Word Salad Claimants: When the words don't identify the Plaintiff or Beneficiary

The more I research and analyze the issue, the more convinced I am that the fundamental deficiency of the case against homeowners is hiding in plain sight. And I think it is jurisdictional so it might be possible to raise it at any stage. Close analysis of the actual wording used in the style of judicial and nonjudicial foreclosures shows that if there is a direct or indirect reference to an alleged REMIC Trust there is no Plaintiff and there is no Beneficiary asserted or alleged.  Who is the claimant if they lose? Whose assets will be used to satisfy an award of costs, damages, or sanctions. Who could be found in contempt of court?  Is it Bony Mellon who will say they are only named in order to allow a third party to be the claimant because a trust cannot appear except through a trustee? Is it an implied trust that is not identified except by name? Is it certificate holders who have no right, title or interest in the debt, note or mortgage?