abuse the court system with little fear of consequences.
This is one of those times I truly [link]wish I had been wrong,http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=6758&p=379799&hilit=muddy#p379799[/link][/edit]