<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: 10th Circuit Appeal &#124; In re: MARK STANLEY MILLER &#8220;Deutsche Bank presented evidence that IndyMac had indorsed the Note in blank. Is proof of this indorsement sufficient. As we shall see, it is not&#8221;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://4closurefraud.org/2012/02/04/10th-circuit-appeal-in-re-mark-stanley-miller-deutsche-bank-presented-evidence-that-indymac-had-indorsed-the-note-in-blank-is-proof-of-this-indorsement-sufficient-as-we-shall-see-it-is-not/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2012/02/04/10th-circuit-appeal-in-re-mark-stanley-miller-deutsche-bank-presented-evidence-that-indymac-had-indorsed-the-note-in-blank-is-proof-of-this-indorsement-sufficient-as-we-shall-see-it-is-not/</link>
	<description>- Fighting Foreclosure Fraud BY SHARING THE KNOWLEDGE</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 14:08:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.3</generator>
</channel>
</rss>
