No Judge Oing noted that EEGC had been informed, but as EEGC were claiming they had not been informed (perhaps Smart Win was using the same postal address as Paul is having all his mail returned from) Judge Oing wanted to see an Affidavit from the person who gave that notice confirming it was genuine - it was the affidavit that was missing not the notice, judge Oing said he had seen that. The lack of that affidavit meant that it was a testable fact and therefore that he could not give summary judgement in favour of Smart Win. Paul was too inept to point this out himself, it was the judge who brought it up because he clearly had bothered to read the papers, something Paul clearly had not bothered to do.