Acme Legal really should open a fresh box of law books. They seem to be specializing in stale law, especially in the use of citations to old court cases that have been overturned or that rely on a law or rule that has since been changed.
For example, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin kept relying on Conley v. Gibson, a 1957 case, in his oppositions to various motions to dismiss in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness. Every motion to dismiss has cited Ashcroft v. Iqbal, a 2009 case that effectively overturned Conley.
As I read through the various Acme advised filings from Team Kimberlin, I see a consistent pattern of citing cases that seem to support Acme’s legal theories without regard to whether the case has been superseded in some way.