COMES NOW Petitioner Frederick J. Shaddock, pro se, and resists Respondent's Motion for Continuance filed February 24, 2026, and renews his Motion to Dismiss the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage filed July 14, 2025. In support, Petitioner states as follows:

I. Factual Background

The parties were married on January 17, 2001, in Virginia. The marriage has lasted over 25 years.
This is the 10th divorce proceeding between the parties, with all prior actions dismissed upon mutual reconciliation, probably a world's record.
On October 10, 2025, Petitioner filed a Motion to Convert Petition for Dissolution of Marriage to Petition for Legal Separation. Despite this filing, Respondent's counsel stated in court filings that "Respondent joins Petitioner�s request to dissolve the marriage," which is inconsistent with Petitioner's position since October 2025.
Respondent has been unemployed since January 2025, over a year, and is currently in Russia caring for her elderly mother following the father's death in approximately November 28, 2025.
Respondent has substantial debt, no medical insurance, and no independent means of support. She is currently in Russia caring for her elderly mother, who requires daily medical assistance.
Petitioner has provided all financial support for both marital properties: the Harbour Square condominium in D.C. (Unit S-316) and the Iowa house (806 North 4th St., Fairfield, IA). Without this support, Respondent would likely require public assistance, including welfare for living expenses and medical care.
Petitioner is willing to continue providing support within the marriage at no cost to the public. This includes payment for the couple's two homes, in Fairfield, Iowa, and luxury condo in D.C., plus a Mercedes Benz at both homes.
Prolonged litigation incurs substantial legal fees for Respondent. Petitioner is proceeding pro se, with the free assistance of Grok.AI, to conserve marital savings and has repeatedly suggested ways for Respondent to reduce costs. Grok.AI is an unbiased tool and receives no benefit from any division of marital assets. Respondent's decision to retain expensive counsel is her choice and should not shift the burden of those costs to Petitioner or the marital estate.

II. Resistance to Motion for Continuance

Petitioner resists the continuance on the following grounds:

Insufficient Notice: Respondent's motion was filed on February 24, 2026, only 7 days before the scheduled March 2, 2026 hearing, providing insufficient notice and time for Petitioner to respond adequately, in violation of principles of fair notice and due process under Iowa Code � 598.15 and court rules.
No Good Cause: Respondent's reason for continuance (stay in Russia to care for mother) does not constitute good cause, as the divorce proceeding has been pending since July 2025. Her absence further suggests the dissolution is not a priority, and continuing it wastes judicial resources. Russia has the internet, so Respondent can participate via Zoom. just as well as from Iowa or DC
Waste of Resources: This is the 10th proceeding, and further delay imposes unnecessary costs on taxpayers, court staff, and the parties. The Clerk of Court's time and public funds are better served by resolving this repetitive matter promptly.
Prejudice to Petitioner: Delay prolongs Petitioner's suffering without full access to the marital Harbour Square condominium in D.C. Respondent has deactivated Petitioner's key fob since September 10, 2025, preventing independent re-entry to the building and access to the doctor-ordered exercise gym and swimming pool for health maintenance (high blood pressure management). This interference with marital property rights (absent a final divorce or asset division order) constitutes ongoing harm that a continuance would exacerbate.
Property Access and Mail - Delay also prolongs Petitioner's suffering of inability to receive his mail, Door Dash, and packages. Respondent has ordered the marital DC condo manager at Harbour Square and gate house staff to refuse to accept Petitioner's deliveries, including U.S. Mail, in violation of 18 U.S. Code � 1701 - Obstruction of mails.

The motion for continuance should be denied, and the March 2, 2026 hearing should proceed as scheduled.

III. Renewed Motion to Dismiss

Petitioner renews his request to dismiss the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage without prejudice:

No Advantage to Divorce: At their ages (Respondent over 56, Petitioner over 70), dissolution offers no meaningful benefit and would increase emotional and financial strain. There are no children, no credible threat of harm, and Respondent has access to both marital homes for separate living if desired.
Respondent's Financial Dependence: Respondent is unemployed with substantial debt and no insurance. Dissolution would leave her without support, likely requiring public assistance at taxpayer expense. Iowa Code � 598.21 emphasizes self-sufficiency in distribution, which Respondent lacks.
History of Reconciliation: All 9 prior proceedings were dismissed upon reconciliation, indicating dissolution is not inevitable or desired. These 10 near-Biennlal Divorce Proceedings are probably a World Record.
Public Interest: Prolonged litigation wastes judicial resources and public funds. Dismissal prevents unnecessary burden while allowing refiling if circumstances change.

IV. Request for Mediation

If the Court denies dismissal, Petitioner requests mandatory mediation under Iowa Code � 598.7, to explore reconciliation or legal separation (� 598.28) before proceeding. The parties' history shows mediation could resolve this without trial.

V. Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Court:

Deny Respondent's Motion for Continuance and proceed with the March 3, 2026 hearing.
Dismiss the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage without prejudice.
If dismissal is denied, order mediation before further proceedings.
Order Respondent to restore equal access to both marital properties, and mail rights.
Award such other relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Frederick J. Shaddock
Frederick J. Shaddock, Pro Se
520 N St SW, Unit S-316
Washington, DC 20024
(202) 365-6100
fred@shaddock.net
Date: February 27, 2026

Certificate of Service

I certify that on February 27, 2026, a true copy was served by email to:
Joe Pavelich (pavelich@spiespavelich.com)
Oksana Shaddock (oksanashaddock@gmail.com)
Robert C. Liotta (rcl@ldelaw.com) /s/ Frederick J. Shaddock