THE REAL LAW IS FOUND IN 15 USC 1-ALL COURTS ARE ILLUSION OF JUSTICE OWNED BY DOD, LAW GROUP INC

AND
THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX (SEE 28 USC 3002)

NOBODY HAS AN OATH

YOU ARE THE DEBTOR, THE STATES INCS ARE THE CREDITORS AND THE ATTORNEYS ARE THE DEBT COLLECTORS &
THE FOREIGN AGENTS ARE CASHING OUT ON YOU BID BOND/C-TRUST (28 UCS 3002)
Purpose
Use Thank Remind Explain

• Use our REAL TIME • Thank the WHITE • Remind the • Explain 15 USC 1 –
RICO case against HATS [DIGITAL followers that we the REAL LAW IS
the United States SOLDIERS] for are still playing the TRADE AKA UCC
Inc and the United allowing me to sting operation see 28 USC 3002
States of America share our story on just look at the and how [most]
(Military) aka VA social media on 5 patterns or the USA INC attorneys
Company of MARCH 2025 for digital soldier’s are traitors aka
London aka the entire world to slides/real raw debt collectors
Bankers aka hear than signing news or the who work as
Rothschilds our certified mail defendants we foreign agents
receipt informed [and did especially the VA
nothing] Law Group
Attorneys in DC!
All 42 USC 1983 KKK/1871 KKK lawsuits with
merit cannot be denied because the General
Counselor/Attorney accepted service for the
prime contractor and Judge Amy Jackson had
Austin and I prove standing
NOBODY HAS THEIR OATH OF OFFICE TO ABIDE BY THE
CONSTITUTION
 PETE HEGSETH
The Real LAW IS FOUND IN THE ANNOTATED USA INC STATUTES
These are all the United States Inc
Foreign Agents/Agencies we went
to from 2018- date – they said they
could not turn in their buddies
United States Inc Foreign PEDO Agents that we went to that could NOT/WOULD NOT HELP US TURN THE ATTORNEY IN
for National Security Violation at the VA in DC BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL IN BED together!
Securitization of living flesh is illegal United
States INC PEDOS
 The VA AND DOD PAYS
BILLIONS OF YOUR MONEY
TO FOREIGN AGENTS TO
COMMIT NATIONAL
SECURITY VIOATIONS???
 THIS IS WHAT VA, DOD
and the LAW GROUP ARE
HIDING
Pay attention how much
money you are paying
ORM…ORM WILL MAKE
2 REQUEST TO VIOLATE
OUR RIGHTS????
The DOD, VA AND ITS ATTORNEYS DO
NOT WORK FOR US
All human constitutions which contradict HIS laws, we
are in conscience bound to disobey. Such has been the
adjudications of our courts of justice." (Robin v.
Hardaway, 1 Jefferson 109, 114 (1772)
Purpose

01 02 03
Use our REAL TIME RICO Answer the Questions Ref: Review the BAR
case against the United Attorneys aka USA INC’s
States INC and the United DEBT COLLECTORS
States of America (Military)
aka VA CO OF LONDON
AKA BANKERS AKA
VATICAN, QUEEN, LORD
MAYOR AND DOD
 Judicial Notice of Liability: Attorney no Authority

Whereas the Judiciary Act of 1789 created the attorney-general but not the
STATE BAR card carrying attorney, Esquire.

Ask me a Interrogatories:
1. What act of legislation granted the title or created the public office of

Question, I Esquire?2. If no such legislation exists, by what lawful authority does one act?3.
Is one communicating about a debt in a species other than what has been
legislated?

will tell you my 4. What legislation granted the Supreme Court licensing/certification power?5.
Who Has Authority to Hire the Corporate BAR Attorney?

thoughts Request for admissions:1. No act of legislation has created the authority for an
Esquire to operate business in any State.
2. There is no congressional consent for the creation of the BAR member
attorney.3. The Supreme Court has no legislative, executive nor judicial authority
to license or certify professions.4. The Supreme Court certificate given to BAR
attorneys is not a license.5. One has no "Power of attorney", meaning a writing
that uses the term "power of attorney" and grants authority to an agent to act in
the place of the principal.6. Only the "governing authority", the board of
directors, at a noticed meeting for a corporation or business entity may hire
counsel on behalf of the same.
The BAR CARD
The State Bar is unconstitutional(Monopoly) All illegal &
Criminal Enterprise violate Article 2 Section 1
Background on the BAR
That flag is your
warning
There is only 1 LAW we must follow –
GOD’s LAW
I did the Quo Warranto
 The 1830 AMOORICAN REMOVAL ACT WAS AN
EARLY EXAMPLE OF ETHNIC CLEANSING,
GENOCIDE and USA INC SETTLER COLONIALSIM
None of these United States
Inc Agencies can help
because they all work together
Proof they set people up who are threats
If the General Counselor receives
NOTICE, Our Claims CANNOT BE
DENIED
Sent DC, DOJ and MD Courts
Treason to President Trump and
General OMAR Jones
Attorneys CANNOT
TESTIFY!!! THEY LIE AND
THEY DON’T HAVE AN
OATH!!!
About Attorneys aka DEBT COLLECTORS and
etc…
• THAT The practice of Law is an occupation of common right, the
same being a secured liberty right. (Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720
(1925)
• THAT No state may convert a secured liberty right into a privilege,
issue a license and fee for it. (Murdock vs. Pennsylvania 319 US
105 (1943)
• THAT The practice of Law authority higher than the authority of the State; that
there is a moral law which the State is powerless to alter; that the individual
possesses rights, conferred by the Creator, which government must respect.
• The Declaration of Independence (and the Charter of the Forest) stated
the now familiar theme: ‘We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men
and WOMEN are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the
Pursuit of Happiness.’ And the body of the Constitution, as well as the Bill of
Rights, enshrined those principles.” (McGowan v. Maryland, 366 US 420, 563,
Supreme Court (1961).
• As per the Charter of FOREST, NO MAN IS ABOVE GOD’s LAW. No man can
violate another man/woman’s rights. Your rights are your property. Should
another man/woman harm another man/woman – They will have a trial and
they will pay for their emotional, physical and etc harm.
• THAT "All acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural
right and justice are, in our laws and must be like things,
considered as void.
• The laws of nature are the laws of God; whose authority can
be superseded by no power on earth.
• A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from
whose punishments they cannot protect us.
• All human constitutions which contradict HIS laws, we are in
conscience bound to disobey. Such has been the
adjudications of our courts of justice." (Robin v. Hardaway, 1
Jefferson 109, 114 (1772)
• The Supreme Court has warned, "Because of what appear to be
Lawful commands on the surface, many citizens, because of their
respect for what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into
waiving their rights, due to ignorance [and deceptive practices in
inferior administrative State courts]." (United States v. Minker, 350
U.S. 179, 187, 76 S.Ct. 281, 100 L.Ed. 185 (1956)
• The United States Constitution does not give anyone the right to a
lawyer or the right to counsel, or the right to any other "hearsay
substitute." The 6th Amendment is very specific that the accused only
has the right to the “assistance of counsel” and this assistance of
counsel can be anyone the accused chooses without limitations.

• "The term [liberty] ... denotes not merely mean freedom from bodily
restraint but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any
of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to
marry, to establish a home and bring up children, to worship God
according to the dictates of this own conscience... The established
doctrine is that this liberty may not be interfered with, under the guise
of protecting public interest, by legislative action (Meyer v. Nebraska,
262 U.S. 390, 399, 400).
• A State cannot exclude a person from the practice of law or from
any other occupation in a manner or for reasons that contravene
the Due Process Clause (Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 353
U.S. 232). The practice of law is an occupation of common right
(Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925).
• Therefore there can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon on
because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights (Sherar v. Cullen,
481 F. 2d 946 (1973).
• Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial
proceedings (Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virgin ia State Bar, 377
U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335
• Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425). Members of groups
who are competent non-lawyers can assist other members of the
group to achieve the goals of the group in court without being
charged with "unauthorized practice of law (NAACP v. Button, 371
U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715;
and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969).

• A next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable

to tend to his or her own interest (Federal Rules of Civil
Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USC A "Next Friend”).
 Judges lose Immunity from being sued when
they ignore the ADAAA

• The Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Lane, et al., 541 U.S. 59 (2004) pointed out that
Congress Constitutionally abrogated the States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity,
making suits for damages available to individuals who proceed under Title II of the
ADA with claims of violation of Due Process of Law (Huffer, 2012). This means that if
judges do not adhere to the ADAAA, they lose their immunity from being sued. The
Lane case found that “Congress enacted Title II against a backdrop or pervasive
unequal treatment of persons with disabilities in the administration of state services
and programs, including systematic deprivation of fundamental rights (Huffer,
2012). Specifically, Title II seeks to enforce a variety of basic Constitutional
guarantees, including the right of access to the courts, infringements of which are
subject to heightened judicial scrutiny. The court found that all courts have a duty to
accommodate that is perfectly consistent with the well-established due process
principle that a state must afford to all individual a meaningful opportunity to be
heard in its courts. The Supreme Court concluded in Lane, ‘that Title II, as it applies
to the class of cases implicating the fundamental right of access to the courts,
constitutes a valid exercise of Congress’ authority to enforce the guarantees of the
Fourteenth Amendment (Huffer, 2012).
 You don’t need to be an attorney to practice
law
• (1) Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1; v.
Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425.
Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial proceedings.
• (2) Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the simple guide of
Rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial
justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of
skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and
accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper
decision on the merits." The court also cited Rule 8(f) FRCP, which holds that
all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice.
• (3) Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359;
NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449. "The assertion of federal rights, when
plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local
practice."
• (4) Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905. "... the right to file a lawsuit
pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."
• (5) Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USCA "Next Friend." A next
friend is a person who represents someone who is unable to tend to his or her
own interest.
• (6) Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972). "Allegations such as those asserted
by petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient"... "which we hold to
less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."
• (7) Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R.
Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233. Pro se pleadings are to be
considered without regard to a technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not
to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.
• (8) Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938). "Pleadings are intended to
serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between
litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that
end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness
as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment."
• (9) NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs, 383
U.S. 715; and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969). Members of groups who are
competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group to achieve the goals
of the group in court without being charged with "unauthorized practice of law."
• (10). Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as
"inept." Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for
protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings
without regard to technicalities."
• Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA). It was held that a pro se
complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per
Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957).
• Roadway Express v. Pipe, 447 U.S. 752 at 757 (1982). "Due to sloth,
inattention or desire to seize the tactical advantage, lawyers have long
engaged in dilatory practices... the glacial pace of much litigation breeds
frustration with the Federal Courts and ultimately, disrespect for the law."
• (11) Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973). "There can be no sanction or
penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights."
• (12) Schware v. Board of Examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238,
239. "The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State."
• (13) Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925). B. Platsky v. CIA, 953 F.2d 25, 26 28
(2nd Cir. 1991), "Court errs if the court dismisses pro se litigant without the
instruction of how pleadings are deficient and how to repair pleadings."
• (14) THAT The practice of Law is an occupation of common right,
the same being a secured liberty right. (Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W.
720 (1925)
(15) THAT No state may convert a secured liberty right into a
privilege, issue a license and fee for it. (Murdock vs. Pennsylvania
319 US 105 (1943)
• (16) THAT The practice of Law cauthority higher than the authority of the State; that
there is a moral law which the State is powerless to alter; that the individual
possesses rights, conferred by the Creator, which government must respect. The
Declaration of Independence stated the now familiar theme: ‘We hold these Truths
to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the
Pursuit of Happiness.’ And the body of the Constitution, as well as the Bill of Rights,
enshrined those principles.” (McGowan v. Maryland, 366 US 420, 563, Supreme
Court (1961).
(17) THAT "All acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right and justice are,
in our laws and must be like things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the
laws of God; whose authority can be superseded by no power on earth. A legislature
must not obstruct our obedience to him from whose punishments they cannot
protect us. All human constitutions which contradict his laws, we are in conscience
bound to disobey. Such has been the adjudications of our courts of justice." (Robin v.
Hardaway, 1 Jefferson 109, 114 (1772)
 SUFFICIENCY OF PLEADING
Jurisdiction (Personal and Subject Matter
Jurisdiction) is not just important it is
everything and is rarely properly
established
• Jurisdiction may be broken down into two categories: personal
jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction. Personal jurisdiction is the
requirement that a given court have power over the defendant, based
on minimum contacts with the forum.
• Subject-matter jurisdiction is the requirement that a given court have
power to hear the specific kind of claim that is brought to that court.
While litigating parties may waive personal jurisdiction, they cannot
waive subject-matter jurisdiction.
• In federal court, under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion to
dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is considered a favored
defense and may be raised at any point in the litigation process, even if
the parties had previously argued that subject-matter jurisdiction
existed.
• A civil/criminal suit is a table with four legs: two opposing parties
(2 legs), Subject Matter Jurisdiction (1 leg), and a Competent Fact
Witness (1 leg). If anyone of the Legs is missing, the pleading fails
to make the prima facie case.

• The Judge must establish SMJ first. When they don’t they issue
void orders.
 THE NATURE OF SUBJECT-MATTER
JURISDICTION:

• The jurisdiction over the subject-matter is the right of the court

to exercise judicial power over that class of cases, and is said
to be essential, necessary, indispensable and an elementary
prerequisite to the exercise of judicial power. US v Cotton, 535
US 625 (2002); Joy v Two-Bit Corp., 287 Mich 244; 283 NW2d 45
(1938); Prosecuting Attorney for Ingham County v American
Amusement Co. Inc., 71 Mich App 130; 246 NW2d 684 (1976), cf,
21 CJS “Courts” § 18, p, 25.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• In fact, the court may dismiss a case sua sponte (on its own) for
lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. Proc.
12(b)(1).
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• Without such jurisdiction existing, an order entered by the court is
absolutely void. In re Matter of Hague, 412 Mich 532, 544; 315
NW2d 524 (1982). Therefore, a defense based upon the lack of
jurisdiction cannot be waived and may be asserted at any
time. Menna v New York, 423 US 61, 62-63 (1975)(citing People v
Carpentier, 446 Mich 19; 521 NW2d 195 (1994) cf, Fox v Board of
Regent of Michigan University, 375 Mich 238, 242; 134 NW2d 146
(1965).
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• In a court of limited jurisdiction, whenever a party denies that the
court has subject-matter jurisdiction, it becomes the duty and
the burden of the party claiming that the court has subject
matter jurisdiction to provide evidence from the record of the
case that the court holds subject-matter jurisdiction. Bindell v
City of Harvey, 212 Ill.App.3d 1042, 571 N.E.2d 1017 (1st Dist.
1991) (“the burden of proving jurisdiction rests upon the party
asserting it.”).
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction

• challenged when one has an attorney, who tends to want to argue

by the hour until there is a settlement, vs attack the main
issue…jurisdiction (*and the court rarely has it in No Harmed Party
Cases).
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction

• Until the plaintiff submits uncontroversial evidence of subject-

matter jurisdiction to the court that the court has subject-matter
jurisdiction, the court is proceeding without subject-matter
jurisdiction. Loos v American Energy Savers, Inc., 168 Ill.App.3d
558, 522 N.E.2d 841(1988)(“Where jurisdiction is contested, the
burden of establishing it rests upon the plaintiff.”).
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction

• The law places the duty and burden of subject-matter jurisdiction

upon the plaintiff. Should the court attempt to place the burden
upon the defendant, the court has acted against the law, violates
the defendant’s due process rights, and the judge under court
decisions has immediately lost subject-matter jurisdiction.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction

• In a court of limited jurisdiction, the court must proceed exactly

according to the law or statute under which it operates. Flake v
Pretzel, 381 Ill. 498, 46 N.E.2d 375 (1943) (“the actions, being
statutory proceedings, … were void for want of power to make
them.”) (“The judgments were based on orders which were void
because the court exceeded its jurisdiction in entering them.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• Where a court, after acquiring jurisdiction of a subject matter, as
here, transcends the limits of the jurisdiction conferred, its
judgment is void.”); Armstrong v Obucino, 300 Ill. 140, 143, 133
N.E. 58 (1921) (“The doctrine that where a court has once
acquired jurisdiction it has a right to decide every question which
arises in the cause, and its judgment or decree, however
erroneous, cannot be collaterally assailed, is only correct when
the court proceeds according to the established modes governing
the class to which the case belongs and does not transcend in the
extent and character of its judgment or decree the law or statute
which is applicable to it.”
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction

• Vulcan Materials Co. v. Bee Const. Co., Inc., 101 Ill.App.3d 30, 40,
427 N.E.2d 797 (1st Dist. 1981) (“Though a court be one of general
jurisdiction, when its power to act on a particular matter is
controlled by statute, the court is governed by the rules of limited
jurisdiction.”).
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction.” See
Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215. “A universal principle as old as the law
is that a proceedings of a court without jurisdiction are a nullity
and its judgment therein without effect either on person or
property.” See Norwood v. Renfield, 34 C 329; Ex parte
Giambonini, 49 P. 732.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Jurisdiction is fundamental and a judgment rendered by a court
that does not have jurisdiction to hear is void ab initio.” See In Re
Application of Wyatt, 300 P. 132; Re Cavitt, 118 P2d 846.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject
matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely
void in the fullest sense of the term.” See Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P 27.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “A court has no jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction,
for a basic issue in any case before a tribunal is its power to act,
and a court must have the authority to decide that question in the
first instance.” See Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of Los
Angeles, 171 P2d 8; 331 US 549, 91 L. ed. 1666, 67 S.Ct. 1409.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “A departure by a court from those recognized and established
requirements of law, however close apparent adherence to mere
form in method of procedure, which has the effect of depriving
one of a constitutional right, is an excess of jurisdiction.” See
Wuest v. Wuest, 127 P2d 934, 937.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Where a court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial
of due process of law, court is deprived of juris.” See Merritt v.
Hunter, C.A. Kansas 170 F2d 739.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “the fact that the petitioner was released on a promise to appear
before a magistrate for an arraignment, that fact is circumstance
to be considered in determining whether in first instance there
was a probable cause for the arrest.” See Monroe v. Papa, DC, Ill.
1963, 221 F Supp 685.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court,
but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction. The burden of
proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter.” See McNutt v. GMAC,
298 US 178. The origins of this doctrine of law may be found in
Maxfield’s Lessee v. Levy, 4 US 308.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “A court has no jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction, for a
basic issue in any case before a tribunal is its power to act, and a
court must have the authority to decide that question in the first
instance.” See Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of Los Angeles,
171 P2d 8; 331 US 549, 91 L. ed. 1666, 67 S.Ct. 1409.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when
it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no
authority to reach merits, but, rather, should dismiss the action.”
See Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has
been challenged, it must be proven.” See Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S.
Ct. 2502 (1980). “Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be
proven.” See Hagens v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven.” See Hagens
v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Where there is absence of jurisdiction, all administrative and
judicial proceedings are a nullity and confer no right, offer no
protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon
direct collateral attack.” See Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7
L.Ed. 381; Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “No sanctions can be imposed absent proof of jurisdiction.”
See Standard v. Olsen, 74 S. Ct. 768; Title 5 U.S.C., Sec. 556 and
558 (b). “The proponent of the rule has the burden of
proof.” Title 5 U.S.C., Sec. 556 (d). “Jurisdiction can be
challenged at any time, even on final determination.” See
Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 2nd 906 at 910.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “Mere good faith assertions of power and authority (jurisdiction)
have been abolished.” See Owens v. The City of Independence,
445 US 622 (1980). “A departure by a court from those
recognized and established requirements of law, however
close apparent adherence to mere form in method of
procedure, which has the effect of depriving one of a
constitutional right, is an excess of jurisdiction.” See Wuest v.
Wuest, 127 P2d 934, 937.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “In a court of limited jurisdiction, whenever a party denies that
the court has subject-matter jurisdiction, it becomes the duty
and the burden of the party claiming that the court has subject
matter jurisdiction to provide evidence from the record of the
case that the court holds subject-matter jurisdiction.”
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Bindell v City of Harvey, 212 Ill.App.3d 1042, 571 N.E.2d 1017 (1st Dist.
1991) (“the burden of proving jurisdiction rests upon the party
asserting it.”). “Until the plaintiff submits uncontroversial evidence of
subject-matter jurisdiction to the court that the court has subject-matter
jurisdiction, the court is proceeding without subject-matter
jurisdiction.” Loos v American Energy Savers, Inc., 168 Ill.App.3d 558,
522 N.E.2d 841(1988)(“Where jurisdiction is contested, the burden of
establishing it rests upon the plaintiff.”).
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• The law places the duty and burden of subject-matter
jurisdiction upon the plaintiff. Should the court attempt to place
the burden upon the defendant, the court has acted against the
law, violates the defendant’s due process rights, and the judge
under court decisions has immediately lost subject-matter
jurisdiction.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• In a court of limited jurisdiction, the court must proceed exactly
according to the law or statute under which it operates. Flake v
Pretzel, 381 Ill. 498, 46 N.E.2d 375 (1943) (“the actions, being
statutory proceedings, … were void for want of power to make
them.”)
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• (“The judgments were based on orders which were void because
the court exceeded its jurisdiction in entering them. Where a
court, after acquiring jurisdiction of a subject matter, as here,
transcends the limits of the jurisdiction conferred, its judgment is
void.”); Armstrong v Obucino, 300 Ill. 140, 143, 133 N.E. 58 (1921)
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• (“Where a court’s power to act is controlled by statute, the court is
governed by the rules of limited jurisdiction, and courts exercising
jurisdiction over such matters must proceed within the strictures
of the statute.”)
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• In re Marriage of Milliken, 199 Ill.App.3d 813, 557 N.E.2d 591 (1st
Dist. 1990) (“The jurisdiction of a court in a dissolution
proceeding is limited to that conferred by statute.”); Vulcan
Materials Co. v. Bee Const. Co., Inc., 101 Ill.App.3d 30, 40, 427
N.E.2d 797 (1st Dist. 1981)
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• (“Though a court be one of general jurisdiction, when its power to
act on a particular matter is controlled by statute, the court is
governed by the rules of limited jurisdiction.”);
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• “The doctrine that where a court has once acquired jurisdiction it
has a right to decide every question which arises in the cause,
and its judgment or decree, however erroneous, cannot be
collaterally assailed, is only correct when the court proceeds
according to the established modes governing the class to which
the case belongs and does not transcend in the extent and
character of its judgment or decree the law or statute which is
applicable to it.” In Interest of M.V., 288 Ill.App.3d 300, 681 N.E.2d
532 (1st Dist. 1997)
 Lack of Judicial Immunity
• Thus, neither Judges nor Government attorneys are above the
law. See United States v. Isaacs, 493 F. 2d 1124, 1143 (7th Cir.
1974). In our judicial system, few more serious threats to
individual liberty can be imagined than a corrupt judge or
judges acting in collusion outside of their judicial authority
with the Executive Branch to deprive a citizen of his rights.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• In The Case of the Marshalsea, 77 Eng. Rep. 1027 (K.B. 1613), Sir
Edward Coke found that Article 39 of the Magna Carta restricted
the power of judges to act outside of their jurisdiction such
proceedings would be void, and actionable.
 Subject Matter Jurisdiction
• When a Court has (a) jurisdiction of the cause, and proceeds
inverso ordine or erroneously, there the party who sues, or the
officer or minister of the Court who executes the precept or
process of the Court, no action lies against them. But (b) when the
Court has not jurisdiction of the cause, there the whole
proceeding is [before a person who is not a judge], and actions
will lie against them without any regard of the precept or process .
. . Id. 77 Eng. Rep. at 1038-41.
 Right to sue a Judge
• A majority of states including Michigan have followed the English
rule to find that a judge had no immunity from suit for acts outside
of his judicial capacity or jurisdiction. Robert Craig Waters,
‘Liability of Judicial Officers under Section 1983’ 79 Yale L. J.
(December 1969), pp. 326-27 and 29-30).
DOJ, VA and De Facto Government, I cannot help but SEE YOUR GAME. We can prove RICO. Just Ask Alan, DOJ and DOD,

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZjcHFzPoJH2n/

I provide nothing but the truth. I offer our real time RICO, 1983 KKK Case, NIST and Crimes Against Humanity Case to Americans to show you first hand the corruption/RICH Man's Games
these DEVILS Play on us.
As I analyze the fraud, waste, and abuse, I SEE their strategic plan 'aka' the rich man's game as it pertains to fake justice, VA HQ, "aka" the CABAL in building 810.
I don't have time to explain it now as we have to get our response in the mail (on the record), but I will be back.
Long story short: (1) Americans you cannot expect justice in a corrupt "corporate" court system or DE FACTO GOVT (EEOC, DOJ, VA Attorneys in Building 810, Harvard, Yale, Other federal
Agencies and etc.), (2) Everything in American is BUSINESS/CORPORATION), (3) THEY (those who sold their soul to the DEVIL for GREED) are playing Americans. Therefore, YOU CAN
TRUST NOBODY, especially the Attorneys and Judges. They run off of Assumptions, hence the reason you must support your evidence with AFFIDAVITS, (4) They use their "brothern" and
"sistern" (other agencies, courts, prosecutors, DOJ and etc.) against Americans, (5) If you do not consent or go along with their game, they make criminals/threats out of you, (6) They
steal tax dollars (American Tax dollars, Disability Tax dollars, VA Benefits and etc.) to do their dirty work and line their pocket, (7) They also get their money by manipulating DOD and VA
Contracts (Military Industrial Complex), (8) They track the OLD (50 Years and older ), (8) They have access to your medical and play your medical records against you (9) They steal VA
Benefits from Veterans (10) They own stock in the Court electronic filing, NOTE- He who owns the data wins! (11) They go by CORPORATE LAW; therefore, EVERYTHING MUST BE ON THE
RECORD. If it is NOT on the record, it did not happen. Hence the reason why Judge Moss and Judge Amy B. Jackson sent us the following significant motions back to our home address
and denied us ADA right/Equal Access to use electronic filing.
The items that they sent back to us vs. post of the records are:
(1) Austin and My Proof of Standing. This is significant because, after their GAME, they must make us WHOLE as if they had not violated us. NOTE: Their corrupt corporate game is NOT to
give you justice but to turn you into a threat, put you in jail using manufacture data/evidence, or as per VA's TORT Attorney Tara Jones said on the record, "THEY WILL RUN YOU AND YOUR
FAMILY OFF THE ROAD UNTIL YOU ARE DEAD.
(2) 300 page [Affidavits] Called the fox is guarding the henhouse. This document shows the public how VA and its leaders cheat and set up Americans (e.g., Medical, VA Benefits, Judges,
EEOC/ORM process, Transmittal Records, Pawns, Post Office, DOJ, VA police, Courts at every level and etc.)
(3) Proof that we submitted a Quo Warranto against over 110 defendants to include Judge Amy B. Jackson and Judge Randolph Moss.
(4) All our 2020 significant motions
(5) Proof that we were getting death threats and asked for equal protection by DC/MD and 3771 and was DENIED
(6) Proof that VA Leaders, The Cabal in building 810, MD Prosecutors, MD ADA Court Clerk, MD Criminal Judge (Rand), DOJ, and the DC Judges at every level set us up while the cabal in
building 810 watched.
(7) Proof that VA spends AMERICAN TAX dollars on third parties (Judy Lane, Workers Comp, Post Office Investigator, Anne Klien, Gail Leary, Attorney, Judy Valois, SSN, EEOC Judges,
Deltorro, etc.).
Proof that the Judges and Attorneys don't follow the law and allow PAWNS like Voncelle to commit PERJURY.
I will do a video on the FOX Guarding the Hen House Later so AMERICANS can see what they are paying for with YOUR HARD EARN MONEY.
BLUF: Hard Evidence does not lie. We have a solution for this evil - Quo Warranto and Military Tribunals. We must make examples out of these criminals. Otherwise, they will do this to
you. Please continue to share and teach our children. We have a right to protect ourselves against EVIL as these criminals cause a PREVENTABLE HEALTH ISSUE, Legal Abuse Syndrome
which is a CRIME. If LAS, MST and PTSD are preventable health issues, why are these criminals in JAIL YET? Why must AMERICAN’s Suffer? Just not: Everything Evil Leads back to
EPSTEIN, Harvard, Yale, Skull and Bones aka the devil and how his people treat [abuse] our kids (our future).
 Right to sue a Judge

• Also as early as 1806, in the United States there were recognized

restrictions on the power judges, as well as the placing of liability
on judges for acts outside of their jurisdiction. In Wise v. Withers, 7
U.S. (3 Cranch) 331 (1806), the Supreme Court confirmed the right
to sue a judge for exercising authority beyond the jurisdiction
authorized by statute.
 Right to sue a Judge

• In Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 at 360 (1978), the Supreme

Court confirmed that a judge would be immune from suit only if he
did not act outside of his judicial capacity and/or was not
performing any act expressly prohibited by statute. See Block,
Stump v Sparkman and the History of Judicial Immunity, 4980
Duke L.J. 879 (l980).
 Right to sue a Judge

• It is clear that a judge who acts in the absence of subject matter

jurisdiction may be held liable for his judicial act. Stump v.
Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 98 S. Ct. 1099, 55 L. Ed. 2d 331 (1978)
and Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 335, 20 L. Ed. 646 (1872).
 Right to sue a Judge

• Judicial immunity may only extend to all judicial acts within the
courts jurisdiction and judicial capacity, but it does not extend to
either criminal acts, or acts outside of official capacity or in the
‘clear absence of all jurisdiction.’ see Stump v. Sparkman 435 U.S.
349 (1978). When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts
in the face of clearly valid Constitutional provisions or valid
statutes expressly depriving him of jurisdiction or judicial
capacity, judicial immunity is lost.” Rankin v. Howard 633 F.2d 844
(1980), Den Zeller v. Rankin, 101 S.Ct. 2020 (1981).
 Right to sue a Judge

• As stated by the United States Supreme Court in Piper v. Pearson,

2 Gray 120, cited in Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335, 20 L.Ed. 646
(1872), ‘[w]here there is no jurisdiction, there can be no discretion,
for discretion is incident to jurisdiction.’
 The constitutional requirement of due process of
the law is indispensable:
• The constitutional requirement of due process of the law
is indispensable:
• “A judgment can be void . . . where the court acts in a manner
contrary to due process.” Am Jur 2d, §29 Void Judgments, p.
404.
• “Where a court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to
denial of due process of law, court is deprived of juris.” —
Merritt v. Hunter, C.A. Kansas 170 F2d 739.
• “Moreover, all proceedings founded on the void judgment are
themselves regarded as invalid.” Olson v. Leith 71 Wyo. 316,
257 P.2d 342.).
 The Law of Void Judgments and Decisions
Supreme Court Decisions on Void Orders
• The Law of Void Judgments and Decisions
Supreme Court Decisions on Void Orders
Supreme Court Decision on Void Orders
• A judgment may not be rendered in violation of constitutional
protections. The validity of a judgment may be affected by a
failure to give the constitutionally required due process notice and
an opportunity to be heard. Earle v. McVeigh, 91 US 503, 23 L Ed
398. See also Restatements, Judgments ' 4(b). Prather vLoyd, 86
Idaho 45, 382 P2d 910.
Supreme Court Decision on Void Orders
• The limitations inherent in the requirements of due process and
equal protection of the law extend to judicial as well as political
branches of government, so that a judgment may not be rendered
in violation of those constitutional limitations and guarantees.
Hanson v Denckla, 357 US 235, 2 L Ed 2d 1283, 78 S Ct 1228.
Supreme Court Decision on Void Orders
• A void judgment is not entitled to the respect accorded a valid
adjudication, but may be entirely disregarded, or declared
inoperative by any tribunal in which effect is sought to be given to
it. It is attended by none of the consequences of a valid
adjudication. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any
purpose or at any place. ... It is not entitled to enforcement ... All
proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves
regarded as invalid. 30A Am Jur Judgments '' 44, 45.
Supreme Court Decision on Void Orders
• No Opportunity to Be Heard

A judgment of a court without hearing the party or giving him

an opportunity to be heard is not a judicial determination of his
rights. Sabariego v Maverick, 124 US 261, 31 L Ed 430, 8 S Ct 461,
and is not entitled to respect in any other tribunal.
Supreme Court Decision on Void Orders
• "A void judgment does not create any binding obligation. Federal
decisions addressing void state court judgments include Kalb v.
Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L ed 370; Ex parte
Rowland (1882) 104 U.S. 604, 26 L.Ed. 861:
"A judgment which is void upon its face, and which requires only an
inspection of the judgment roll to demonstrate its wants of vitality
is a dead limb upon the judicial tree, which should be lopped off, if
the power to do so exists." People v. Greene, 71 Cal. 100 [16 Pac. 197,
5 Am. St. Rep. 448]. "If a court grants relief, which under the
circumstances it hasn't any authority to grant, its judgment is to that
extent void." (1Freeman on Judgments, 120c.) An illegal order is forever
void.
Supreme Court Decision on Void Orders
• "A judgment which is void upon its face, and which requires
only an inspection of the judgment roll to demonstrate its
wants of vitality is a dead limb upon the judicial tree, which
should be lopped off, if the power to do so exists." People v.
Greene, 71 Cal. 100 [16 Pac. 197, 5 Am. St. Rep. 448]. "If a court
grants relief, which under the circumstances it hasn't any
authority to grant, its judgment is to that extent void." (1Freeman
on Judgments, 120c.) An illegal order is forever void.
 The Law of Void Judgments and Decisions Supreme
Court Decisions on Void Orders

"If a court grants relief, which under the circumstances it hasn't any
authority to grant, its judgment is to that extent void." (1Freeman on
Judgments, 120c.) An illegal order is forever void.
 Justice John F. Molloy

• “The once-honorable profession of law now fully functions as a

bottom-line business, driven by greed and the pursuit of power
and wealth, even shaping the laws of the United States outside
the elected Congress and state legislatures.”
-- Justice John F. Molloy
1 OF 2
2 OF 2
 The ORM, EEOC and Legal
Process is no more than a
stressful war of words, tricks,
and bullying…
FROM: Victims [and future victims] of
the System

PROJECT: I REALLY CARE

MISSION: SHARE THEIR GAME

IF 70 % OF LOW to Middle Class Cannot
Afford lawyers
• Need Statement:
• Solution: Work together to help the 70% of Low to Middle Class
Do not be coerced into waiving your rights
• The Supreme Court has warned, "Because of what appear to be
Lawful commands on the surface, many citizens, because of their
respect for what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into
waiving their rights, due to ignorance [and deceptive practices in
inferior administrative State courts]." (United States v. Minker, 350
U.S. 179, 187, 76 S.Ct. 281, 100 L.Ed. 185 (1956)
 The Supreme Court has stated:
• The general misconception among the public being that any exercise of
state regulatory or police power bearing the appearance of law is in fact
in agreement with the law of the land, and is, therefore, legitimate in its
operation as imposed. A statute is not a "Law," (Flournoy v. First Nat.
Bank of Shreveport, 197 La. 1067, 3 So.2d 244, 248), a concurrent or
joint resolution of legislature is not "a law," (Koenig v. Flynn, 258 N.Y.
292, 179 N.E. 705, 707; Ward v. State, 176 Okl. 368, 56 P.2d 136, 137;
State ex rel. Todd v. Yelle, 7 Wash.2d 443, 110 P.2d 162, 165)
• The Supreme Court has warned, "Because of what appear to be Lawful
commands on the surface, many citizens, because of their respect for
what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
rights, due to ignorance [and deceptive practices in inferior
administrative State courts]." (United States v. Minker, 350 U.S. 179,
187, 76 S.Ct. 281, 100 L.Ed. 185 (1956)
The Constitution (6 Amendment allows you
th

anyone you choose without limitations)

• The United States Constitution does not give anyone the right to a
lawyer or the right to counsel, or the right to any other "hearsay
substitute." The 6th Amendment is very specific that the accused only
has the right to the “assistance of counsel” and this assistance of
counsel can be anyone the accused chooses without limitations.
• "The term [liberty] ... denotes not merely mean freedom from bodily
restraint but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any
of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to
marry, to establish a home and bring up children, to worship God
according to the dictates of this own conscience... The established
doctrine is that this liberty may not be interfered with, under the guise
of protecting public interest, by legislative action (Meyer v. Nebraska,
262 U.S. 390, 399, 400).
States cannot exclude a person from the
practice of law
• A State cannot exclude a person from the practice of law or from
any other occupation in a manner or for reasons that contravene
the Due Process Clause (Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 353
U.S. 232). The practice of law is an occupation of common right
(Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925). Therefore there can be no
sanction or penalty imposed upon on because of his exercise of
Constitutional Rights (Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973).
 Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed
laymen
• Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial
proceedings (Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virgin ia State Bar, 377
U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335
Pleadings shall be so construed as to do
substantial justice"... "
• (2) Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the
simple guide of Rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed
as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the
approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by
counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle
that the purpose of leading is to facilitate a proper decision on the
merits."
Legal Process is no more than a stressful war
of words, tricks, and bullying…
• “The legal process is no more than a stressful war of words, rituals,
papers, perceptual tricks, bullying, and prevarication. Once a human
being is respected as the very reason for having a justice system in the
first place, the litigant can begin to put into effect the mandates of
ADA and ADAAA”.

Karnen Huffer (2012)

See: Unlocking Justice (2012)
The ORM, EEOC and Legal Process is no more
than a stressful war of words, tricks, and bullying…
• Once a human being is respected as the very reason for
having a justice system in the first place, the litigant can
begin to put into effect the mandates of ADA and ADAAA”.

Karnen Huffer (2012)

See: Unlocking Justice (2012)

Become a Certified ADA Advocate

https://equalaccessa
dvocates.com/ada-
advocate/
 Veterans Affairs Legal Abuse Syndrome (VALAS) vs
Legal Abuse Syndrome

Stop using
psychology and
tax dollars to
destroy veterans and
children
How & When TO
SUE VETERANS
AFFAIRS
LEADERSHIP
WHAT YOU NEED TO 180 days???
KNOW
Veterans Affair
Abuse – They are stealing from dead
veterans and the disabled

Syndrome;
A preventable public health Problem.
• (1) Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar,
377 U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin,
Sheriff 407 U.S. 425. Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed
laymen during judicial proceedings.
• individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of
discrimination, including outright exclusion, overprotective rules,
and policies, failure to make modifications to existing practices,
exclusionary qualifications standards and criteria, segregation,
and relegations to lesser services, programs, activities, benefits,
jobs or other opportunities
• ) Title 42, Chapter 126, Equal Opportunity for Individuals with
Disabilities, Sec 12101, Sec 12182 and 12181 states that no
individual shall be discriminated against by disability in the full
and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages, or accommodations of any place of public
accommodations by any person who owns or operates a place of
public accommodation,
• the American with Disability Act use: Title II and III request the
courts to support this law.
• Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the simple
guide of Rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do
substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that
pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may
be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the
purpose of leading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits."
• Specifically, Title 42, Chapter 126, prohibits (ii) failure to make reasonable
modification in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications
are necessary to afford services, privileges, advantages or accommodations
to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making
such modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the privilege,
advantage, or accommodations and (iii) states that it is discriminate to treat
individuals differently. the American with Disability Act use: Title II and III
request the courts to support this law.
• Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the simple guide of
Rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial
justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of
skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and
accept the principle that the purpose of leading is to facilitate a proper
decision on the merits."
• Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the simple guide of Rule 8(f)
that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal
rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by
counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose
of leading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits."

• Specifically, Title 42, Chapter 126, prohibits (ii) failure to make reasonable
modification in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are
necessary to afford services, privileges, advantages or accommodations to
individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such
modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the privilege, advantage, or
accommodations and (iii) states that it is discriminate to treat individuals
differently. the American with Disability Act use: Title II and III request the courts to
support this law.

• Sec 12101 (a) sections 1-8, Congress finds that (1) physical or mental disabilities in
no way diminish a person’s right to participate in all aspects of society fully, yet
many people with disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of
discrimination,
• Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the simple guide of Rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do
substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be
decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of leading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits."

• Specifically, Title 42, Chapter 126, prohibits (ii) failure to make reasonable modification in policies, practices, or procedures, when
such modifications are necessary to afford services, privileges, advantages or accommodations to individuals with disabilities,
unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the privilege, advantage,
or accommodations and (iii) states that it is discriminate to treat individuals differently. the American with Disability Act use: Title II
and III request the courts to support this law.
• Sec 12101 (a) sections 1-8, Congress finds that (1) physical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to participate in
all aspects of society fully, yet many people with disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination,

• (2) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including outright exclusion, overprotective
rules, and policies, failure to make modifications to existing practices, exclusionary qualifications standards and criteria,
segregation, and relegations to lesser services, programs, activities, benefits, jobs or other opportunities
• Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the simple guide of Rule 8(f) that all pleadings
shall be so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that
pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept
the principle that the purpose of leading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." Specifically,
Title 42, Chapter 126, prohibits (ii) failure to make reasonable modification in policies, practices, or
procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford services, privileges, advantages or
accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such
modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the privilege, advantage, or accommodations
and (iii) states that it is discriminate to treat individuals differently. the American with Disability Act use:
Title II and III request the courts to support this law. Sec 12101 (a) sections 1-8, Congress finds that (1)
physical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to participate in all aspects of society
fully, yet many people with disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination,
(2) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including outright
exclusion, overprotective rules, and policies, failure to make modifications to existing practices,
exclusionary qualifications standards and criteria, segregation, and relegations to lesser services,
programs, activities, benefits, jobs or other opportunities. Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb
v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449. "The assertion of federal rights, when
plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice."
• Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905. "... the right to file a
lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the
constitution and laws."
• Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USCA "Next Friend."
A next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable
to tend to his or her own interest.
• Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v.
Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233.
Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to a
technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the
same high standards of perfection as lawyers.
• Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938). "Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just
settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that
end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a
just judgment."Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957). "Following the simple guide of Rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be
so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which
one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of leading is to facilitate a
proper decision on the merits." Specifically, Title 42, Chapter 126, prohibits (ii) failure to make reasonable modification in
policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford services, privileges, advantages or
accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would
fundamentally alter the nature of the privilege, advantage, or accommodations and (iii) states that it is discriminate to treat
individuals differently. the American with Disability Act use: Title II and III request the courts to support this law. Sec 12101
(a) sections 1-8, Congress finds that (1) physical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to participate in all
aspects of society fully, yet many people with disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination, (2)
individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including outright exclusion,
overprotective rules, and policies, failure to make modifications to existing practices, exclusionary qualifications standards
and criteria, segregation, and relegations to lesser services, programs, activities, benefits, jobs or other opportunities. Davis
v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449. "The assertion of federal
rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice.“ Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S.
519 (1972). "Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however in artfully pleaded, are sufficient"... "which we hold to
less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."
• Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court
of Appeals. The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and
described by a federal judge as "inept." Nevertheless, it was held
"Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil
rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings
without regard to technicalities."
• Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA). It was held
that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one
drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S.
41 at 48 (1957).
• Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973). "There can be no sanction
or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of
Constitutional Rights."
• Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925). B. Platsky v. CIA, 953 F.2d 25,
26 28 (2nd Cir. 1991), "Court errs if the court dismisses pro se
litigant without the instruction of how pleadings are deficient and
how to repair pleadings."
 VOID ORDERS
• An order that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court is void and can
be attacked in any proceeding in any court where the validity of the
judgment comes into issue. (See Rose v. Himely (1808) 4 Cranch
241, 2 L ed 608; Pennoyer v. Neff (1877) 95 US 714, 24 L ed 565;
Thompson v. Whitman (1873) 18 Wall 457, 21 l ED 897; Windsor v.
McVeigh (1876) 93 US 274, 23 L ed 914; McDonald v. Mabee (1917)
243 US 90, 37 Sct 343, 61 L ed 608.
• As the court in Jonson v Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58, S. Ct. 1019;
Wuest v. Wuest", 127 P2d 934, 937, when a party violates Due
Process or Constitutional constraints, jurisdiction is lost and
"Where a court failed to observe safeguard, it amounts to a denial
of due process of law; the court is deprived of jurisdiction”.
• "Pure Oil Co. v. The city of Northlake", 10 all 25 (1936). World-Wide
Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 44 U.S. 286 (1980) "A judgment
rendered in violation of due process is void in the rendering State
and is not entitled to full faith and credit elsewhere.
• Luckett v. Boeing Co., 98 Wn. App. 307, 309, 989 P.2d 1144 (1999),
review denied, 140 Wn.2d 1026 (2000). When rule providing for
relief from void judgments is applicable, relief is not a
discretionary matter, but is mandatory, Orner v. Shalala, 30 F.3d
1307, (Colo. 1994).
• If a court grants relief, which under the circumstances it hasn't any
authority to grant, its judgment is to that extent void." (1 Freeman
on Judgments, 120c.) "A void judgment is no judgment at all and is
without legal effect." (Jordon v. Gilligan, 500 F.2d 701, 710 (6th Cir.
1974) "a court must vacate any judgment entered in excess of its
jurisdiction." (Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27,
453 F.2d 645 (1st Cir. 1972)
• A void judgment does not create any binding obligation. Federal
decisions addressing void state court judgments include Kalb v.
Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L ed 370. Federal
judges issued orders permanently barring Stich from filing any
papers in federal courts. After Judges Robert Jones and Edward
Jellen corruptly seized and started to liquidate Stich's assets,
Judge Jones issued an unconstitutional order barring Stich from
filing an objection to the seizure and liquidation
• Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938). "Pleadings
are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just
settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not
raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper
pleading is important, but its importance consists in its
effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just
judgment."
• A civil suit is a table with four legs: two opposing parties (2 legs),
Subject Matter Jurisdiction (1 leg), and a Competent Fact Witness
(1 leg). If anyone of the Legs is missing, the pleading fails to make
the prima facie case.

• The Judge must establish SMJ first (before the proceeding). When
they don’t they issue void orders.
• When Judges issues an order WITHOUT establishing subject
matter jurisdiction, they are abusing their authority and willfully
committing fraud upon the court, In re Village of Willowbrook, 37
Ill.App.3d 393 (1962) Wuest v. Wuest", 127 P2d 934, 937 hold that
when a party violates Due Process or Constitutional constraints,
jurisdiction is lost and "Where a court failed to observe safeguard,
it amounts to a denial of due process of law; the court is deprived
of jurisdiction", "Pure Oil Co. v. The city of Northlake", 10 all 25
(1936).
• As the court in Jonson v Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58, S. Ct. 1019;
Wuest v. Wuest", 127 P2d 934, 937, when a party violates Due
Process or Constitutional constraints, jurisdiction is lost and
• "Where a court failed to observe safeguard, it amounts to a denial
of due process of law; the court is deprived of jurisdiction", "Pure
Oil Co. v. The city of Northlake", 10 all 25 (1936).
• World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 44 U.S. 286 (1980) "A
judgment rendered in violation of due process is void in the
rendering State and is not entitled to full faith and credit
elsewhere. Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 732-733(1878)."[World-
Wide Volkswagen Corps.v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (1980)].
• A trial court's decision whether to vacate a judgment or order
under CR 60 is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Luckett v.
Boeing Co., 98 Wn. App. 307, 309, 989 P.2d 1144 (1999), review
denied, 140 Wn.2d 1026 (2000).
• When rule providing for relief from void judgments is applicable,
relief is not a discretionary matter, but is mandatory, Orner v.
Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307, (Colo. 1994).
Response from
DC Judge ref:
RICO Case:
allowed Robert
to intervene.
Robert
intervened
because we
discovered that
OEDCA allowed
ORM to issue a
Fraud Final
Orders

1 of 4
2 of 3
3 of 4
4 of 4
What Law says a for-profit USA INC corporation (28 USC 3002) can tax something you own? I want to
see your oath otherwise you are impersonating an AMERICAN from Americas
Purpose
• Use our REAL TIME RICO CASE against the 2 foreign PEDO JESUIT contractors (1) United
States Inc and (2) United States of America (28 USC 3002)
• Show Amooricans from Americas what the USA INC FOREIGN CONTRACTORS did to
AMOORICANS and their land while abusing our CHILDREN IN THEIR USA INC MILITARY
RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS!
• Use our REAL TIME QUO WARRANTO AND RIGHT TO SUE LETTERS
• Remind Amooricans what the contractors did in 1870/1871 HINT: THEY CANNOT LEAVE DC
and make up fake laws as they go along because they think they are the SALT OF THE EARTH!
• Show how the United States Inc’s Secret Societies (Safety Committee), MOB, USA INC
Military stole Hawaii [OUTSIDE OF DC and WITH A VOID AB INITIO CONSTITUTION while
killing 90 percent of us with their JESUIT BIO- WEAPONS!]
• Update our United States Inc WORKERS COMPENSATION case
• Remind the BLACK HATS THAT I AM NOT GOING TO LET OUR CASE GO BECAUSE THEIR USA
INC BUDDIES TRIED TO KILL OUR FAMILY THAN BRAG ABOUT IT!
• Define the Difference BETWEEN LAND PATENT AND DEE
See 28 USC 3002 and 8 USC
1101 and 884!!!
Lili’uokalani, Queen of Hawaii, sent this memorial to the U.S. House of Representatives protesting U.S. assertion of ownership of Hawaii. On July 7,
1898, the Hawaiian Islands had been annexed with a joint resolution of Congress.

Queen Lili’uokalani wrote this letter to "earnestly and respectfully protest against the assertion of ownership by the United States of America of the
so-called Hawaiian Crown Islands amounting to about one million acres," and to "call upon the President and the National Legislature and the
People of the United States to do justice in this matter and to restore to me this property, the enjoyment of which is being withheld from me by
your Government under what must be a misapprehension of my right and title."

In 1887, Lili’uokalani's brother King Kalākaua had been on the throne. A group of non-native U.S. businessmen with sugar interests forced the king
to sign a new constitution under the threat of violence. It stripped him of his power and many native Hawaiians of their rights. It came to be known
as the "Bayonet Constitution" because Kalākaua signed it under duress.

When King Kalākaua died in 1891, Lili'uokalani succeeded him. She introduced a new constitution that would restore her power and Hawaiian
rights. The move was countered by the "Committee of Safety," a group of non-native U.S. businessmen and politicians with sugar interests. Led by
Sanford Dole, they had monetary reasons for doing so – they feared that the United States would establish a tariff on sugar imports, endangering
their profits, and wanted to protect Hawaii's free-trade status.

The Committee overthrew Queen Lili'uokalani in a bloodless coup on January 17, 1893, with support from the U.S. Minister to Hawaii and a
contingent of Marines. The Committee of Safety proclaimed itself to be the Provisional Government.

When President Grover Cleveland came into office, he appointed special investigator James Blount to look into the events. The Blount Commission
found that Lili’uokalani had been overthrown illegally, and ordered that the American flag be lowered from Hawaiian government buildings.

Lili'uokalani never regained power, however. Sanford Dole, leader of the Committee of Safety and the president of the Provisional Government of
Hawaii, refused to turn over power. Dole argued that the United States had no right to interfere in the internal affairs of Hawaii. The Provisional
Government then proclaimed Hawaii a republic – the Republic of Hawaii – in 1894, with Dole its first president.

For the next several years, Queen Liliuokalani struggled to reinstate the monarchy and to restore the rights and customs of native Hawaiians, with
letters like this and a petition from native Hawaiians. Nevertheless, the U.S. annexed Hawaii easily with an American-run government already in
power, making it the U.S. Territory of Hawaii in 1898.
What did the United States Inc and the United States of America (Military) 28 USC 3002 do to you AMOORICANS
FROM AMERICAS IN 1870/1871?
 Purpose – Use our REAL TIME RICO CASE AGAINST THE UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (KM) and hold them accountable for
FRAUD, WASTE ABUSE and PRETENDING TO BE AMERICANS

Prove that the United States Inc and the United States of America is a for-profit criminal organization and NOBODY CONSENTED TO BE THEIR SLAVE as they
violate rights, their oath of office, Magna carta and Charter of the FOREST
Explain our RIGHT TO SUE LETTER against the UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
We challenge the first FORT MEADE female Commander
to tell her soldiers what that UNITED STATES INC
FOREIGN CORPORATE BANNER STANDS FOR
To Understand how the
Jesuits stole our land
and murdered our
people you must
understand the NEW
WORLD ORDER
MISSION
So, What’s is this woman’s Point REF: THERE ARE NO WHITE PEOPLE IN THE BIBLE AND
WHAT DOES HEAVENS ABOVE, WE FILCH THE NIGGER’S LAND AND THEN WE MAKE AN
ALIEN OF HIM
Purpose
Use our REAL TIME RICO case against the United States Inc and the United States of
America (Military) 28 USC 3002 proves that they are a foreign CRIMINAL Organization
which must abide by UCC (CONSTRACT LAW/CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE).

Explain what the Criminal organization did to MOORS FROM AMERICAS which is in
violation of GOD’s Law, Laws of Nature, UCC, Magna Carta, Charter of the forest

Explain – “What’s is this woman’s Point is REF: THERE ARE NO WHITE PEOPLE IN THE
BIBLE AND WHAT DOES HEAVENS ABOVE, WE FILCH THE NIGGER’S LAND AND THEN
WE MAKE AN ALIEN OF HIM”
Agenda

Update on Workers Compensation hearing

•Nobody has an oath
Update on •The transcripts leave off that Robert is a MOOR vs USA INC Strawman
•Explain the Factors which they had on hand and cannot find!

Explain the 4 most criminals organizations

•Vatican in the name of religion
Explain •United Nation
•United States Inc and its Military
•London aka Lord Mayor aka VA COMPANY OF LONDON aka United States Inc

Explain the messages ref: (1) THERE ARE NO WHITE PEOPLE IN THE BIBLE AND (2) WHAT DOES HEAVENS ABOVE, WE FILCH THE
NIGGER’S LAND AND THEN WE MAKE AN ALIEN OF HIM
Explain •This war is biblical as Americas is the promise land and as there is the devil there are good people – THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS COLOR ONLY GOOD AND EVIL
•28 USC 3002 – Look at the bottom they made MOORS from Americas into INDIANS (THEY USE TV to BRAINWASH US ALL)
•Define Alien by using 8 USC 1101
Zionist/Jesuit aka KM
Constitution vs the Magna Carta/Charter of the Forest and
the United States INC NO RULE/NO CONSTITUTION
Worker Comp Claim field in 2018 after Stroke that
could have been prevented!

Sovereign MOOR vs USA INC Strawman

2016 – ADA RA packet

shows anxiety – Feb 2018
Shows PTSD/STROKEAND
& LAS

2016-14 Aug 2018

Doctor Prices and Nurse Gina’s orders and

ADA Reasonable Accommodation request
which were denied!
 Update on United States Inc
Workers Compensation hearing
with Ken H.
See 5 elements leading to
Robert’s Stroke on 14
August 2018
If the constitution states we AMOORICANS cannot fight for the United States Inc,
we can see why the Veterans Affairs(VA) is illegal and cheats!
If you take our COURT OF APPEALS ORDERS [and General Flynn’s] do you see the STING NOW?!
HINT: Baby Clerks NEVER signed orders! The same baby clerk who signed our WRIT OF MANDAMUS/QUO WARRANTO also signed General
Flynn’s order and WHO DO YOU THINK “OWNS” the Press? ELON MUSK
Purpose

Use our REAL TIME RICO CASE against the United States of America (Military) and the United States Inc (CEO) and show
Use Amooricans from Americas how they infiltrated us using void ab initio orders and Justice Anna’s Notice

Prove to you that we are going through a sting operation but it does not excuse the United States Inc and the United States of
Prove America from giving us our settlement as per UCC 15 USC 1! Trade (See 1871 KKK Organic Act)

Continue to play the game but continue to move forward.

Continue •Write ELON MUSK?
•Write Trump?

Keep Keep our eye on our THERAPY Camp and MED BEDS!
We sent this on 7 March 2025 and it takes 5 days to reach the
pentagon which is approximately 26 miles away?
9589071052701154808365
Item picked up in Washington DC on March 13, 2025
Purpose

• Use our REAL TIME RICO case against the United States of America (Military) and the
United States Inc Foreign PEDO Corporation aka VA COMPANY OF LONDON (28 USC
3002)
• Compare the MOOR’s Constitution to:
• The Magna Carta and Charter of the FOREST
• The United States INC’s Foreign PEDO corporation (NO RULE AND NO
CONSITUTION) and
• Update on our ADA RA WORKER’s Comp case
• See Oath, Public Health Hazard Bonding Information, Expedite Case, and etc
• Explain 28 USC 3002 which proves that the United States Inc is a foreign pedo
corporation that infiltrated Americas!
• Explain why we don’t pay taxes!
Mediation
9 May 2018

Unclassified
Family members can sue under
the Zone of Interest
 PURPOSE

• Discuss Undue Delay as per Executive order 13164 of

Reasonable Accommodation impact a Service-Disabled Veteran
VA employee and his family with PTSD
• Discuss concerns about the work environment and the Office of
Resolution (ORM)
• Gain a decision on resolution for civil rights violations which a
preliminary investigation would find the need to stop the
retaliation because it has affected our family, related irreparable
harm. The damage is done (Relief pursuant to Rule 65 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
 PURPOSE

Discuss Undue Delay as per Executive Order 13164 of Reasonable

Accommodation impacts a Service-Disabled Veteran VA employee
and his family with PTSD.
Discuss concerns about the work environment and the Office of
Resolution (ORM)
Gain a decision on resolution for civil rights violations which a
preliminary investigation would find the need to stop the retaliation
because it has affected our family, related irreparable harm. The
damage is done (Relief pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
Facts
• The United States Inc. is a Foreign Corporation and must follow contract law as per 28 USC 3002
• The United States Inc. has 3 Citizenships
• Continental
• Federal
• Corporation
• The United States made Amooricans/Soldiers USA INC Citizens/Corporations unknowingly, which voids everything
• DOD owns the District Courts, and the VA attorneys run the courts throughout Amoorica
• The EEOC process to the Supreme Court is rigged (RICO)
• The United States Inc is a criminal organization
• Lawyers give their oath to the Prime Contractor. See 28 USC 3002 Section 15a. They Write the policies they don’t follow
• The United States Inc. must follow its charter, oath, and law; otherwise, it cannot operate in our country due to TREASON
• Contractors are required to have health hazard bonding information to cover their crimes
• An unrebutted Affidavit/Declaration stands as truth in Commerce Law
• People who fall under the 1990 ADA Act/1973 Rehab Act should protect themselves under Titles II (nobody gets immunity) &
III (man-made laws can be changed)
 References
• A. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 701

• B. Executive Order 13164,

• C. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Policy

Guidance on Executive Order 13164

• D. Equal Employment Opportunity Enforcement Guidance on

Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship Under the
American's with Disabilities Act (October 17, 2002),

• E. Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA) of 2008,

Public Law 110-325, effective 2009/ADA Interference Act

THAT one who relies on prior decisions of the Supreme Court has a perfect defense for willfulness. (U.S. v.
Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 (1973), as “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a
crime.”(Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d. 486, 489 (1956).
 References
• F. USC
• 18 USC 241
• 18 USC 242
• 18 USC 243
• 18 USC 245
• 18 USC 246
• 18 USC 249
• 42 USC 1983 KKK/42 USC 1871 KKK = Charter of the Forest
• 42 USC 1985
• 42 USC 1986 (Magna Carta)

G. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 701

H. Executive Order 13164,

I. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164

J. Equal Employment Opportunity Enforcement Guidance on Reasonable Accommodation and Undue

Hardship Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (October 17, 2002),
K. WESTFALL ACT

K. Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA) of 2008, Public Law 110-325, effective 2009.

THAT one who relies on prior decisions of the Supreme Court has a perfect defense for willfulness. (U.S. v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 (1973), as “The claim and exercise of
a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”(Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d. 486, 489 (1956).
 • Constitutional Rights
• 18 USC Codes (Criminal Codes,
18 USC 241, 242, and etc)
• 41 USC Codes (1983 KKK with
merit, 1985, 1986 and etc)
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964
References • ADA Act 1990 (1973 Rehabilitation
Act)
Continued • Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137,
was a landmark U.S. Supreme
Court case that established the
principle of judicial review in the
United States, meaning that
American courts have the power to
strike down laws and statutes that
they find to violate the
Constitution of the United States
 REFERENCES Continued
• A. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 USC 2000e, etc seq as
amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
• B. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 701)
• C. Executive Order 13164
• D. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Policy Guidance on
Executive Order 13164
• E. Equal Employment Opportunity Enforcement Guidance on Reasonable
Accommodation and Undue Hardship Under the American's with Disabilities
Act (October 17, 2002),
• F. Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA) of 2008, Public Law
110-325, effective 2009.
• G. 10.13 Civil Rights Title VII – Constructive Discharge (Suder’s Decision)
Harassment which leads to a constructive discharge constitutes a "tangible
employment action" only when precipitated by an official action of a supervisor.
• H. Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA)
• J. United States Code Title 10, Section 892, Article 92
• K. Title 1 of he Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)

THAT one who relies on prior decisions of the Supreme Court has a perfect defense for willfulness. (U.S. v. Bishop, 412 U.S.
346 (1973), as “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”(Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d.
486, 489 (1956).
 REFERENCE (Continued)
• L. Section 501 and 505 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act
• M. Section 102 and 103 of he Civil Rights Act of 1991. Amends Title VII and the ADA o
permit jury trials and compensatory and punitive damage awards in intentional
discrimination.
• N. Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA)
• O. United States Code Title 10, Section 892, Article 92
• P. Workplace Safety/OSHA Act of 1970
• Q. OSHA Sec 5(A)(1) employers have a general duty
• R. Section 102 and 103 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 Amends Title VII and the ADA
to permit jury trials and compensatory and punitive damage
• S. Department of VA Equal Employment Opportunity, Diversity and Inclusion, No
Fear, and Whistleblower Rights and Protection Policy Statement, 5 July 2017
 REFERENCE (Continued)
• Title 42, Chapter 126, Equal Opportunity for
Individuals with Disabilities, Sec 12101, Sec
12182 and 12181.
• Title 42 USC 1981, prohibiting discrimination
• Title 42 USC 1983, prohibiting discrimination
 PROBLEM STATEMENT
“ Situations happen, but work should not hurt”
Unless that is the intent .
• Violation of Civil Liberties (ADA & Title VII) of protected employees under
federal law deserves the level of attention of the Under Sec and Sec

• Discrimination on the basis of: Reprisal (11 January 2018)

• Age
• Race
• Disability
• Pay and Benefits
• Time and Allowance
• Reasonable Accommodation (Disability) and Married to s Disabled
Veteran
• Discipline and Discharge
• Ignoring Harassment
• Privacy Act Violation/HIPAA

Issue taken to: From 2016 and Jan 2018 to date, we tried in good faith
 AGENDA

• Problem Statement
• Prior Coordination
• Management Methodology
• Timeline
• EEO Process encountered
• Cause of Actions [26 claims]
• Facts
• Assumptions
• COAs (1-3)
• Screening Criteria
• Comparison
• Evaluations
• Analysis
• Conclusion/Recommendation
• Back Up Slides
 PROBLEM STATEMENT
“ Situations happen, but work should not hurt”.

• Violation of Human Liberties of protected employees under

federal law deserves the level of attention of the Under Sec
and Sec

• Issue taken to: Chain of command (i.e., first-line Supervisor,

Director, Chief of Staff to the Sec, and Office of
Resolution/EEO). Unable to discuss direct dialogue with
supervisor to point out the impact of actions.
Constructive Discharge
 PROBLEM STATEMENT (Continued)

Damage has been done as the working conditions are so

Intolerable that a reasonable person in Robert’s position [and with
his disabilities] would feel compelled to resign.

Pennsylvania state Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 147 (2004) . Accord Poland v. Chertoff, 494 F.
3d 1174, 1184 (9th circuit 2007); See also Emeldi v Univ. of Or., 673 F.3d 1218, 1225 (9th Cir.2012)
holding in Title VII retaliation case that constructive discharge occurs when “a retaliating
employer creates working conditions so extraordinary and egregious as to overcome the
normal motivation of a competent, diligent, and reasonable employee to remain on the job.
 Team of Subject Matter Experts VS. Attorney
We selected a team of SME vs. Attorneys because:

The practice of Law is an occupation of common right, the same being a secured
liberty right. (Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925)) Schware v. Board of Examiners,
United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239. "The practice of law cannot be
licensed by any state/State." Should any state convert a secured liberty right into a
privilege, charge a fee and issue a license for it, one may ignore the license and fee
and engage in the exercise of the right with impunity. (Shuttlesworth vs. City of
Birmingham 373 U.S. 262 (1962)).

Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members
of the group to achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with
"unauthorized practice of law.“ NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers
of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715; and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969).

THAT one who relies on prior decisions of the Supreme Court has a perfect defense
for willfulness. (U.S. v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 (1973), as “The claim and exercise of a
Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”(Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d. 486,
489 (1956).
 PRIOR COORDINATION

Robert Bozgoz ‘s Support Team Veteran’s Affairs

Robert Bogzgoz- VA Employee Voncelle James – Supervisor

Sue Bozgoz- (ADA Representative) [Austin] Angela Kendrix – Director, VBA

Ethel Briggs – SME (ADA) Ronald Burke - Dep Under Sec Field Ops
Larry Hughes (ADA)
Wena Mangram- SME (Nurse) Willie Clarke – Sec Field Ops
Rob Smith- SME (EEO) Brandye Terrell – Deputy Chief of Staff
Willie Lovelace- SME (Business Partner E2) Kevin Brown- HR/ADA Coordinator
*Hjordis Jones – SME (EEO ADVISOR & ADA Representative) Mike Frueh– Chief of Staff, Signed my VA benefits
Dr Price – COA 3, Doctor Melvin Gerrets – Division Chief Comp Serv
*Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Karen Agee – VA HR Director
General Joe Dunford and Staff- Asked to be Impartial/DOD
General Robert Shadley – ADA/MENTOR COA 3 Chris Wunsch- ADA Director
* General Russel Honore - Mediation in Good Faith French Bryant – EEO Representative

*T.D. – VA Alternate ADA Representative Dr. Racha - VA Doctor- Fab 2018 Med Doc

Candace Thorpe - VA Coworker Under Sec- Thomas Murphy

* Debrah Jolissaint – Nurse Practitioner (2016 to date) Sec- Robert Wilkie (Acting)
* L.S.- SME & VA Insiders *FOIA
Management Methodology *
 Management Methodology *

Step 1 – Assemble Team • VA (internal/ External), Generals, SMES, EEO, ADA

• Rules, Regulations, Policies, Federal Law/Internal and External VA

Step 2 – Leverage Existing Data Employees/News/Mr. Burke, Mr. Murphy and Mr Clark testimony via
congress

• SME, Nurse, Doctor, Mentors, Legal Assistance, ADA, EEO.

Step 3- Assign Tasks

• Update all procedures/Schedules

Step 4- Develop Strategies/Procedures • Update before, during and after the events

Step 5- Applicable Forms/Documents • AAR/Track/Documents

• Develop Status Charts/Control Procedures/Define

Step 6-Management Execution Responsibilities

❖ Focus/Main Priority: Robert and Austin

 Management Methodology (continued)

Step 7 – Develop Status Chart/Control

Procedures • Define Responsibilities

• Keep the lines of communication open

Step 8 – Meetings • Internal Meetings/Interface

Step 9- Coordinate Internal Audits • Internal Audits to insure accurate data

❖ Focus/Main Priority: Robert and Austin

 TIMELINE OF VIOLATIONS (Page 1 of 3)
31 Jan 2018 Mr Brown informs Sue that he has no 2016 ADA
Records of Rob, therefore, ADA does not exists.

31 Jan 2018 Vocelle give Robert a void letter of reprimand/retaliation

Sue informs HR and Mr Bryand that retaliation against law

30 Jan 2018 Rob and Sue, ADA Rep meet with Melvin J. ADA rep informs
Melvin, HR and EEO that retaliation and intimidation against the law

24 Jan 2018 Melvin J contacts Rob and informs him that Voncelle/Angela
has requested an investigation against him ref: 12 Jan.

19 Jan 2018 Robert called into Voncelle’s office w/o ADA rep and harassed.
Voncelle told Rob for times that she demand he speak. Rob refuses.

18 Jan 2018 EEO complaint filed and packet filed with HR and General Dunford cc’d

17 Jan 2018 Rob forms HR that he intends to file an EEO complaint due to civil rights
Violation.

16 Jan 2018 Rob emails Voncelle for HR, Kevin Brown and Voncelle response

12 Jan 2018 Voncelle calls meeting. When discover Robert request ADA representative she post/canc

11 Jan 2018 * Robert questions Voncelles unfair practices and she fails to respond (protected by

Nov 2018 *ADA rep informs Voncelle of leave issue .

Dec 2016 Chief of Staff involvement with ADA request and allowed (e,g., ADA rep, work from home, Med doc Rep named and provided to
HR/Division POC.

Dec 2016 Initial Harassment with Division Chief, Angela.

 TIMELINE OF VIOLATIONS (Page 2 of 3)
APR 2018 Voncelle and Director sends Sue the results of ADA accommodations.
Sue sends to doctor and doctor tells her to take VA to court because
they have ignored her on purpose as they have done nothing but willfully harm .

APR 2018 Brown informs Sue due to urgency going to send ADA request to director.
Chris coordinate another interactive ADA meeting. Sue request Gen Shadley and
Outside support. Meeting taped and medical file given to director which he leaves on
table . General Dunford staff contact Sue and states he needs to be fair.
APR 2018
Sue informs HR and command that stress affecting son and if he has a reset
She will hold them accountable as he has been institutionalized due to his disability .

MAR 2018 Doctor fills out FMLA for a year in an effort to protect Robert from harassment. Mr. Brown
Informs the Bozgozes to tell the doctor to redo the FMLA document on the right form. Then
reminds Sue that she needs to have the doctor to update RA doc. Bozgoz disagrees.

MAR 2018 Stress affects Son. Rob returns to work and Voncelle calls Rob into office w/o ADA rep. Sue asked Theresa to
assist. Voncelle/Angela harass Theresa. Brown inform Sue to update RA as per they directed. Sue disagrees.
Mr. Burke asks for mediation due to the harassment.

Mar 2018 Robert and Sue arrive at VA to attend RA meeting. Mr. Brown & Ms Agee informs Sue
to change Doc’s RA doc to remove harassment. Brown Informs Sue that higher is involved
and to be nice. Brown enters RA in RAPIDS . Voncelle goes on unexpected leave.
23 Feb 2018 Sue demands VA not delay reasonable accommodation. Stress affects son.

20 Feb 16 Jan 2018 HR ask so to recollect med records. Sue updates medical doc and sends: 1) 2016
med doc 2) suppl doc and 3) to FMLA (2 weeks) doc to VA.

Feb 2018 Sue Contacts Under Sec, Sec, Chief ask them to stop the harassment. Under Sec
response and ask for Robs information as if they are interested in helping.

Feb 2018 French Byant, EEO informs Sue that Voncelle & Angela agree to mediation wont
Remove void reprimand. Voncelle states she isnot responsible for Rob’s 2016 harassment .
Feb 2018 Sue contacts Chief of Staff to utilize open door policy. Negative Response. Sue responds to letter of
Reprimand. Later, Voncelle denies it.

Sue fires VA Doc & finds other Doc for Rob. Voncelle calls Rob in meeting and ask for copy of letter of
Feb 2018 Reprimand. Sue informs Voncelle that she cannot harass Rob.

Sue calls VA Doc to provide 2016 reasonable accommodation to VA 2xs. Doc calls Rob ask Doc on phone and
Feb 2018 In writing to provide 2016 reasonable accommodations. VA Doc fabricates 2018 RA documents and sends.
 TIMELINE OF VIOLATIONS (Page 3 of3)

17 April 2018 – VA ADA Director cc’d contacts Sue and informs her if she
Disagrees with their ADA results fill out another form.

18 April 2018 – Sue informs VA that it has become personal and the next
Step in ADA violations is court.

19 April 2018 - Sue contacts EEO coordinator, Gary Richardson

and informs him that VA disregarded the Doctors and General Shadley
guidance ref: do no harm. Sue requested that the additional ADA violation
be added to the 26 other ADA and 1973 Rehabilitation violations. Gary agrees.

.
 6 Dec 2016
Harassment
* Interactive process
starts via email
EEO Process/Program
27 Nov 2017
Time and Warn HR and Melvin Garrett that
harassment is against the law
Allowance

18 Jan 19 Jan
Sue Contacts EEO
24 Jan Melvin Gerrett
Voncelle Bullies Robert
CC:
*ADA Rep contacts VA HR,James
Voncelle Gen Dunford * EEO SME: Bob Smith
into talking
and Niki. Jones
Report to calls investigation for
HR 30 Jan 2018

12 Jan 2018
VA Leader
Directors
17 Jan 2018 Other VA Directors
Robert emails Voncelle Supervisors 31 Jan 2018
HR [Supervisors/Staff/ADA] Robert Receive
Letter of Reprimand
ORM Informal (French Bryant)
Robert returned from
FMLA. Within minutes EEO/Harassment
he Was in another Coordinator [Mediator]
2 Feb 2018 HR
meeting *NOTE: ORM is employed by VA Bozgoz Contacts EEO
Without his ADA HR
representative HR provides Bozgoz French
Office Resolution Browns Bosses Number
Management
ADR 24 April 2018

ADR to stop Harassment and

remove void letter of reprimand Informal to Formal
ORM French Bryant
3 Items vs 26 Items
&
Bryant vs Bozgoz
Mr. Ron Burke
Mediation

Prove 26 Violation
Reasonable FMLA LEAVE ADA/FMLA Undue Delay
Accommodation Denied
Reasonable Accommodation
 Cause of Actions
Comment
Race 1981 ( limited does not apply due to racial discrimination) No limitation ($600,000)
.
Under 1981A (Disability, Age, Retaliation) $300,000 Maximum. Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1).

HIPAA/Privacy Act (2 each) (2016 & 2018) $50,000 to $250,000 (3 time – 2016)

Willful Violation (KKK) 1983 of Title 42 of USC Code Jury is not entitled to place a monetary value on constitutional rights violations Cannot throw out a 1983 KKK
of which was deprived/punitive damage case with merit without giving
settlement
Married/Minority (non Federal Employee) $300,000. Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). Separate Cause of Action/RICO

Son (non-government entity) – Zone of Interest $300,000. Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). A person who knowingly obtains
VA caused an emotional setback on purpose or discloses individually
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbDR_lWmdXo identifiable health information in
violation of the Privacy Rule may
Attorney’s Fee/Representative ADA and Dr. Price $80,000
face a criminal penalty of up to
$50,000 and up to one-year
Subject Matter Expert Fees (ADA) (24 April) $30,000 imprisonment. The criminal
penalties increase to $100,000
Subject Matter Expert Fee (EEO) (24 April) $10,000 and up to five years imprisonment
if the wrongful conduct involves
Subject Matter Expert Fee (Medical) (24 April) $10,000 false pretenses, and to $250,000
and up to 10 years imprisonment
ADA Rep /ADA Violation $75,000 first Offense and $125,000 thereafter if the wrongful conduct involves
the intent to sell, transfer, or use
VA Doctor Falsifying Medical Record RICO (treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory identifiable health information for
damages). commercial advantage, personal
gain or malicious harm. The
RICO Act: treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory Tremble Damages: must allege (1) that the defendant received money from a Department of Justice is
damages). pattern of racketeering activity, (2) invested that money in an enterprise, (3) the responsible for criminal
enterprise affected interstate commerce, and (4) an injury resulting from the prosecutions under the Privacy
investment of racketeering income distinct from an injury caused by the Act. We reserve the right to
predicate acts themselves. contact hospital to file complaint
and to file a complaint with the
MD Medial Board.
 COURSE OF ACTION (COA)

COA 1: Relief as per law/policies

COA 2: Relief based on Retirement
COA 3: Court [VA, DOD and individual
capacity and media exposure]
 COA 1
Comment

COA 1: Relief that would

.
Race Discrimination: 1981 (only applies with Race)
have been available had the matter been heard in court:
No limitation ($600,000). 1981
Punitive Damage awarded when practice is done with malice or with reckless
•
•
Constructive Discharge
Changes in policies
indifference to the federal protected rights • Manage Training
Under 1981A (Disability, Age, Retaliation and etc.) $300,000 Maximum Cap. Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility Promote future compliance
for punitive damages depends on the state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v
Am. Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999).
HIPAA/Privacy Act (2 each) (2016, VA Doctor, 2018) ($150,000 ) 5-10 years 150,000
Note: $50,000 to $250,000 (3 time – 2016, VA Dr, and 2018)
Willful Violation (KKK) 1983 of Title 42 of USC Code Jury is not entitled to place a monetary value on constitutional rights violations of *Rule 65 of the Federal Rule of Civil
which was deprived/punitive damage ($300,000) Procedure. Allows court to stop
retaliation
Married/Minority (non Federal Employee) /ADA/Emotional $300,000 (Not Capped) under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). Separate Cause of Action/RICO

Son (non government entity)/Emotional VA Caused a emotional set back on purpose) $300,000 (Not Capped). under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). A person who knowingly obtains or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbDR_lWmdXo discloses individually identifiable
health information in violation of
Transfer to GA at VA expense under ADA Violation law $155,000. the Privacy Rule may face a
criminal penalty of up to $50,000
Representative ADA (Title 42 Section 126)/ADA and Dr Price $80,000 and up to one-year
imprisonment. The criminal
Expert Fees (ADA) (1981A and 1981) $30,000 penalties increase to $100,000 and
up to five years imprisonment if the
wrongful conduct involves false
Expert Fee (EEO) (1981A and 1981) $10,000
pretenses, and to $250,000 and up
to 10 years imprisonment if the
Expert Fee (Medical) (1981A and 1981) $10,000 wrongful conduct involves the
intent to sell, transfer, or use
ADA Rep (T.D $10,000) /ADA Right ($110,000) $10,000 and $110, 000) identifiable health information for
commercial advantage, personal
VA Doctor Falsifying Medical Record RICO (treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory gain or malicious harm. The
damages). Department of Justice is
responsible for criminal
RICO Act: treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory Tremble Damages: must allege (1) that the defendant received money from a pattern prosecutions under the Privacy
damages) or Use of racketeering activity, (2) invested that money in an enterprise, (3) the enterprise Act. We reserve the right to contact
Solution: Grant Money ($3 Million) to train VA Employees, ORM, and HR on ADA, affected interstate commerce, and (4) an injury resulting from the investment of hospital to file complaint and to file
Counseling, and EEO. racketeering income distinct from an injury caused by the predicate acts a complaint with the MD Medial
themselves.
 COA 1 RECAP
.

COA #1: Relief that would have been available had the matter been heard
in court.
• Robert 1981 (600,000)+ 1981A (300,000)+HIPAA (150,000) +Taxes =$1,050,000
• Sue (ADA Rep) KKK 1983 (300,000)+ Emotional/ADA (300,000) +Taxes $600,000
• Austin (ADA) (300,000) +Taxes = $300,000
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbDR_lWmdXo)
• Attorney and Expert Fees: 1981/1981A ($140,000) + Training = $140,000 +$155,000
• Transfer to GA at VA’s expense under ADA violation law ~$150,000
• Robert Returns to work with leave restored
• Use Grant Money under 1981/1981A to UDC to ADA/Counseling training
• ~3 Million
• Hold VA, DOD and everyone accountable in their own individual capacity
• Mandatory “tracked” [outside] training [ADA, EEO, Counseling] for all
supervisors (Use Grant 3 Million to UDC)
• Coordinate with UDC to provide “tracked” counseling to VA employees
[student supervised training] [win-win]
• Restore leave
• Hire special assistant to figure out ORM/EECO process
***We reserve the right to sue RICO and Privacy Act Violations
 COA 2
.
COA 2: Base Relief on Retirement (22 years with Benefit, $106 X 22 plus benefits
promotion and taxes ~2.8 Million) + Expert + UDC training + 3 X s

Retirement 1981A/1981/ADA/Constructive Termination 2.8 Million + Taxes

ADA Representative $300,000
Austin $300,000
Transfer Back to GA under ADA Law $155,000
Attorney’s Fee/Representative ADA 1981A/1918 $80,000
Expert Fees (ADA) 1981A/1981 $30,000
Expert Fee (EEO) 1981A/1981 $10,000

Expert Fee (Medical Nurse) 1981A/1981 $10,000

ADA Rep (T.D) /ADA and 1981A/1981/Doctor Price $110,000 (Teresa $10,000)
Solution: ***1981/1981A Grant Money ($3 Million) to train VA
Employees, ORM, and HR on ADA, Counseling, and EEO.
 COA 2 RECAP
. RECOMMENDATION

• COA #2: Base Relief on Retirement (22 years with Benefit, $106 X 22 plus
benefits, promotion and taxes ~2.8 Million) + ADA Rep, + Son + expert
• Attorney and Expert Fees: 1981/1981A ($140,000) + Training = $140,000
• ADA Rep $300,000
• Son $300,000 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbDR_lWmdXo)
• Transfer to GA at VA expense ADA Violation law $155,000
• Use Grant Money under 1981/1981A to UDC to ADA/Counseling training
• ~3 Million
• Hold VA, DOD and everyone accountable in their own individual capacity
• Mandatory “tracked” [outside] training [ADA, EEO, Counseling] for all
supervisors (Use Grant 3 Million to UDC)
• Coordinate with UDC to provide “tracked” counseling to VA employees
[student supervised training] [win-win]
• Restore leave
• Hire special assistant to figure out ORM/EECO process

***We reserve the right to sue RICO and Privacy Act Violations
 COA 3
.
Race 1981 (does not apply)
COA 3: Relief that would have been available had the matterComment
No limitation ($600,000)
been heard in
court:
Under 1981A (Disability, Age, Retaliation) $300,000 Maximum Cap. Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981
a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the state of mind
the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am. Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535
(1999).
HIPAA/Privacy Act (2 each) (2016 & 2018) $50,000 to $250,000 (3 time – 2016)

Willful Violation (KKK) 1983 of Title 42 of USC Code Jury is not entitled to place a monetary value on constitutional rights
violations of which was deprived/punitive damage
Married/Minority (non Federal Employee) $300,000 Separate Cause of Action/RICO

Son (non government entity) $300,000 A person who knowingly obtains or discloses
individually identifiable health information in violation
Attorney’s Fee/Representative ADA $80,000 of the Privacy Rule may face a criminal penalty of up to
$50,000 and up to one-year imprisonment. The
Expert Fees (ADA) $30,000 criminal penalties increase to $100,000 and up to five
years imprisonment if the wrongful conduct involves
false pretenses, and to $250,000 and up to 10 years
Expert Fee (EEO) $10,000
imprisonment if the wrongful conduct involves the
intent to sell, transfer, or use identifiable health
Expert Fee (Medical) $10,000 information for commercial advantage, personal gain
or malicious harm. The Department of Justice is
ADA Rep (T.D) $10,000 responsible for criminal prosecutions under the Privacy
Act. We reserve the right to contact hospital to file
VA Doctor Falsifying Medical Record RICO (treble damages (damages in triple the amount of complaint and to file a complaint with the MD Medial
actual/compensatory damages). Board.

RICO Act: treble damages (damages in triple the amount of Tremble Damages: must allege (1) that the defendant received money
actual/compensatory damages). from a pattern of racketeering activity, (2) invested that money in an
enterprise, (3) the enterprise affected interstate commerce, and (4)
an injury resulting from the investment of racketeering income
distinct from an injury caused by the predicate acts themselves.
 COA 3 RECAP
• COA 3: Court .
• Relief that would have been available had the matter been heard in court (Cause of Action):
Hostile work environment based on:
(1) Retaliation (11 Jan 2018 & 18 Jan 2018) (*1981A =$300,000 Cap) However, $300,000 Maximum Cap. Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981
a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am. Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999).

(2) Age Discrimination, Disability, Emotional (*1981A)

(3) Race (Caucasian) Discrimination (Unlimited Cap)
(4) ADA 1990, Title I, II, III, V, and VII 1981 $300,000 Cap/ADA $55,000/110,000
(5) Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ($300,000)

Separate Cause of Action

(6) Married disabled veteran (nonfederal) Separate Cause of Action
KKK 1983 (Unlimited)
(7) Austin/ADA Protected nonfederal) Separate Cause of Action
KKK 1983 (Unlimited)
(8) Emotional Distress (Willful/Unlimitted)
5-10 Years
(9) Privacy Act/HIPPA Law (2016 & RA meeting) ($100,000 to $250,000)
(10) VA Doctor falsifying 2016/2018 documents
(11) RICO : Treble damages
(12) Multiple Press Conferences/Veteran Services Organization/Wounded Warrior
Game/Invictus Games
 COURSE OF ACTION (COA)

COA 1: Relief as per law

COA 2: Relief based on Retirement
COA 3: Court [VA, DOD and individual
capacity and media exposure]
Accepted EEO Claims
 Items of Violations on EEO Report (Intro)
An agency shall accept a complaint from any aggrieved employee or applicant for employment who believes that s/he has been discriminated against by that agency because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age or disabling condition. The Commission has long defined an
"aggrieved employee" as one who suffers a present harm or loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which there is a remedy. Diaz v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994); see also Wildberger v. Small Business
Administration, EEOC Request No. 05960761 (October 8, 1998). An agency is required to address EEO complaints only when filed by an individual who has suffered direct, personal deprivation at the hands of the employer; the agency's act must have caused some concrete effect on
the aggrieved person's employment status. Quinones v. Department of Defense, EEOC Request No. 05920051 (March 12, 1992).

The complaint of discrimination raises the following claim: Whether Complainant was subjected to a hostile work environment based on: (1) Retaliation, (2) age, (3) race (Caucasian), (4) Discrimination based on his
disability as a Service Disabled veteran and (4) being married to a minority service disabled veteran as evidenced by the following
Date Claim (Must State a Action Responsible Regulations Prohibited by Fine Comments
claim) Parties
6 Dec 2016 Retaliation for ADA Boss ignores ADA Reps request and calls team VA EEO MGT Directive ADA 1990 , Title I, II, III, EEO law Sections 102 and 103 of the Civil Interaction process starts when asked.
representative approaching meeting. In meeting Kendrix allows co-worker to Director, Angela Kendrix 1614.107 V, & VII, Rehab Act of Rights Act of 1991 Rehab Act of 1973 require Fed Agency
boss about the harassment harass Rob in front of peers. Rob says nothing. ADA 1993, Title VII, 501 and provide RA to indiv unless cause undue
and unfair treatment ref: rep contacts Chief of Staff and Deputy Bradey Chief of Staff, Mike Freul ADA Procedures under 505 of the Rehab Act of 1981A Cap $300,000. $300,000 Maximum hardship
telework and indefinite Terrell. CoS insures Reasonable Accommodations Executive Order 13164 1973. Cap. However, Punitive Damages under 42 Race Discrimination *Pattern of ongoing
phone duty. request starts (2018 Voncelle states on tape this Deputy Chief of Staff requires all exe branch KKK, Title 42 USC 1983 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive discrimination
action was a management deal. What happened to Brandey Terrell federal agencies institute damages depends on the state of mind the
Rob before her time is not her responsibility. procedures for leadership were in, Kolstad v Am. Dental Agency must consider at least as
2 weeks later, Rob received VA HR Denise Williams processing RA request Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999). background all relevant evidence offered
bad Report Card due to This starts the interactive process/Rob (Oct 2002 under Section 501 of the outside of 45 days
opposition (3rd Party) Enforcement Guide). VA leads one to believe the VA Doctor Rachsa (RA ) Rehab Act of 1973 Retaliation against Rob
interactive process starts when they say it starts. Oct 2002 Enforcement due to ADA contacting No limits on Race 1991 Race *NOTE: No undue delay when Chief of Staff
Nurse Deb Jou Guide command Discrimination ($600,000) and KKK/1983 got involved. Kendrix forced to follow the
Rob receives RA (Telework, ADA, Med Appoints and (RA) rules/offers mediation ADA refuses. Wants
Superv) Racially harassed by No limits on Race Discrimination or Under her to simply stop the harassment.
2016 VA Medical Records (Dr Rashs- and Nurse – peers and supervisor KKK 42 USC 1983
Deb ). Candace and Peers 2018 HR states packet missing/ VA Doctor
Emails & Written request. ADA Violation - $55,000 for the first Fab 2016 Medial Documents *RICO
violation and $110,000 there after.
**Robert becomes protected under the
ADA Acts

Reserve the rights for

*RICO Claim -3 Xs

The opposition clause of Title VII has an “expansive definition,” and “great deference” is given to the EEOC’s interpretation of opposing conduct. As the Supreme Court stated in Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson
County, “‘[w]hen an employee communicates to her employer a belief that the employer has engaged in . . . a form of employment discrimination, that communication’ virtually always ‘constitutes the employee’s opposition to the activity.’” For
example, accompanying a coworker to the human resources office in order to file an internal EEO
 Items of Violations on EEO Report (#1)
An agency shall accept a complaint from any aggrieved employee or applicant for employment who believes that s/he has been discriminated against by that agency because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age or disabling condition. The Commission has long defined an
"aggrieved employee" as one who suffers a present harm or loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which there is a remedy. Diaz v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994); see also Wildberger v. Small Business
Administration, EEOC Request No. 05960761 (October 8, 1998). An agency is required to address EEO complaints only when filed by an individual who has suffered direct, personal deprivation at the hands of the employer; the agency's act must have caused some concrete effect on
the aggrieved person's employment status. Quinones v. Department of Defense, EEOC Request No. 05920051 (March 12, 1992).

The complaint of discrimination raises the following claim: Whether Complainant was subjected to a hostile work environment based on: (1) Retaliation, (2) age, (3) race (Caucasian), (4) Discrimination based on his
disability as a Service Disabled veteran and (4) being married to a minority service disabled veteran as evidenced by the following
Date Claim (Must State a Action Responsible Regulations Prohibited by Fine Comments
claim) Parties

27 Nov Time and Attendance Supervisor gave Voncelle EEO Manage Title I, II, VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the EEO law Sections 102 and 103 of the Civil Rights Act of Establishing a pattern. Agency
2017 Abuse of Power leave then took it James Directives EEO ADEA, Title V of the ADA, Section 501 of the 1991 must consider at least as
back. Once ADA Angela MD 110 Rehab Act (501), the EPA background all relevant evidence
rep sent an email, Kendrix ADA 1981A Cap $300,000. offered outside of 45 days .
Supervisor gave KKK 42 USC 1983 However,.Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 This was the time (if VJ [really did
Robert partial leave Sec 501 of the Rehab Act 1973 prohibits a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the not coordinate with Angela
and then invited discrimination against qualified individual with state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am. Dental Kindrex located one door away
ADA Rep to talk disabilities with respect all terms, conditions and Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999). from her office] should have
(See Email) privileges of employment. This law also require researched the status of Robert
covered employees to make RA absent undue as a supervisor she has a
hardship. No limits on Race 1991 Race Discrimination ($600,000) responsibility to learn.
Title III, Public Accommodations. and KKK/1983
504 (Gov’t Programs and activities)
No limits on Race Discrimination or Under KKK 42 USC
1983

ADA Violation - $55,000 for the first violation and

$110,000 there after.

Reserve the right for

*RICO Claim -3 Xs
 Items of Violations on EEO Report (#2)
Date Claim Action Responsible Regulations Prohibited by Fine Comments
Parties

Following Claim addresses the additional ADA prohibition of “interference” with the exercise of rights under the ADA. The interference provision goes beyond the retaliation prohibition to make it also unlawful to coerce,
intimidate, threaten, or otherwise interfere with an individual’s exercise of any right under the ADA, or with an individual who is assisting another to exercise ADA rights.

11 Jan UNFAIR TREATMENT FOR EXPRESS In response to VJ denial Voncelle James EEOC REHAB ACT OF 1973, [501 and 505] UNFAIR TREATMENT FOR Retaliation: CAP Willful
2018 OPPOSITION TO DISCRIMINATORY email, the Complainant Enforcement EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO DISCRIMINATORY $300,00 harassment
PRACTICE/REPRISAL questioned VJ unfair Angela Kindrex Guidance on PRACTICE/REPRISAL among VA
discriminatory email Retaliation and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 5 the Age 1990 ADA employee starts
Interference with ADA law [treatment as he was WITNESSES: Related Issues Discrimination, Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–3(a), $55,000 for the after 12 Jan
singled out]. Candace, Theresa 2016 Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),7 Section 501 initial Claim and
Davis of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 501),8 the Equal Pay Act (EPA), 9 $100,000.
VJ. Ignored the Section 4(d) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 623(d),
complainant. Section 503 of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12203

PROTECTED: The first question when analyzing a claim that a materially adverse action was retaliatory is whether there was an earlier complaint or other EEO activity that is protected by the law (known as “protected activity”). Protected activity
includes “participating” in an EEO process or “opposing” discrimination. These two types of protected activity arise directly from two distinct statutory retaliation clauses that differ in scope. Participation in an EEO process is more narrowly
defined to refer specifically to raising a claim, testifying, assisting or participating in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing under the EEO laws, but it is very broadly protected. By contrast, opposition activity encompasses a broader
range of activity by which an individual opposes any practice made unlawful by the EEO statutes. The protection for opposition is limited, however, to those individuals who act with a reasonable good faith belief that a potential EEO violation exists
and who act in a reasonable manner to oppose it.

Okoli v. City of Balt., 648 F.3d 216, 224 (4th Cir. 2011) (ruling that it was sufficient to constitute “opposition” that plaintiff complained about “harassment” and described some facts about the sexual behavior in the workplace. EEOC v. Go Daddy
Software, Inc., 581 F.3d 951, 964 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that allegations need not have identified all incidents of the discriminatory behavior complained of to constitute opposition because “a complaint about one or more of the comments is
protected behavior”); Ogden v. Wax Works, Inc., 214 F.3d 999, 1007 (8th Cir. 2000) (ruling that reasonable jury could conclude plaintiff “opposed discriminatory conduct” when she told her harasser, who was also her supervisor, to stop harassing
her). 40 1 B. Lindemann, P. Grossman, & C. Weirich, Employment Discrimination Law 15–20 (5th ed. 2012)
 Items of Violations on EEO Report (#3)
Date Claim (Must State a claim) Action Responsible Regulations Prohibited by Fine Comments
Parties

PROTECTED: The first question when analyzing a claim that a materially adverse action was retaliatory is whether there was an earlier complaint or other EEO activity that is protected by the law (known as “protected activity”). Protected activity includes “participating” in an EEO process or “opposing” discrimination. These two
types of protected activity arise directly from two distinct statutory retaliation clauses that differ in scope. Participation in an EEO process is more narrowly defined to refer specifically to raising a claim, testifying, assisting or participating in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing under the EEO laws, but it is very
broadly protected. By contrast, opposition activity encompasses a broader range of activity by which an individual opposes any practice made unlawful by the EEO statutes. The protection for opposition is limited, however, to those individuals who act with a reasonable good faith belief that a potential EEO violation exists and
who act in a reasonable manner to oppose it.

12 Jan 2018 Refusal to meet with ADA Rep and Discuss issue REPRISAL/ADA VIOLATION Voncelle James Rob Questions PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Protection Act. 5 USC Supervisor can not violate: Voncelle James
[Protected] VJ agrees to meet with Complainant at 2:45. Authority/Superv. Action &2302(b)(8) Merit System Principles and or the Personal Angela Kendrix
Angela Kindrex via email that denies. Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR &1614.101(b) Practice
However, when complainant initiates ADA protection Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti retaliation
Complainants ask VJ for HR representative’s rights, VJ denies representation and cancels the WITNESSES: Candace, provision/opposition clause Reprisal: $300,000 Cap
information due to 11 and 12 January incident via scheduled meeting: Theresa Davis 1981 A.
email. VJ responds to Complainant with HR [Mr. (1) after the ADA representative arrives 1990 ADA Interference Provision. ADA prohibits However,.Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. &
Brown’s] email. *This is significant information (2) and while supervisor, Angela Kendrix watches and interference with the exercise or enjoyment of ADA 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages
because it proves VJ knows Complainant is (3) in the presence of Teresa Davis. right Title 42 USC 1223(b) depends on the state of mind the leadership
interested in filing an EEO complaint. Brown vs. City of Tucson, 336 F3d 1181 (9 th Cir. were in, Kolstad v Am. Dental Ass’n, 527 US
Supervisor Actions constitutes intereferance in violation 2003) 526, 535 (1999).
*This action caused the Complainant’s disability od ADA
to worsen as the Supervisor failed to resolve the KKK, 1983 No Cap
issue
ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation and
$110,000

17 and 18 Jan 2018 Unfair treatment for express opposition to ADA sends email to Kevin Brown, HR and [General HR, Kevin Brown PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Protection Act. 5 USC 198 A, $300,000 Cap/Punitive Damages Voncelle James
discriminatory (3rd Party) Dunford] to informs them EEO complaint will be &2302(b)(8) Angela Kendrix
submitted due to 11 and 12 Jan issue and how she made Voncelle James Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR &1614.101(b) 1981 Unlimited
Rob feel . Ask for protection. Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti retaliation
Angela Kendrix provision/opposition clause 1983, KKK Jury Unlimited
Failed to protect Rob from harassment. Informed VJ. ADA Violation –Interference
ADA Violation $55,000 first violation,
$100,000 there after
Reserve the right to file
RICO 3X

RICO
Date Claim (Must State a Action Responsible Regulations Prohibited by Fine Comments
claim) Parties

19 Jan VJ directs Rob to REPRISAL/ADA VIOLATION Voncelle James PROTECTED PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Supervisor can not violate: Voncelle James
come to her office Harssment Protection Act. 5 USC Merit System Principles and or the Personal knows willfully
and willfully ADA Interference Angela Kindrex &2302(b)(8) Practice violates the ADA
harasses him. Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR law without fear.
VJ directs Robert to come to her office and sit across from &1614.101(b) Reprisal: $300,000 Cap
her in an effort to remind him who is boss. VJ directors Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti 1981 A.
Robert to her about 11 and 12 Jan. retaliation provision/opposition However,.Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. &
clause 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages
VJ calls Robert into her office and orders him to speak to depends on the state of mind the leadership were
her abut 11 and 12 Jan issue. 1990 ADA Interference Provision. in, Kolstad v Am. Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535
Robert refuses as VJ become frustrated ADA prohibits interference with (1999).
the exercise or enjoyment of ADA
Robert refuses as he informs her that he reserves his right right Title 42 USC 1223(b) KKK, 1983 No Cap
not to say anything to her [as there was an EEO complaint Brown vs. City of Tucson, 336 F3d
filed against her]. VJ informs Robert 4Xs to speak. Robert 1181 (9th Cir. 2003) ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation and $110,000
reminds her that he was there to listen and she will talk to
him in such a manner when he knows his rights.

24 Jan VJ and Angela Melvin Gerrett coordinates an interagency investigation Melvin Gerrett PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Reprisal: $300,000 Cap Warned Melvin
2018 Kendrix coordinates with Robert which is be design to intimidate and oppress Voncelle James Protection Act. 5 USC 1981 A. that retaliation
with Melvin Garrett him. Angela Kendrix &2302(b)(8) However,.Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & and harassment
to investigate Robert Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages were against the
with internal &1614.101(b) depends on the state of mind the leadership were law.
investigation Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti in, Kolstad v Am. Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535
retaliation provision/opposition (1999).
clause
KKK, 1983 No Cap

ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation and $110,000

Date Claim (Must State Action Responsible Regulations Prohibited by Fine Comments
a claim) Parties
30 Jan Willful Harrssment Melvin Gerrett met with Robert in person in his Melvin Gettett PROTECTED ADA/Reprisial Reprisal: $300,000 Cap Willful harassment.
2018 office to harass him. Had him sign the same 1981 A. Melvin Gerrette called a fake
documents that was previously signed and However,.Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 meeting and informed both Rob and
remind him he could be held accountable for not a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the Sue that they would receive a copy of
cooperating in the VOID investigation state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am. the final investigation. As of date, no
Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999). report. He wasted both our times.

KKK, 1983 No Cap. ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation

and $110,000

31 Jan Supervisor gives VJ knows she is not authorized to give Robert a Voncelle James PROETCTED Interference of Reprisal: $300,000 Cap Willful Harassment
2018 Robert a void Letter letter of reprimand as she is not a director. and ADA 1981 A.
of Reprimand According to HR and VA rules, one must be a HR Karen Agee However,.Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981
director, provide a warning first and etc. a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the
state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am.
Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999).

KKK, 1983 No Cap. ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation

and $110,000
2 Feb ADA Rep Contacts Fraud waste and abuse of tax payers funds. VJ is Kenvin Brown, Protect Privacy Act Privacy Act ADA representative attempting to get
2018 HR and attempts to not rained and willfully harassing Robert. informs Bozgoz ADA Violation Robert out of the toxic area. Contact
call EEOC Rep, Brown informs ADA that he violated the privacy that Gary is VA Doctor Rasha and inform her to
French Bryant and act and lost Robert’s ADA records, therefore we French Bryant’s resend VA Robert 2016 RA. Dr Rasha
report retaliation. need to reassemble his ADA records. boss. Conact ignores request.
Gary and report
EEOC

6 Feb Reprisal/ADA Complaint filed against VJ for issuing void Voncelle James ADA KKK Ac 1983 NO Cap Willful abuse.
2018 letter of reprimands. Interference Fraud, waste and abuse of taxpayers
Voncelle denies it (policy needs to change money.
here.
Date Claim Action Responsible Prohibited by Fine Comments
Parties
15 Feb Reprisal/ADA Problem: VJ Congress. Fraud waste and abuse Supervisor can not violate: Start questioning
2018 Congress give appropriate funds to: Angela Kendrix ADA Interference . Merit System Principles and or the Personal Practice VA’s practices.
Fraud waste and abuse of HR, VJ and ORM. If the VA policy states VJ needs French Bryant
power and tax payers money to be trained why are people in leadership Kevin Brown Clear policies, rules, and regulations Reprisal: $300,000 Cap
[lack of training]. allowing her to run wild and play with lives? Karen Agee are being broken. 1981 A.
However, Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981
ORM informs ADA Rep VJ ORM informs ADA Rep the VJ refused to remove a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the
wants to mediate but refuses Void order and if we mediate, they wont remove Interfere with ADA state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am.
to remove the void letter of reprimand. Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999).
reprimand from Robs ADA request VJ recognizes.
personal file. Neg Response KKK, 1983 No Cap

ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation and $110,000

16 Feb, Interference of ADA rights. Abuse of authority and lack of training. VJ Rehab Act of 1973 [501 and 505] Reprisal: $300,000 Cap VJ calls Robert in
2018 Retaliation (3rd Party). Voncelle James calls Robert into her office, ask Angela Kendrix PROTECTED: Whistle Blower 1981 A. again without ADA
Punishes Robert by calling him to locate the original Letter of Reprimand. Protection Act. 5 USC &2302(b)(8) However, Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 rep.
him into her office again. They ask him to sign her the grievance which she Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the
denied. &1614.101(b) state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am.
Ignores RA Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999).
retaliation provision/opposition
clause KKK, 1983 No Cap

ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation and $110,000

19 Feb, Unfair treatment due to ADA calls Chief of Staff, Under Sec and Deputy Sec Rehab Act of 1973 [501 and 505] Reprisal: $300,000 Cap Under Sec
2018 express opposition to and Demand that they investigate VJ and her Under Sec PROTECTED: Whistle Blower 1981 A. Chief of Staff, Frueh
discrimination willful Federal law violations. Chief Protection Act. 5 USC &2302(b)(8) However, Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 Assist Chief of Staff,
practice/reprisal on third Called Secretary, Chrystal Brooks. Left a message Deputy Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR a(b)(1). Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the Terrell
party. (emergency). Chrystal said the Chief was in a Chrystal Brooks &1614.101(b) state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v Am. Voncelle
meeting and he might call back. Chief never Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999). Angela
Fraud waste and abuse called. Called Under Sec and Sec retaliation provision/opposition
clause KKK, 1983 No Cap

ADA, $55,000 for the initial violation and $110,000

Date Claim Action Responsible Party Prohibited by Fine Comments

20 Feb Retaliation from Under Sec request more information for Under Sec PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Protection Act. 5 USC Supervisor can not violate:
2018 Under Sec Robert then stops! &2302(b)(8) Merit System Principles and or the Personal Practice
Direction of Duty Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR &1614.101(b)
Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti retaliation Reprisal: $300,000 Cap
provision/opposition clause 1981 A.
Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility
for punitive damages
KKK, 1983 No Cap
21 Feb ADA interference HR refuses to find 2016 document. ADA VJ 1981 A.
2018 and Retaliation rep assembles suppl documents Angela Kendrix Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility
Kevin Brown for punitive damages
KKK, 1983 No Cap
21 Feb ADA Interference ADA fires VA Doctor for fabricating VA Doctor Privacy Act Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). Eligibility
2018 VA Doctor Fab RA medical Records for punitive damages
KKK, 1983 No Cap

21 Feb ADA interference Stress taking toll on Austin/Breaks VA & Command New Doctors assist Rob as the stress has affected his family. 1981A Cap $300,000
2018 and retaliation down/Dr called Kevin Brown Doctor
VJ RICO ACT (3Xs)
Angela Kendrix KKK 1983

22 Feb Retaliation HR refuses to expedite RA/File FMLA to HR EEO Counselor provides his example of EEO complaint. 1981A Cap $300,000
2018 protect Rob from area VJ Bozgoz updates it afert 2nd day and sends to command and
Angela Kendrix EEO rep. Everyone ignores the complaint RICO ACT (3Xs)
KKK 1983
22 Feb Reach out to General Dunford, Shadley VA/HR Rehabilitation Act/Undue Delay $300,000 Punitive Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1).
2018 and Honore VJ and Angela Eligibility for punitive damages
kendrix KKK, 1983 No Cap
Date Claim Action Responsible Prohibited by Fine Comments
Party

March Retaliation Rob returns from FMLA and VJ VJ Freedom of Reprisal: PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Protection Act. 5 Son and Wife’s PTSD is triggered.
2018 calls him into her office and Kevin Brown 29 CFR &1614.101(b) USC &2302(b)(8) Doctor Price inform the Bozgozes that if she thought VA
refuses ADA rep. ADA rep Karen Agees Title 7 of the Civil Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR &1614.101(b) was going to harass him she would not have sent him
finds Theresa to act as ADA Rights Act/aniti Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti retaliation back to work. She updated his FMLA documents for a
rep retaliation provision/opposition clause year and said VA’s work area is toxic with VJ. She
provision/opposition recommends that he stay away as their goal is to break
clause him without regards.
March ADA interference Attend RA meeting with VA HR VA Freedom of Reprisal: Reprisal: $300,000 Cap Once HR Supervisor left to meeting. Kevin Brown
2018 Superv, Karen Agee and Kevin 29 CFR &1614.101(b) 1981 A. informed ADA that higher is involved in our process and
Brown Title 7 of the Civil Damages under 42 U.S.C. & 1981 a(b)(1). to be nice and I might get what Robert wants.
HR wanted us to tell the Rights Act/aniti Eligibility for punitive damages depends on the ADA rep informed HR rep to do his job and stop wasting
doctor to redo RA and take out retaliation state of mind the leadership were in, Kolstad v tax payers money.
harassment. provision/opposition Am. Dental Ass’n, 527 US 526, 535 (1999).
clause
March ADA interference ADA Rep ask for RA update. VA & PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Protection Act. 5 VA wants Doctor price to redo her paper work to erase
2018 and retaliation VA refuses to update. VA Command USC &2302(b)(8) what she wrote on the FMLA document and RA
wants doctor to change Kevin Brown Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR &1614.101(b) document. Dr Price is concen. Ask Robert to consider
VJ Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti retaliation leaving VA.
Angela Kendrix provision/opposition clause

29 Mar Mr. Burke request interested in mediation. Mediation Mr. Burke Mediation Schedule for 24 April team prepares and 3
2018 coordinate for 24 April then cancelled by VA after days before the meeting, VA cancels meeing.
team assembled
Date Claim Action Responsible Prohibited by Fine Comments
Party

April Retaliation Rob returns from FMLA and VJ calls him into her office VJ Freedom of Reprisal: 29 PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Protection Act. 5 USC Son and Wife’s PTSD is triggered.
2018 and refuses ADA rep. ADA rep finds Theresa to act as Kevin Brown CFR &1614.101(b) &2302(b)(8) Doctor Price inform the Bozgozes that if she thought
ADA rep Karen Agees Title 7 of the Civil Rights Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR &1614.101(b) VA was going to harass him she would not have sent
Act/aniti retaliation Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti retaliation him back to work. She updated his FMLA documents
provision/opposition provision/opposition clause for a year and said VA’s work area is toxic with VJ.
clause She recommends that he stay away as their goal is
to break him without regards.

April RA Meeting with Undue delay Chris W

2018 ADA interference Taped VJ and Chris in meeting giving wrong V/J
information. VJ is the trigger but

April Privacy Act ADA Rep provided 2016 Medical Documents to Chris to Chris Privacy Act $250,000 and 5 years in prison
2018 Violation add to his files.

Chris leave documents on table after General Shadley

askes him and VJ to do the right thing by focusing on
the victim.

April Undue Delay VJ ADA interference PROTECTED: Whistle Blower Protection Act. 5 USC VJ has made this personal.
2018 Of Reasonable Accommodations. Chris &2302(b)(8)
After the RA meeting, VJ disregarded the doctors advise and made RA that was Freedom of Reprisal: 29 CFR &1614.101(b)
not effective. Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act/aniti retaliation
As of date, Rob is staying home on FMLA as per doctors orders. provision/opposition clause
ADA
 SCREENING CRITERIA

• Each Claim must be proven to cause harm. If this can

be done, it has standing in court and relief is due
• The answer is yes or no
• The screening criteria must tie back to the facts
 SURVIVING COAs

COA
. 1 (Relief as per law )

COA 2 (Relief based on

Retirement)
COA 3 (Court [VA, DOD and
individual capacity] and
exposure)
 EVALUATION CRITERIA
#1
Short Title: RELIEF AS PER LAW
Definition: THE TOTAL COST REQUIRED TO Relief that would
have been available had the matter been heard in court as per
employment arbitration rules/mediation procedures.
• Unit of Measure: MEASURED IN DOLLARS
• Benchmark: What ever can be proven
• Formula: MORE IS BETER
• WEIGHT: 5.20
 EVALUATION CRITERIA
#2
Short Title: PUBLIC TRUST
• Definition: What was briefed to Congress vs. Reality
• Unit of Measure: MEASURED WHAT CAN BE PROVEN REF:
REGULATIONS VIOLATIONS
• Benchmark: VOID ACTIONS
• Formula: LESS IS BETTER
• WEIGHT: 12
 EVALUATION CRITERIA
#3
Short Title: RELIEF AS PER RETIREMENT
Definition: THE TOTAL COST OF BOZGOZED HEALTH as per
Empirical Data, OSHA and Doctors guidance
• Unit of Measure: MEASURED IN DOLLARS
• Benchmark: State of mind/Emotional Health
• Formula: MORE IS BETER
• WEIGHT: 10
WHAT MAKES GOOD CRITERIA

Based on Federal Law

Preference is for objective numerical count

Measurable Standard Compare COA to standard, SOPS, REGULATIONS – not COAs

against each other
Established SOP or doctrine based

Evaluates quality of COA Cost, time, speed, distance, span of control, flexibility, emotional
stress caused to family etc.

Reasoning – leader applies personal experience, training, public

interest
Historical Data – based on what has been known to happen
Benchmark must be based in Current Allocation – existing conditions
Averaging – mathematical average of remaining COAs - least
preferred method
 ANALYSIS OF COA#1
VA SLIDE
ADVANTAGES
• Cost: $____________
• Emotional Harassment for Robert, Sue and Austin
Stops
•Damage [indirectly and directly] Stops
•Everyone moves forward
•VA gets training and opportunity to repair the issues.
DISADVANTAGES
• Robert will continue to work in spite of doctor’s advice
•Prison time for violations
 ANALYSIS OF COA#2
VA SLIDE
ADVANTAGES
• Cost: $____________
• Emotional Harassment for Robert, Sue and Austin
Stops
•Damage Stops
•Everyone moves forward
•VA gets training VA gets training and opportunity to
repair the issues.
DISADVANTAGES
• Win/Win
 ANALYSIS OF COA#3
VA SLIDE
ADVANTAGES
• Cost: $____________
• Emotional Harassment for Robert, Sue and Austin
Stops
•Damage Stops
•Everyone moves forward
•VA gets training
DISADVANTAGES
• Media Attention
•Public Trust Violations
•More fines, imprisonment, longer time
ANALYSIS OF COAs
VA SLIDE
DECISION MATRIX
Compare raw data
VA SLIDE
 CONCLUSION

COA 2 - is a win-win. Although it is more

expensive this entire journey would allow
everyone to move forward. The damage is done
and a solution has been offered so this does not
happen again.

COA 3 –Public Trust issue is brought to light

and All members [DOD and VA] must answer.
RECOMMENDATION

COA 2
The Treaty of the
Peace
Nobody has an oath!!!
AMERICA HAS BEEN INFILTRATED BY THE JESUITS AKA ZIONIST
IF YOU KNOW THAT THE UNITED STATES INC BANNER IS UNCONSTIUTIONAL- WHY DO YOU SALUTE IT?

28 USC 3002 USA INC

ARE FOREIGN AGENTS
Alfred Moore Waddell
Why do we keep on acting as if the USA INC FOREIGN
BANNER is our National Amoorican Flag?
 Violating your oath of office to defend the
Constitution that the Moor wrote is a Federal Crime

5 UC 7311 Executive Order 10450

Punishable By Removal from Office, PRISON and FINES
Pay attention to 28 USC 3002 and the
Clearfield Doctrine which states the
USA INC cannot operate Criminal
Courts Ever!
 The American HISTORY
THAT NEEDS to be told so
we can understand how the
fake United States Inc Jew
took over our Nation
When WHITE SUPREMACISTS OVERTHREW THE AMOORICAN GOVERNMENT
AND
Lincoln bankrupted a commercial company known as the original United States.
Prior to this, Lincoln
had formed a Delaware Corporation doing business as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
1870 the United States of America (Bankers) passed a void ab initio Act, Corporation Act

PROOF THE COURTS ARE RIGGED AT EVERY LEVEL

 Understanding the illuminati, their mission and their agents in Americas.
NOTE: THE USA INC said they had to harm us so the white man could steal your land see 1881, 2022, & 2024 USA INC
REPORT
 The USA INC
attempts Destroy
your Creditability
when you are
whistleblower
Ref: Disgruntled?
Afraid you will
expose their entire
operation
When you The information in our
case has been
altered, lost,

investigate
you should denied [to be placed
on the record],
sent back to us,
denied electronic
filing

take all
information Stolen Hidden
They are obligated to
investigate!

and analyze
it Cover up at all levels
Generals, police, army
personnel, Judges,
State Judges, attorney,
public pretender,
 Illuminati

Intel

Drug
Satanic
MKL – CIA mind control after WII, Paper
Clip
Why?
All elected public official are required to be bonded and they must sign an oath to uphold the CONSTITUTION OF THEIR STATE AS WELL AS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR AMERICAN
Show Cause Document
1983 KKK
 1983 KKK Continued

Robert’s case: ADA Rights – ADA Reasonable Accommodations established in 2016

- ADA Advocate – Sue
- Answer a question when asked
- Denied to allow him to work on MLK when everyone else was able
- Interfered with the ADA Act
- Lost 2016 RA documents Jan 2018 and retaliated
- Refuse ADA Advocate
- Gave him bad ratings, Letter of Recommendation, Denied Dr. Price’s RA, Denied FMLA Leave, Denied Sick Leave, Denied Acceptable
Reasonable Accommodation,
- Illegal investigation
- Illegal Pay
- Refused OSHA investigation
1983 KKK Continued
1983 KKK continued
1983 KKK continued
After I inform Angela on 14 Dec that I was not
interested in mediation ref: her discrimination
against Robert, I told her to treat him fairly. She then
wrote him a negative report card staring he cannot
communicate.
Angela Kendrix illegal Retaliates against Robert for for ADA Advocate
informing her to stop the discrimination
 Mediation
9 May 2018

Unclassified
Family members
can sue under the
Zone of Interest
See 28 USC 3002 at the
bottom!
 (1) Taxes are unconstitutional for all Americans and
(2) Who are the real AMOORICANS from Americas anyway?
Hint See 3002 and the real constitution the USA INC threw in a dust bin in 1871!
 Agenda
• Explain our RIGHTS TO SUE LETTERS and then explain GENERAL JOE DUNFORD, GENERAL MILLEYS, ADMIRAL
CHRISTOPHER FRENCH’s Crimes/TREASON AGAINST AMOORICANS
• 28 USC 3002 Proves that the United States Inc aka VA COMPANY of London is a foreign pedo corporation
• SEE: Bottom of 28 USC 3002 which proves that they called MOORS (Indian and aliens to the USA INC) and put them in a trust
while their pawns/foreign agents (Judges, military, KKK, mob) stole their property
• Made Everyone Corporation to ignore the REAL CONSTITUTION and Magna Carta and Charter of the Forest
• Use
• Real Constitution which they threw in a dustbin in 1871
• United States Military signed the 300 Committee to work for the ROTHSCHILDS
• Start calling themselves Americans after the trail of tears
• Killed the MOOR children in USA INC residential Schools
• Magna Carta
• Charter of the Forest
• USE HARRIETTA’s 1866 Case (Sued the USA INC slave traders, USA INC GOVERNOR AND USA INC CORPORATION AND
WON!
 Purpose – Use our REAL TIME RICO CASE AGAINST THE UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (KM) and hold them accountable for
FRAUD, WASTE ABUSE and PRETENDING TO BE AMERICANS

Prove that the United States Inc and the United States of America is a for-profit criminal organization and NOBODY CONSENTED TO BE THEIR SLAVE as they
violate rights, their oath of office, Magna carta and Charter of the FOREST
Explain our RIGHT TO SUE LETTER against the UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Proof that the United States of Oath of Office Magna Carta

America is a Criminal Organization

28 USC 3002
who violates the following Charter section 884 of 29
Jan 2019!
These criminals violated their
oath and Magna Cart on 29
Jan as they have the truth in
their SAFE SERVER
On 29 Jan 2019 at 0824 [20 minutes after Austin and filed against DOD], Schmittel
contacts us and states lies and states he represents Joe Dunford and Admiral Christopher
French! Insides at the VA also contact me and state that VA had an emergency meeting to
move the leaders around!!!
What are you doing about VA locking in fake
claims in your safe server?
The Magna Carta
The United States Inc follows the MAGNA
CARTA/Charter of the FOREST and UCC
 Only three (13,39 and
40)of the 63 Clauses of
the Magna Carta are used
today
Real Constitution vs the Magna Carta and Charter of the FOREST
Children are their drug of Choice!!!
THE UNITED
STATES INC
FOREIGN
PEDOS
The United States Inc follows the MAGNA
CARTA/Charter of the FOREST and UCC
 Only three (13,39 and
40)of the 63 Clauses of
the Magna Carta are used
today
Purpose
• Use our REAL TIME RICO CASE AGAINST the United States Inc and the United
States of America (Military)
• Update our cases (using the DIGITAL SOLDIER’s SLIDES, video, Moor’s
Constitution, Magna Carta/Charter of the Forest and the USA INC policies )
1. EEOC (Pending – according to Judy Valois, too far apart not time to settle yet
2. SSN (WON) DOD’s trading company NAZI Kangaroo Courts cause Legal Abuse
Syndrome
3. Workers Comp (ADA RA Expedite, wanted to see Ken’s Oath and Public Health Hazard)
6 March (he has 8 days to show it to us or step down)
4. Austin and My 42 USC 1983/1871 KKKK case with Merit (cannot dismiss until they make
us whole)- Pending until after the Sting Operation
5. ADA Clients cases – Pending until after the Sting Operation
• Go over the QUO Warranto/Writ of Mandamus
• Help you understand the Sting Operation as all the top leaders are pedos! See
Pence and Military Tribunals ref: (Justice Roberts)
Proof Austin and I filed in District Court
after VA violated their contract. We filed
under the Zone of Interest as Protected
MOORS vs United States Inc Citizens! We
asked for the case to be expedited as per
1990 ADA RA ACT!
When the United States Inc and the United States
of America (Military) General Joe Dunford and
Admiral Christopher French help VA, DOD, DOJ,
the Attorney LAW GROUP INC and Voncelle
retaliate against us, we filed a WRIT OF
MANDAMUS/QUO WARRANTO on 18 May 2020!
Proof everything is on
the record as per
UCC while Justice
Roberts is at EPSTEIN
ISLAND
Proof we asked
for ADA RA
Proof the Supreme Court
must answer because we
have an Ambassador,
Carolyn Kenndey as a
Defendant for playing PAY
TO PLAY
Justice Anna stating
people need to
understand what the
United States INC IS
DOING to YOU!
As per the WHITE HATS and Lin WOOD’s witness,
we have supreme court justices at EPSTEIN
ISLAND with PENCE
THE UNITED STATES
INC’s FLAG IS A
BANNER FOR THEIR
CORRUPT
CORPORATION
One day you’ll learn how
deep the rabbit hole
is…everyone in the
entertainment industry is
there to distract you and
indoctrinate you!
One day you’ll learn how deep the rabbit hole is…everyone in the entertainment industry
is there to distract you and indoctrinate you!
DIGITAL
SOLIDERS
SLIDES
Pence – Sealed indictment on Feb 1, 2020 – We submitted our RICO on
19 Jan 2019 and the Writ of Mandamus/QUO Warranto on 18 May 2020.
General Flynn copied ours on 20 May 2020
 The Reconstruction period was illegal!!! It made the MOORS in
Americas Slaves by the Bankers, Governors, Judges, Sheriffs, KKK, and
etc. Tell- lie- vision is a lie
KIDS - WHO ARE
YOU ANYWAY?
WHAT IS YOUR
NATIONALITY? DO
YOU KNOW WHAT
THE UNITED STATES
INC DID TO YOU?
The United States INC is a cover for the Virginia
Company of London INC
The UNITED STATES INC PAID THE KKK, MOB AND UNITED STATES INC SOLDIERS $300 EACH FOR KILLING
MOORS
THE UNITED STATES INC CALLED MOORS INDIANS TO COVER THEIR GENOCIDE
1871 THE UNITED STATES INC MILITARY, PRIEST AND NUNS STOLE AND ABUSED OUR KIDS IN RESIDENTIAL
SCHOOLS GENERAL PRATT DESIGNED
The UNITED STATES INC AND ITS MILITARY BIO-WEAPONS TIMELINE 1700 -2025
Reconstruction period 1863 (Lincoln Bankrupted
the United States Inc) until 1866.

Note Henryetta’s case. (1856-1866) She won her

case against the United States Inc, Governor Inc
and the slave traders Inc.

USA INC Slave Traders would kidnap MOORS and

sell them into slavery while getting paid by the
United States Inc Military.
UNITED STATES Inc FOREIGN PEDO
CORPORATION TIMELINE
Feb (1871 KKK Organic Act)/28 USC 3002. They
called all MOORS – INDIANS and put them in a
trust!!! Then started stealing their land
If we are sending all the USA INC’s PEDO TO GITMO, TAKE THEIR PEDO FLAG WITH THEM!!!
The UNITED STATES INC FOREIGN PEDO Corporation [and its USA INC Military had 200 years to genocide MOORS
from Americas and they ran out of time!
PUT UP OUR AMOORICAN FLAG AND TAKE DOWN THE USA INC FOREIGN PEDO CORP BANNER!!!
 The Military has been in
control since Abe Lincoln
bankrupt the United States
Inc Foreign Pedo
Corporation in 1863!
3 types of USA
INC
CITIZENSHIP
1. Corporation
2. Federal
3. Continental
r
What does Justice Anna
say about the NEW
REPUBLIC and General
Joe Dunford?
Where is the gold that the
WHITE HATS TOOK OUT
OF THE VATICAN?
GS15 Angela telling on
the LAW GROUP INC
GS15 Angela Kendrix breaks down and tells on the attorney in building 810, and the VA leaders for setting us up to do jail
time so they can dismiss our higher court case against the United States Inc
The Attorney’s Give away
Colonies are companies which must abide by
UCC vs KILL
Back up and request to see
oaths of offices and etc
(SSN, IRS, TSA,
COMPTROLLER, CLERK,
ATTORNEYS AND ETC)
 Request the following

Copy of Oath of Office

Training Records

ADA Training Records

Insurance – Public Health Hazard

Put a lien on it!!!
He is addressing me as a
corporation – ALL CAPS
Judge Amy B. Jackson and DOJ’s Crimes
(9 Fake Claims locked in DOD’s Safe
Server)
15 USC 1 – Felony – 100 Million Fine
Pay him $165? For what? I am asking him for
records, oath of office and explain why the Judge
and the comptroller had an illegal ex parte meeting
and came up with a $17,000 illegal bill which is
based on Federal IRS taxes which are illegal
Talk to a lawyer? Why Lawyers work
for the prime contractors who we are
suing? 28 USC 3002
Scam
Fake Kangaroo Court Complaint sent back to me
by the CLERK OF COURT
24 May 2024 sent to Court and etc 15 USC 1
violation
MD Attorney
General
Responded
ref: the Fraud
42 USC 1986 – They have an
obligation to stop the scam
under the color of law!!! 18 USC
242
IRS ref: 2014 Bill they sent me 3 years ago ref:
my business
Contracts
IRS removes $2,000 fake charges and sends
letter after I threaten them in 2020
They sent this bill when we started the sting and
when I informed them the USA INC stole our 65
Million contract and if they keep playing with me, I
am going to add them as a defendant…
Social Security is part of the
scam too! They have access to
the Army Secure Servicer as
they all work together – they
cancel the SSN hearing 1 day
before due to our request to
have it tape recorded
Comptroller running a scam and I refused to be a
part of their scam
What would happen if the European never came to Amoorica, a land that was
not lost? Hint 1830 AMOORICAN REMOVAL/GENOCIDE

1830 Moor REMOVAL/GENOCIDE ACT signed into law by

United States Inc Foreign Pedo Corporation Andrew
Jackson against the 1215 Magna Carta and 1217
Charter of the Forest

The United States Inc made a STRAWMAN OUT OF YOU

AMOORICANS ask the GENERALS and the Military
Industrial Complex
What would happen if the European never came to Amoorica, a land that was
not lost? Hint 1830 AMOORICAN REMOVAL/GENOCIDE

1830 Moor REMOVAL/GENOCIDE ACT signed into law by

United States Inc Foreign Pedo Corporation Andrew
Jackson against the 1215 Magna Carta and 1217
Charter of the Forest

The United States Inc made a STRAWMAN OUT OF YOU

AMOORICANS ask the GENERALS and the Military
Industrial Complex
The only power the UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (MILITARY) IS
TO GOVERNOR OVER MATTERS OF COMMERCE! THEY CANNOT EVER INTERFERE WITH
COMMERCE LAW
GOOD VS EVIL
Khazaian mafia
Amy B. Jackson and Randolph Moss cannot threaten to take our money and dismiss an 1871
KKK Case with merit aka 42 USC 1983 KKK case while using General Joe Dunford’s fake
Kangaroo Courts and their PAWNS (e.g. Voncelle James, Sheriffs, Judges, Clerks, third-Party
Contractors, and void ab intio fake orders!
DOJ Haynes Retires when I
inform him what PAWN
VONCELLE SAID ABOUT OUR
CASE AND HOW DOJ, VA
LEADERS, JUDGES and DOD is
involved
ADA Reasonable
Accommodations CANNOT
BE DENIED UNLESS THE
USA INC IS GOING BROKE
Explain our RIGHTS TO SUE THE UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’s RIGHT TO
SUE LETTERS AGAINST THE PRIME CONTRACTORS AND THE STATUS: They received my request on 13
March 2025 to expedite my case(s)
Explain our RIGHTS TO SUE THE UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’s RIGHT TO
SUE LETTERS AGAINST THE PRIME CONTRACTORS AND THE STATUS: They received my request on 13
March 2025 to expedite my case(s)
The Contract that we have with the United States of America and the United States INC
Our REAL constitution THAT
THE UNITED STATES INC
AND ITS FOREIGN AGENTS
HID SINCE 1871!!!
Proof that the United States INC is really the
VA COMPANY OF LONDON
List of all the agencies
contacted to prevent
harm – Status – Still
waiting for justice!
• https://politicalvelcraft.org/2014/01/27/rothschilds-
council-on-foreign-relations-controls-u-s-corporate-
media-propaganda/
Amy B. Jackson is lying again! And
signing void orders which is
another crime – Why aren’t you at
GITMO – cannot dismiss a 42 USC
1983 KKK case with merit. Just ask
DOD or look in the safe server!!!
 Proof that everyone in
the USA INC and DOD is
involved or committing
National Security
Violations
 (1) Taxes are unconstitutional for all Americans and
(2) Who are the real AMOORICANS from Americas anyway?
Hint See 3002 and the real constitution the USA INC threw in a dust bin in 1871!
 Agenda
• Explain our RIGHTS TO SUE LETTERS and then explain GENERAL JOE DUNFORD, GENERAL MILLEYS, ADMIRAL
CHRISTOPHER FRENCH’s Crimes/TREASON AGAINST AMOORICANS
• 28 USC 3002 Proves that the United States Inc aka VA COMPANY of London is a foreign pedo corporation
• SEE: Bottom of 28 USC 3002 which proves that they called MOORS (Indian and aliens to the USA INC) and put them in a trust
while their pawns/foreign agents (Judges, military, KKK, mob) stole their property
• Made Everyone Corporation to ignore the REAL CONSTITUTION and Magna Carta and Charter of the Forest
• Use
• Real Constitution which they threw in a dustbin in 1871
• United States Military signed the 300 Committee to work for the ROTHSCHILDS
• Start calling themselves Americans after the trail of tears
• Killed the MOOR children in USA INC residential Schools
• Magna Carta
• Charter of the Forest
• USE HARRIETTA’s 1866 Case (Sued the USA INC slave traders, USA INC GOVERNOR AND USA INC CORPORATION AND
WON!
 Purpose – Use our REAL TIME RICO CASE AGAINST THE UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (KM) and hold them accountable for
FRAUD, WASTE ABUSE and PRETENDING TO BE AMERICANS

Prove that the United States Inc and the United States of America is a for-profit criminal organization and NOBODY CONSENTED TO BE THEIR SLAVE as they
violate rights, their oath of office, Magna carta and Charter of the FOREST
Explain our RIGHT TO SUE LETTER against the UNITED STATES INC AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Proof that the United States of Oath of Office Magna Carta

America is a Criminal Organization

28 USC 3002
who violates the following Charter section 884 of 29
Jan 2019!
These criminals violated their
oath and Magna Cart on 29
Jan as they have the truth in
their SAFE SERVER
On 29 Jan 2019 at 0824 [20 minutes after Austin and filed against DOD], Schmittel
contacts us and states lies and states he represents Joe Dunford and Admiral Christopher
French! Insides at the VA also contact me and state that VA had an emergency meeting to
move the leaders around!!!
What are you doing about VA locking in fake
claims in your safe server?
The Magna Carta
The United States Inc follows the MAGNA
CARTA/Charter of the FOREST and UCC
 Only three (13,39 and
40)of the 63 Clauses of
the Magna Carta are used
today
Real Constitution vs the Magna Carta and Charter of the FOREST
Constitution vs the Magna Carta/Charter of the Forest and
the United States INC NO RULE/NO CONSTITUTION
Proof that the United States INC is really the
VA COMPANY OF LONDON
Proof that the United States INC is really the
VA COMPANY OF LONDON
Understand why the
United States Inc and the
Military changed our
nationality – To cover
their war crimes/crimes
against humanity
 The Military has been in
control since Abe Lincoln
bankrupt the United States
Inc Foreign Pedo
Corporation in 1863!
3 types of USA
INC
CITIZENSHIP
1. Corporation
2. Federal
3. Continental
r
What does Justice Anna
say about the NEW
REPUBLIC and General
Joe Dunford?
Where is the gold that the
WHITE HATS TOOK OUT
OF THE VATICAN?
GS15 Angela telling on
the LAW GROUP INC
GS15 Angela Kendrix breaks down and tells on the attorney in building 810, and the VA leaders for setting us up to do jail
time so they can dismiss our higher court case against the United States Inc
The Attorney’s Give away
Colonies are companies which must abide by
UCC vs KILL
Back up and request to see
oaths of offices and etc
(SSN, IRS, TSA,
COMPTROLLER, CLERK,
ATTORNEYS AND ETC)
 Request the following

Copy of Oath of Office

Training Records

ADA Training Records

Insurance – Public Health Hazard

Put a lien on it!!!
He is addressing me as a
corporation – ALL CAPS
Judge Amy B. Jackson and DOJ’s Crimes
(9 Fake Claims locked in DOD’s Safe
Server)
15 USC 1 – Felony – 100 Million Fine
Pay him $165? For what? I am asking him for
records, oath of office and explain why the Judge
and the comptroller had an illegal ex parte meeting
and came up with a $17,000 illegal bill which is
based on Federal IRS taxes which are illegal
Talk to a lawyer? Why Lawyers work
for the prime contractors who we are
suing? 28 USC 3002
Scam
Fake Kangaroo Court Complaint sent back to me
by the CLERK OF COURT
24 May 2024 sent to Court and etc 15 USC 1
violation
MD Attorney
General
Responded
ref: the Fraud
42 USC 1986 – They have an
obligation to stop the scam
under the color of law!!! 18 USC
242
IRS ref: 2014 Bill they sent me 3 years ago ref:
my business
Contracts
IRS removes $2,000 fake charges and sends
letter after I threaten them in 2020
They sent this bill when we started the sting and
when I informed them the USA INC stole our 65
Million contract and if they keep playing with me, I
am going to add them as a defendant…
Social Security is part of the
scam too! They have access to
the Army Secure Servicer as
they all work together – they
cancel the SSN hearing 1 day
before due to our request to
have it tape recorded
Comptroller running a scam and I refused to be a
part of their scam
What would happen if the European never came to Amoorica, a land that was
not lost? Hint 1830 AMOORICAN REMOVAL/GENOCIDE

1830 Moor REMOVAL/GENOCIDE ACT signed into law by

United States Inc Foreign Pedo Corporation Andrew
Jackson against the 1215 Magna Carta and 1217
Charter of the Forest

The United States Inc made a STRAWMAN OUT OF YOU

AMOORICANS ask the GENERALS and the Military
Industrial Complex
What would happen if the European never came to Amoorica, a land that was
not lost? Hint 1830 AMOORICAN REMOVAL/GENOCIDE

1830 Moor REMOVAL/GENOCIDE ACT signed into law by

United States Inc Foreign Pedo Corporation Andrew
Jackson against the 1215 Magna Carta and 1217
Charter of the Forest

The United States Inc made a STRAWMAN OUT OF YOU

AMOORICANS ask the GENERALS and the Military
Industrial Complex
Understand why the
United States Inc and the
Military changed our
nationality – To cover
their war crimes/crimes
against humanity
May 2022 Moor Residential School Results –
Executive Summary and page 21
The Colonies are United States Inc COMPANIES AND
MUST ABIDE BY CONTRACT LAW UCC – 100 million
AMOORICANS DIED Companies
I WANT TO SEE SOME OPEN ARREST AND SO SHOULD YOU!!! BEFORE YOU
ARE NEXT !!!
 The United States Inc
Strategic Plan to put you into
their for-profit prison
I WANT TO SEE SOME OPEN ARREST AND SO SHOULD YOU!!! BEFORE YOU ARE NEXT !!!
This is a very simple concept that EVERYONE is missing
, Why have those on the list not been arrested yet
????????? Why release the list and give them time to run
all over the world making it thousands of times harder
for law enforcement to detain arrest and return them .
This entire thing is nothing more than another one of
Con Man Trumpsteins Theater Acts . That is we are
watch here and nothing more . Just another Theater act
and all of you are drooling for some theater instead of
frigging action and arrests and imprisonment . What is
wrong with you all ? You have all been manipulated into
submission like a bunch of dim witted idiots . I think you
have all missed the big picture here HUH. These
horrendous crimes are being treated like a joke and we
are getting bitch slapped in the face and all you idiots
are loving it . I WANT TO SEE ARRESTS !!!!!!!!!!!!! WAKE
THE HELL UP PEOPLE YOU ARE BEING BLIND SIDED
AND ACTING LIKE COMPLETE AND UTTER DIM WITTED
SHAMBOOGLED IDIOTS
Digital Soldiers give them away
Thy enemy marry transgenders and they are
gay? WHY?
The United States Inc, Judges, Attorneys, Sheriffs and Court Clerks
are running a Ponzi Scheme and making Bank off you Strawman/
The United THE ONLY POWER THE UNITED STATES INC FOREIGN PEDO CORPORATION HAD WAS TO
GOVERN OVER MATTERS OF COMMERCE WITHIN ROME AKA DC NOT YOU!!!

The Birth of the 2nd

United States Inc
Foreign Pedo
Corporation
 What does Justice Anna and Judge Amy B. Jackson say about Tyrone’s and
Chris’ Case? – Use the Clearfield Doctrine and THE TRUTH STILL MATTERS!!!

See 1870 & 1871 Act and Mass

Incarceration designed Barr and
Bush = 70 Trillion
 Who is on Epstein’s list? INCLUDE the NEW WORLD ORDER CHART!
Connect the DOTS and add Edward House, GOVERNORS, JUDGES, KKK, and the Texas Rangers(1870/1871 void ab initio orders!)

1870 void ab initio

Corporate Act
 • Use our REAL TIME RICO CASE AGAINST THE CABAL
AND GUESS WHO IS ON EPSTEIN’s LIST
• Digital Soldiers list
• 1870 – COL Edward House (CHIEF OF STAFF)
• 1871 –KKK Organic Act
• KKK and Texas Ranger’s Mission (pd by DOD)
• One WORLD TARTARIAN (2023)
Purpose • Digital Soldiers video ref: The USA INC is hiding the
13th Amendment (No slaves and cannot call
yourself a KING/QUEEN because you are a
COMPANY …)
• Justice Anna Clearfield Doctrine (which reminds
them to prove their sovereignty which we know they
cannot)
The United
Stats Is a
Corporation
Don’t play on our ignorance – give me my
settlement as we used the RICO, QUO
WARRANTO AND CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE
AGAINST THE UNITED STATES INC AND THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Justice Anna’s Affidavit that stand
as truth
Justice Anna’s affidavit
ref: THE USA INC’s
Corruption
People have to learn
the USA INC’s Tricks
When they
violate your
rights use the
Clearfield
doctrine against
them
Request Military
Tribunals and Relief
because DC is closed
and baby clerk does not
want to give us a grand
jury because they work
for the Lord Mayor
DC baby clerks responds oh
and by the way, DC is closed!
 We tell DC that they are being
controlled by the ROTHSCHILD
in LONDON
Put a lien on it
It’s Time to
take down
the BAR
What Does Justice Anna and Amy B Jackson say about Tyrones and Chris case besides we are going through a sting and
AMOORICANS HAVE TO wake up and remember who they are and how the USA INC screw us over using the pyramid
scam see 1870 and 1871 contractors void ab intio fake law - THEY are all PRETENDERS see TELL LIE VISION! | PDF
(scribd.com)
They are public pretenders – Sue
them in their individual and
professional capacity – They can
play but they cannot get caught!
The Solution is You and UNDO what the United States Inc Foreign PEDOs/DOD
leaders did to you/US.
The Military – 1871 Void Ab Initio KKK Organic
 HOW THE UNITED STATES INC SIGNED THE TREATY OF THE PEACE WITHOUT BEING A NATION ?

1773 Hired by Rothschild

28 USC 3002 proves the United States Inc and the
United States of America are Foreign PEDOS
which must abide by Contract Law
How they start the process of
retaliation
Step # 1
ORM informs the VA supervisor to get
prepared, target filed an EEOC/ORM
complaint
ORM informs Voncelle
James and Angela Kendrix
that Robert filed an EEOC
complaint against them.
This is found on the
Transmittal record
Step #2
ORM orders VA Supervisor to violate targets
privacy by: (1) Using his SSN and (2) under the
name of Cindy Boyd otherwise sanctions will
be applied to the agency
Indicates items are affidavits
found in the transmittal records
Proof the Deep States is committing a Crime – THE GIVE AWAY

The DEEP
STATE GIVE
AWAY
Found in an
AFFIDAVIT IN
THE
TRANSMITTAL
RECORD –
CRIME,
TREASON AND
FRAUD
Step #3 They give the VA supervisors
example of how to violate privacy,
personal records and etc
They work in advance by collecting
information against you and/or hiring third
party to pick information out of you.
Voncelle James signs an affidavit that she
violated our family’s medical on 6 April
2019 under the name of Investigator Cindy
Boyd.
 Voncelle lies on her affidavit by stating medical document were never
received until 3//2018. She lied to cover her discrimination act and ADA
violation on 11 Jan 2018. They DR Racha to alter medical records as well

She states the

agency is not
claiming hardship
at this time
because they
cannot steal ADA
funds and deny
ADA rights.
Proof that Robert had 2016 ADA RA and I am his
reasonable accommodation which they cannot
deny. However, since Voncelle James discriminated
against him and me on 11 Jan, they must cover up
her crime. If you don’t agree, you get your ass beat by
them.
They alter records
in the transmittal
file. Proof 2016
and 2018 medical
records were
submitted.
Voncelle lied.
This is how documents should be submitted
into the records
They Fabricate Premade Claims to
cover their crimes
 These are the
criminals
who work for
Rescind a letter
of reprimand
the Attorneys
that Voncelle in bldg. 810
James cannot
give as per their
own policies???
 How they cover
themselves from
violating the ADA
Act – They have 2
portal (auto)
RLAS and RCAS
system
The Truth found in the transmittal
records. Robert had ADA RA
Proof the EEOC/ORM investigation
is fake
They also have Chris Wunsch, lie ref: ADA Ref.
Why? Because they make their money stealing
ADA funds. They cannot take ADA Funds and deny
ADA rights unless VA is running out of money
Proof Voncelle James violates the ADA Act to harm.
Proof they allow Voncelle James to give
Robert a fake letter of reprimand in
retaliation and against their own policy.
I send Voncelle James proof that she
cannot retaliate and she cannot give
Robert a letter of reprimand as per VA’s
policies
Proof they know the are harming
Robert but must cover Voncelle
James crime
My response to Kevin Brown for violating
Robert’s rights and cc Angela Kendrix who
knows the truth as she helped me file his 2016
ADA RA. Instead of helping she says nothing
while Voncelle James smiles
Fort Meade Nurse tells VA to get Voncelle
and Angela (triggers) under control and
stay the hell away from Robert
Robert suffers a stroke on 14 Aug 2019
and Voncelle reminds him while he is
recovering that he has take too much
leave
I tell VA Leaders that they need to
investigate the crimes
Proof that the VA Sec
is the only one who
can deny ADA RA if
they are broke. If this
is a fact, why is
Voncelle James
violating the ADA RA?
Negative response
Proof Voncelle James denied RA FMLA leave and ordered
Robert back to work against his board certified doctor’s
order to harm him. 6 weeks later, Robert suffers a stroke
and VA employees cover the crimes by making Robert into
the fake criminal they are
Robert suffers a stroke on 14 Aug 2018, and
benefits denied to cover their crimes. They
also give him a 5 day suspense while Robert
is recovering from his stroke.
They give
Robert a 5 day
suspense
without pay as
he recovers
from the
stroke they
caused
Quo Warranto
Proof they track us using our ATT
phone and when we I call reference
my PTSD claim.
Military IG can take over when there
is high treason. (e.g., Foreign
government working with Traitors
Garland is corrupt as hell. He is well
aware with our case and the crimes DOJ,
FBI and etc are playing. Don’t let him
gaslight.
 Garland is lying again
DOJ and the FBI are crooks and liars – INJUSTICE FOR ALL AMERICAN
Part 2 of 3
4 USC 1
Robert Welch
GS 15 Angela
Kendrix sends this
ADA protected
email to GS14
Voncelle James
Hotmail account
when ADA
Advocate informs
the VA leaders,
DOD, DOJ that he
is going to make a
whistleblower tape
against them!
Rules the
Leaders, judges
and attorneys
don’t follow
 Note how they make you the evil
people that they are using their illegal
system designed by the CIA and DOD
while Joe Dunford and Admiral
Christopher French watch.
 GS14 Voncelle James takes a worker’s
compensation ADA protected Email and
turns Robert into a fake criminal at the
criminal court they cannot produce as per
the clear field doctrine
We are at the 2019 WORKERS COMP hearing and they are 3 hours late. Voncelle cannot come because she filed a fake
peace order against in June! Robert contacts our ADA advocate, Chris King an hits reply all – Voncelle uses this emailito
make him a crimianls
 Pay attention how the public
pretenders protect them when you
ask for ADA RA and prepare for fake
criminal court which they cannot
produce. See Clearfield doctrine
Proof we went through a 180 day
fake United States Inc EEOC
investigation! Note the Signature
and Letter Head vs DOD or the
Post Office!!!
 ADA Advocate,
Christopher King eats
the DOD, DOJ and the
Courts up for fraud
Trump, if brown skins are NATIVES to
America, WHEN are the WHITE skins
to begin being deported?
AI and the Ignorant is thy enemy -
How the United States Inc and its foreign Agents work together against Amooricans
Know your true worth and your true value
Moors from Americas
We filed a writ of mandamus and QUO
WARRANTO to shut them down
Proof they are liable for bring medical
records into fake Kangaroo COURT
Proof the DISTRICT COURT IS
ALTERING RECORDS
All the courts are illegal run by DOD
THE GENERAL COUNSELORS AND FAKE KANGAROO
COURTS OPERATED BY DOD ARE THE PROBLEM

GET RID OF THEM NOW AMOORICANS