Filed by Conrad · Case 26-102221-PP
04 Supplemental Motion FCI Milan Photo Mailing 2026-04-12
Canonical record: rockenhaus.net. Disputed domains are indexed at /disputed-domains/ (not authoritative).
Loading document…
Filing text (searchable excerpt)
SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN SUPPORT OF TERMINATION OF PPO (WITH FCI MILAN
PHOTO MAILING EXHIBITS)
Source PDF: PPO_Supplemental_Motion_with_Exhibits.pdf
Pages: 17
Case: 26-102221-PP, Wayne County Third Circuit Court (PPO docket)
Author: Conrad Alan Rockenhaus, Respondent (pro se)
Text extracted from embedded OCR layer of source PDF.
PAGE 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN
THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, WAYNE COUNTY
ADRIENNE MARJORIE ROCKENHAUS,
Petitioner,
v.
CONRAD ALAN ROCKENHAUS,
Respondent.
Case No.: 26-102221-PP
Judge: PPO Docket Judge
Hearing: April 29, 2026 at 11:30 AM (Zoom)
RESPONDENT'S SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN SUPPORT OF TERMINATION OF
PERSONAL PROTECTION ORDER AND NOTICE OF RELATED CASE
NOW COMES Respondent, Conrad Alan Rockenhaus, appearing pro se, and respectfully submits
this Supplemental Motion in Support of Termination of the Personal Protection Order entered
February 20, 2026, and in support thereof states as follows:
I. NOTICE OF RELATED CASE
1. Respondent hereby provides notice to this Court that on April 9, 2026, Respondent filed a
Complaint for Divorce against Petitioner Adrienne Marjorie Rockenhaus in the Washtenaw
County Circuit Court, 22nd Judicial Circuit, assigned Case No. 26-737-DO before the Honorable
Darlene A. O'Brien.
2. The divorce proceeding and the instant PPO proceeding are directly related. The same course of
conduct, the same financial motive, and the same pattern of fabrication that form the basis of
Respondent's Motion to Terminate the PPO are also central to the divorce proceeding. The Court's
findings in this matter are therefore relevant to both proceedings.
3. Specifically, Petitioner's Complaint for Divorce alleges, among other things, that: (a) Petitioner
obtained the PPO for retaliatory and financial purposes rather than genuine fear; (b) Petitioner
PAGE 2
made false statements to law enforcement and fabricated medical claims about Respondent; (c)
Petitioner misappropriated Respondent's federal disability benefits during his incarceration; and
(d) Petitioner's subsequent conduct, including forwarding Respondent's mail to him while
simultaneously maintaining the PPO, is wholly inconsistent with any genuine fear of Respondent.
II. NEWLY DOCUMENTED FINANCIAL MOTIVE TIMELINE
4. Respondent presents the following timeline, not previously set forth in this proceeding in
complete form, which establishes that the PPO was the product of a calculated financial and
retaliatory strategy rather than any genuine fear.
5. On or about February 8, 2026, Respondent's appellate counsel, Assistant Federal Public
Defender Kaycee Berente, contacted Petitioner to confirm whether Petitioner would pick up
Respondent upon his release from FCI Milan on March 2, 2026, as had been previously agreed.
Petitioner declined and instead advocated that Respondent be routed to a VA Hospital upon
release. Counsel then informed Petitioner that if Respondent were routed to a VA Hospital, his VA
disability compensation would be required to cover his own lodging and living expenses, meaning
those funds would not be available to Petitioner.
6. The very next day, on February 9, 2026, Petitioner sent counsel a written communication titled
'LEGAL/LIABILITY NOTICE' in which she declared that she was immediately retaining family
counsel to secure a restraining order that would formally bar Respondent from returning to the
marital residence and from accessing financial assets. Petitioner explicitly stated that this would
create 'an absolute legal barrier' and that Respondent would have 'no money, no bank account, no
home to return to.' This communication was sent the day after Petitioner learned that routing
Respondent to a VA Hospital would redirect his disability compensation away from her.
7. Critically, Petitioner's February 9, 2026 communication also contained serious
misrepresentations of Respondent's actual medical condition.
Excerpt of 22276 characters. Download the full PDF for complete text.
About this filing
04 Supplemental Motion FCI Milan Photo Mailing 2026-04-12: filing by Conrad Alan Rockenhaus in Rockenhaus v. Rockenhaus (Personal Protection Order (PPO)), Michigan Case No. 26-102221-PP, Wayne County Circuit Court. PDF and searchable text at rockenhaus.net (canonical court record). Disputed third-party domains: /disputed-domains/.
- File name
04_Supplemental_Motion_FCI_Milan_Photo_Mailing_2026-04-12.pdf- Filed date
- Case number
- 26-102221-PP
- Category
- Filed by Conrad
- Disputed domains
- View disputed domains (asserted controlled by Adrienne Rockenhaus; not authoritative).
- Related context
- FAQ, Joe Prich evidence, Rob Hein
- Canonical record
- rockenhaus.net