Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
a) The Plaintiff alleges that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 8
U.S.C. 1331, Federal question jurisdiction is a subject matter jurisdiction. and
5 U.S.C. 702 et seq.
Compl. at 3, ECF No. 1.
b) A case clearly arises under the Constitution for purposes of 1331 when the
plaintiff claims, that a government officer or employee i.e. DHS officials, acting
in his or her official capacity, injures the plaintiff by taking an action that
violates a provision of the Constitution or statute. The federal question
jurisdiction of the district courts also encompasses causes of action created by
federal statutes, such as 42 U.S.C. 1983, which explicitly authorizes a private
remedy for acts that are taken under color of law and violate rights secured by
law. In such cases, federal law both creates the cause of action, supplying the
underlying substantive rules
(Substantive law refers to the body of rules that determine therights and obliga
tions of individuals and collective bodies. ) that govern defendants conduct,
and authorizes plaintiffs to enforce the rights created.
c) The Supreme Court created a private damages action against federal officials
for constitutional torts (civil rights violations), which are not covered by the
FTCA. Supreme Court recognized the availability of damages and injunctive
relief for constitutional violations committed by individual federal defendants
f) see also 5 U.S.C. 705 ("On such conditions as may be required and to the
extent necessary to prevent irreparable injury, the reviewing court ... may issue
all necessary and appropriate process to postpone the effective date of an
agency action or to preserve status or rights pending conclusion of the review
proceedings.").
h) Plaintiff also bring claims under Supplemental jurisdiction for her claims 28
U.S. Code 1367 (a)- Supplemental jurisdiction. Joinder of claims. Though
Under 28 U.S. Code 1367 (a) , state claims can be joined with federal claims
as long as there is a federal claim(in my case , even defendants have admitted
undisputedly that there is a federal question jurisdiction and under APA 702;
supplemental jurisdiction have evolved through common law, it is up to the
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) prescribes the process for agency
rulemaking and was written to bring regularity and predictability to the decisions
made by executive branch agencies.58 Generally, the APA ensures that the public
Madhuri Trivedi vs. DHS Page 4 of 25
has an opportunity to provide input in how federal statutes are applied by the
executive agencies charged with their enforcement. The various rulemaking
procedures set forth in the APA provide the
public with:
Stakeholders are concerned that the current I-140 policy memorandum allows for
too much subjectivity for adjudicative petitions. Stakeholders presented in amicus
curiae briefing to the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) that the Kazarian
decision does not require USCIS to implement a two-part review and that
application of the I-140 policy memorandum has not resulted in a clearer
adjudicatory standard.
The I-140 policy memo contains numerous examples of what does not constitute
proof of extraordinary ability. However, it does not provide adjudicators with
affirmative examples of the type of evidence that satisfies the governing law;
outstanding professor/researcher status; and, exceptional ability. Although these
categories are
too broad for USCIS to produce any type of exhaustive list of examples, solid
training materials containing approvable examples, from which adjudicators could
extrapolate, would significantly improve the quality adjudications. Affirmative
examples could be developed by expanding upon the brief descriptions of the
various criteria used by USCIS.
CONCLUSION
Rulemaking would provide the forum for USCIS to receive stakeholder concerns
and formally respond.
Plaintiff argue that the defendant's knowledge from Madhuri I 140 petition with
sequence and correlation of day/time that she is working with Quitam attorney
and have been in communication with FBI ;
>denying Madhuris I 140 petition, 765 petition for work authorization and
NOT give her in any way work authorization ; stating in denial letter to
leave the country (obstruction of justice, witness tampering, violation of 8
CFR 1324b(a)(5) )
>would as a result make her unavailable and unable to pursue Quitam case,
and also
current Ninth circuit lawsuit against DHS. And also prevent her from growing
her start up in healthcare field and/or work for Harvard medical school
>have been enough to fulfill the intent and other retaliatory requirement.
office (which defendant didnt admit, omitted and mislead court in their answer
paragraph 87). Upon called as a witness at the trial in this case to testify, the
USCIS officer would agree that Plaintiff Madhuri showed her all immigration
documents pertaining to her EB1-extra ordinary petitions; upon reviewing those,
she stated that Madhuri is a person of extra ordinary ability. She stated that ,
Madhuri is eligible under EB1- I (USCIS officer)can see that but San Francisco
Madhuri Trivedi vs. DHS Page 7 of 25
office does not adjuncate petitions hence she cant adjuncate. Madhuri persuaded
to expedite petition process on extreme hardship-financial, economic loss to a
person/company and distress. That USCIS officer stated that in to me ,you look
fine , and she was willing to submit expedite request only on humanitarian basis
(and not extreme hardship) and hence she submitted that.
None the less, MESSINA vs. U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
SERVICE[3]underscores the basic administrative law tenet, which applies to every
regulatory agency, that an adjudicator may not only look to evidence which
supports the adverse decision but rather, must consider the entire record, make
specific findings, and reach cogent conclusions concerning all relevant claims
which have a bearing on the outcome of the decision.
Madhuri given that the complaint alleged conspiracy based on information and
belief, and
because it did support that allegation with sufficient subsidiary factual allegations.
Page 51 of 63
In his 2015 State of the Union address, President Obama announced that he's
launching the Precision Medicine Initiative a bold new research effort to
revolutionize how we improve health and treat disease.
I also called white house main line in April 2015 and spoke with volunteer
about my whole situation and she said she will notify Obama administration
about this. As per her instructions, I also wrote a letter online to Whitehouse
requesting that I need assistance with a federal agency DHS. In that letter also I
mentioned personalized medicine.
These email from FBI supervisor is of probative value; to assert cause of action
and claims I raised in my complaints.
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Wible, Clayton M. (MW) (FBI)" <Clayton.Wible@ic.fbi.gov>
Date: August 25, 2015 at 6:37:26 AM PDT
To: Madhuri Trivedi <mcis99@gmail.com>
Sincerely,
SSA Wible
Please help me and ask her for help... Apology for bugging
you.. Thanks in advance..
Given I have tried Article I, Aticle II branches to get justice with NO SUCCESS in
this lawless environment, now it rests on Article III branch. Though I havent
gone into All Writs Act, but would like to bring jurisdiction All Writs Act provide
and judge can issue WRIT to grant relief to plaintiff as she requested. We , as
Humanity have many serious problems to work on and find solutions.
When I reported security issues at GE product and whistleblowing activity; in
my B1 visa
documents in October 2013, and that denial letter which was signed by Donald
Nuefled in April 2014 (EXHIBIT 4) even though being Department of Homeland
Security official , Mr. Nuefled ignored to at least have an special counsel assigned
as per 1324b ..nor did any investigation and told me in a letter even though he
knew that I had an arbitration hearing next weekThis clearly is a crime.
Essentially, the crime is where a person, having a public duty entrusted to him,
willfully neglects to carry out that dutyReporting to public about security
issues/defects in 100,000 medical devices and at least doing investigation; is
public duty of DHS officials. Donald
Nuefleds deliberate failure to perform a duty owed to the public, with serious
potential or actual consequences for the public. During my conversation with FDA
official Charles Meyer (Plaintiff complaint EXHIBIT 12) in February 2013, Mr.
Meyers did acknowledged that GE defects I reported are not acceptable by FDA
and he wants to do public release today but there is a loophole. Untill unless FDA
finishes investigation , he cant do public release. (GE general manager Josh
Hanna knew that and told me that it will take FDA years to come after us, we have
screwed up, but by the time FDA will come after us, Madhuri-you will be gone to
India) In December 2015 , FDA is proposing new rule in federal register about
If the agency fails to consider the evidence and make the proper findings on all
relevant issues, the court will oblige and make findings which may not be
palatable to the agency.
Claim of liability under the Civil Rights Act if the intentional infliction of
emotional distress TORT was committed while the defendant was depriving the
plaintiff of federal rights under color of law, including but not limited to Equal
protection clause under US constitution, where similarly situated class of
people would have not told to leave the country and as a result prevent from
pursuing arbitration and False claims Act case, Immigration visa petitions.
The causal relationship for retaliation case, causing injury; The defendant ;be
officials such as the named defendants, to whom GE has influenced for the
immigration denial decision and GE withdrew my H1 even though I was
undergoing mediation/arbitration (and Immigration officials knew about it,
despite didnt take any action EXHIBIT 11 from plaintiff complaint). The Court
views this as "successful retaliatory inducement to put Madhuri in a situation in
which Madhuri is currently". The required causal connection is therefore
between the retaliatory motive of one person(GE/USCIS ) and the action of
another (USCIS).
In Dr. Kazarians own words: I have lived in America and contributed to its
astrophysics research interests for so long, I cannot consider myself as
anything other than an American scientist. Beyond the implications for my
immigration status, I am frightened for the future of this country I love so much
when I see the great pains its government is taking to ensure that brilliant
An abuse of discretion is a failure to take into proper consideration the facts and
law relating to a particular matter. Positive use of discretion would have resolved
this disputes....If Obama admin is trying to keep illegals here.try to send me
back and remove me from USA is also abuse of discretion by DHS. It also shows
how desperately DHS people want to harass me under GEs influence. (JUST so to
set up an example/send a message for all current /future GE employee that if you
speak up as a whistleblower /fraud/security/qualityyou will be put in a situation
like Madhuri and also clearly sending a message that not a single government
body will be on a side of JUSTICE ; rather on corporate GE side.)
Plaintiff did mention punitive damages in her complaint pleadings. And that was
for individual capacity based claims.
Defendants could not demonstrate bad faith or dilatory motive on Plaintiffs part.
To the contrary, Plaintiffs seek to amend /clarify these claims to more thoroughly
frame the relevant constitutional issues before this Court.
III. Plaintiffs are entitled to amend their complaint because their amendments
would not be futile
3) Thus adding/clarifying Bivens claim does not substantially change the legal
theory at this early stage of litigation.
4) The court must construe the complaint in favor of the plaintiff and grant
plaintiff the benefit
of all inferences derived from the facts. Schuler v. United States, 617 F.2d 605,
608 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
Claim for damages arises directly under Constitution without explicit statutory
cause of action (implied constitutional cause of action)
Money damages for constitutional tort committed by defendant acting under color
of federal law/authority
6) Below email is from attorney David Nelson at from Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP.
David looked in to my voluminous GE documents and stated that Madhuri has
SEC security Exchange commission claim . Because of my immigration
situation (partly due to GEs Godzilla influence )that SEC right also hasnt been
exercised.
From: David Nelson <dnelson@bsfllp.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 9:21 AM
Subject: RE: should I send my deposition ?
To: Madhuri Trivedi <mcis99@gmail.com>
Cc: Aaron Marcus <amarcus@bsfllp.com>
Madhuri, today is hectic and I have some meetings tomorrow. Is Wednesday
possible for you at some point? Dave
David Nelson
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
401 East Las Olas Blvd. Suite 1200
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
(Ph) 954.356.0011
(Direct) 954.377.4233
(Cell) 954.213.8810
Defendants have admitted in all of their court fillings that Madhuri s right
related to her ex employer GE for HIPPA violations, Patient safety act, civil rights ,
8CFR 1324b , False claims act. Despite Have knowingly and intentionally
deprived Madhuri from exercising those rights.
MacLean
Oral arguments have been standard in whistleblowing is do you reasonably
believe -that there is a specific and substantial danger to public safety and
health.? . and uncovered a violation of matters relating to specific danger to
public health or safety. " Congress each time has looked at this situation and
has said every single time, we need more whistleblowers to come forward,
because that's the human failsafe against a machine bureaucracy; it is so hard
for whistleblower to come forward. in name of public interest such
whistleblower put their own job in line... Chief Justice John Roberts announced
opinion and stated That statute protected employees who disclosed
information revealing any violation of any law, rule, or regulation or revealing
a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.
2.1. Though this applies to government employees under WPA ..using this
common law
product Insite Exc was dangerous and illegal I put my own job and
immigration in line NOT realisign then that I will end up dealing with 500 pounds
Investigation found that was a measurement error. We can now see our
performance is gradually getting worse as new devices are added, which matches
the reports we are getting from users.