A FEDERAL QUESTION UNDER THE

LIGHT OF PSALM 94: 15 and 16,

WHEN THE GOVERNMENT BY, OR

THROUGH ONE OR MORE OF ITS
AGENT(S) OR OFFICER(S) WAS, IS,
OR BECOME THE WRONGDOER:
WHO WILL RISE, STAND UP FOR
ME AGAINST WRONGDOER(S)
WORKERS OF INEQUITY AND
INJUSTICE?
THE CASE WILL BE TURN TO
JUSTICE AND AFTER IT SHALL GO
ALL THOSE WITH THE RIGHTEOUS
HART.

THE PLAINTIFFS:
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION,
THE UNITED STATES PRESIDENT,
THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS,
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT,

THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES

REPRESENTED BY: THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE CIVIL
RIGHTS COMMISSION, US ATTORNEY
GENERAL, ALL U.S. FEDERAL COURTS AND
JUDGES WHO ARE AGAINST: INJUSTICE
AND JOB EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
A NEW DEAL-NEW TREATY
VERSUS:
THE DEFENDANTS:
ALTOGETHER THE DEFENDANTS, et-al, THE
JUDGES ALTOGETHER THE JUDGES,
PARTICIPANTS IN CONSPIRACY AND OR
FRAUD UPON THE COURT, DENIERS OF
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS (The Jury Trial
Right included)

AUTHOR: JOSE CENTENO CAMACHO, MSHS

INTRODUCTION

IPSO-FACTO AT PRIMA-FACIE, WHEN

THERE IS, ARE, CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS INVOLVED
IN A CASE, THE CONSTITUTION THAT IS REGARDED
AS THE LAW OF THE LAND, THE SUPREME LAW OF
THE LAND, SHALL PREVAIL AS THE CONTROLLING
STATUTE OF THE CASE. THE JUDGE(S) DECISION HAS
TO COMPLY WITH IT BUT CANNOT BE AGAINST IT.
THEREFORE IN AN EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
CASE WHERE THE PLAINTIFF DEMANDED A TRIAL BY
JURY, A SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION ORDER
NEITHER THE MCDONNELL DOUGLASS v GREEN, OR
ANY OTHER JURISPRUDENCE CASE SHALL BE USED
OR PRETEND TO BE USED AS THE CONTROLLING
STATUTE TO JUSTIFY THE DENIAL OF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF THE PLAINTIFF TO THE
TRIAL BY JURY, TO HAVE HIS CASE TRIED BY A JURY.
This book is based on my experience in trying to assert my
Constitutional, Civil, Human and Fundamental Rights against my exemployer (s), the government and federal courts of the Eastern Circuit of
New York. Here is the case as it was arbitrarily changed or molded by the
District Court: CENTENO v CITY OF NEW YORK.
To assert, claim and try to secure my Civil, Fundamental, Human and
Constitutional Rights I was forced or haled into court by: the employer,
the union and the US Government. The main focus of this book is on my
theory that the courts engaged in reckless conduct that can easily sustain a
case of Conspiracy and, or, Fraud Upon The Court, requiring then an
Investigation and Reform from The Federal Government that can result
in more and better ACCESS OF THE UNITED STATES CITIZENS TO
JUSTICE, THE COURTS, AND THEIR GOVERNMENT
RESOURCES AVAILABILITY TO FIGHT JOB EMPLOYMENT
DISCRIMINATION.
But taking into consideration the curiosity of the readers to know the
origins, I will give you a very brief introduction to the origins of this book
(for the full details you can visit www.scribd.com and searching for

JoseArecibo01 you will find the full details in the books under the tittles:
THE HIDDEN CASE and THE EVIDENCE REVIEW OF THE
HIDDEN CASE). Said that, here is the brief of the origin:
I started working for the employer on 1989. I complied with all their
application requirements except this one: They wanted to employ me as a
Provisional instead of Permanent (the Provisional had almost no
rights and could be replaced at any time, at their will). When I saw that
condition within the application, then I haltered it, requested time to
investigate about the subject condition. After my findings of the
investigation I realized that to me, with all my credentials and experience,
was an UNFAIR CONDITION OF, FOR, EMPLOYMENT, for me to be
hired by them in that capacity or unfair and or illegal classification (The
Title VII Act prohibits it), therefore I REFUSED THEIR OFFER!!! But
they liked my education and experience plus they needed a Spanish
Speaking Counselor for the position, then at a later time they called me back
and gave me an EEE (Education and Experience Examination, an
evaluation or test that was permitted to hire Professionals who had the
required education and experience for the position). I passed their
examination; then they changed their condition of Provisional to
Permanent and it was stated in the application; then under this NEW
AGREEMENT of condition of employment I started working for them.
But after been many years working for them, when I wanted to move to a
higher and better paid position, the employer was constantly telling me:
You are not qualified, You are not a Permanent worker, You are
Provisional, You are not a QHP (Qualified Health Professional). I
confronted them with the New Agreement that stated that I was hired as a
Permanent, not a Provisional employee, and asked them that if it was not the
RACE OR NATIONAL ORIGIN then what made an employee without a
Bachelor or a Master Degree that the position required, a QHP (this
happened on many occasions that I applied for higher positions). Through
my investigation I found that one of their hired candidates with whom I
competed had only a High School diploma (Employer claimed their chosen
candidate had an Associate Degree in Dental Technology but they failed to
produce evidence of it, but regardless they would have produced it, the
position requirement was a Master, sometimes they added or a Bachelor
Degree in Soc. Science or related field). In another occasion the position
demanded a Master Degree but employer found the most qualified
candidate to someone who had some college credits BUT NO DEGREE!!!
(I confronted the employer with their Discrimination practices in Hiring and

Promotion but they retaliated). And despite that they did not meet the
Educational Requirements that the positions advertised demanded (Master
Degree), the employer found me the Not qualified, Not a QHP, Not
a Qualified Health Professional and had the nerves to hire and assign the
candidate with the High School Diploma to supervise me.
Because they failed to correct their error and to promote me, then I
sought help from the Union, the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission) and the Federal Government because JOB EMPLOYMENT
DISCRIMINATION IS OF NATIONAL MATTER, therefore THE
GOVERNMENT HAS A STAKE IN THE CASE!!! But despite my cry
for help: some refused to answer, others refused to help, others failed to help
accordingly to the situation and they altogether pushed, haled or forced me
into court alone; where to my surprise then and now to the readers of this
book: THE DISTRICT COURT AND THE COURT OF APPEALS OF
THE EASTERN CIRCUIT OF NEW YORK BECAME AN
ACCOMPLICE TO THE EMPLOYER!*
*But Under Constitution no court, state or federal, may serve as an
accomplice in the willful transgression of the Laws of the United States,
laws by which the judges in every state [are] bound United States V.
Peltier 422 U.S. 531 (1975)
*(Refer to THE EVIDENCE REVIEW OF THE HIDDEN CASE
where I discuss the evidence that sustains my allegations at
www.scribd.com).
Earlier I mentioned that I WAS HALED INTO COURT but I missed
to mention that after the haling, once inside the court, I requested litigation
help but IT WAS DENIED TO ME! The court failed its duty to me and to
the American Government, to the American Public because as a Federal
Court it should have known that EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION IS
A PUBLIC INTEREST MATTER and therefore THE UNITED
STATES GOVERNMENT HAD AND HAS A STAKE IN THE CASE!!!
The court or judge(s) had to request the ligation help to the proper agencies
or authorities!!!
However:
Reason and reflection require us to recognize that in our adversary
system of criminal justice, any person hale into court who is too poor to
hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided

for him lawyers to prosecute are everywhere deemed essential to

protect the publics interest in an orderly society (Gideon V. Wainright
372 US at 344).

THE JUDGES ACTIONS

(UNDER THE SCOPE OF THE UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION):
Article VI, The Supremacy Clause of The United States Constitution
states: Constitution shall be The Supreme Law of the land.
Therefore almost all conceptual or procedural law shall operate within its
mark of reference but not against it! Presidents and Judges are swear to
comply and defend The U.S. Constitution to accept their positions or jobs.
Therefore, when a Judge refuses to comply with any of the Constitutional
Rights, and hinder, denies and refuses to sustain or to uphold such Rights,
then right there in that instant moment that Judge ENGAGED IN WAR
AGAINST THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, AND AGAINST
THOSE WHO DESPITE THEY HAVE NOT SWEAR TO DEFEND IT
BUT FEELS IT IS IN HIS OR HER DUTY TO DEFEND IT!!! A judge
who engaged in war against the U.S. Constitution appears to be doing same
to the State, therefore that judge acted without jurisdiction, therefore
engaged in treason to the Constitution. But:
courts has repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their
criminal acts and Treason to the United States Constitution is a
Criminal Act. And that/those Judge(s) cannot find immunity, lodge in his
or her Title nor protection against a cause of action for their wrongdoing!!!
The first to raise a cause and start an action against such Judge(s) shall be
the State and Federal Governments because THERE IS/ARE
CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL RIGHT OR RIGHTS ( The U.S.
Constitutional Amendment VII, Article III, Section 1, The Right to a
Trial by a Jury, plus The full United States Constitutional Amendment
XIV ) AGAINST THE AUTHORITY AND OR THE LAW on which
the Judges claimed right to deny a Constitutional Right(s) depends.
And from their decisions, actions and written statements, here is where
some of their claimed rights to deny my Constitutional Rights, appear to
depend on:
1-False or Stolen Jurisdiction

2-The Mc Donnell Douglas case framework

3-Jurisprudence Foreign to the Case
3-A Summary Judgment Motion Order
4-False Assumption(s), Speculation(s) and or Delusion(s) or
Hallucinations
(Any Judge(s) who denied Constitutional Right(s), as pertaining to the
Right to a Trial by a Jury: affected the Due Process of Law and or The
Equal Protection of the Law; and if after the denial of the Constitutional
Right of the Plaintiff to have the case tried by a Jury, such judge(s) then
issue or issued a Decision, a Ruling, an Order or a Verdict stating
that: no juror could find on plaintiffs favor, then is logical for any
reasonable mind to think and believe that the judge(s) was/were in a False
Assumption, Speculating, Deluding, or otherwise were either:
Corrupted or Prejudiced!!!
5-So Color of Law to deny Constitutional Right(s)
6-Conclusory Allegations (all allegations to deny Constitutional Right(s) to
end a trial is/are, become Ipso-Facto Unconstitutional Conclusory
Allegations).
At this point I shall say that when a jurisprudence case, plus any other of
a Judges argument is or are used to deny one or more of the Constitutional
Rights, then in that instant and moment that judges act or action IPSOFACTO BECOMES UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!
And to add more spice to the issue: What if when the Citizen initiates
the lawsuit he or she, right there in the court, requests and or demands the
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE THE CASE TRIED BY A
JURY? And what if then the Court accepts, agree and CHARGED A FEE
for a Jury Trial Service and stamp the form stating JURY TRIAL
DEMANDED? Now after you read these questions, I have another
interesting one: How would you feel if after requested and paid for the jury
service, then a Judge during a pretrial hearing drops your case, refuse to
provide the Constitutional Right to a Trial by Jury, and WITHOUT

ALLOWING YOU TO SEE OR BE IN FRONT OF THE JURY then

sends you a letter stating: NO JUROR COULD FOUND ON
PLAINTIFFS FAVOR. Honestly, How would you feel?, How do you
think that the average citizen to whom this kind of Judge(s) played this
kind of injustice will feel and think about the law, government, courts and
society?
And I cannot continue writing without saying or stating that:
NO PLAINTIFF SHALL BE FORCED BY ANY FEDERAL COURT
TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT TO CLAIM
HIS, HER, THEIR, OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!!!!
Because the judges used tricks and tactics to deny a Constitutional Right,
in this case THE RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY, in-grafted in the VII
AMENDMENT of the U.S. CONSTITUTION, now I want to tell the
reader that such Unconstitutional Act TOOK AWAY FROM ME OTHER
RIGHTS like for example: the right of the DUE PROCESS OF LAW, ingrafted also in the V AMENDMENT of the U.S. CONSTITUTION.
Therefore, the United States Government, we, The People:
we find it intolerable that one Constitutional Right should have to be
surrendered in order to assert another (Simmons V. U.S. 390 US 389
(1968).
And I also find intolerable that a Federal Court Judge CUNNINGLY
COERCED AND FORCED this United States Citizen to answer a
Summary Judgment Motion with a framed or preconceived mind that if I
wanted to win the case then I have to win that motion and its preconceived
judge(s) mindset that I will never make it to the front of the jury, instead of,
to provide the requested and Demanded CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to a
Trial by a Jury. AGAINST SUCH A PREJUDICED JUDGE(S)
MIND(S) IT WILL BE A MIRACLE FOR A PLAINTIFF TO WIN
THEIR CONCOCTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION!!!! The
following fact will provide more clarity to the reader about my arguments:
A- I filed suit and DEMANDED JURY TRIAL in the Courts
Complaint Form.
B-The Court charged to me a fee for the service and I paid it.
C- I requested litigation help and the Court denied it.

D- I asked the Court information about the Court Proceedings and the
Court gave to me the following schedule after I give notice to the
defendants:
1-By 11-03-02 defendants should respond
2-By 1-06-03 they should file a motion (Summary Judgment
Motion)
3-By 2-09-03 plaintiff should respond to the motion
4-Then will go to trial
E- The Judge(s) planned concocted hijack of the Constitutional Rights
to Jury Trial and Due Process of Law took place at step 3 BECAUSE
the Court did not allow plaintiff to go to the scheduled step 4 to reach
the, be in front of: THE JURY!!! (The judge(s) were prejudiced and or
preconditioned that for them to provide the Constitutional Right to Trial by
Jury they had to like my answer to the defendants Summary Judgment
Motion; and as it was concocted in their preconceived anti-jury trialmind, because they did not like my answer they wrongly used that as an
excuse to deny Constitutional Rights and dismissed the case therefore
interfered the proceedings, obstructed the true course of Justice!!! And
to more shame to the American Justice System, the judge(s) prejudiced
mind was made manifest in writing:
In an attempt to make me and the American Public to believe that a trial
took place, in the Judge(s) cunning trick minded decision they wrote: NO
JUROR COULD FIND ON PLAINTIFFS FAVOR ON HIS
COMPLAINT (capital letters are mine). This is rampant court
corruption and right then and there the judge(s) engaged in war against the
United States Constitution, the Federal Government, U.S. Department of
Justice and Civil Rights Commission.
THIS WARRANTS A FEDERAL INTERVENTION because:
Many citizens because of their respect for what only appears to be a
law are cunningly coerced into waving their rights due to ignorance
(U.S. V. Minker). And It is monstrous that courts should aid or abet the
law breaking It is abiding truth that nothing can destroy a
government more quickly than its own failure to observe its own laws or
worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence Justice Brennan
quoting Mapp V. Ohio, 367, US 643, 659 (1961) in Harris V. New York,
401 US 222, 232. (1971).

And to me, these court judge(s) cunning tricks, conduct, reckless denial
of Trial by Jury and Due Process of Law, with a knowingly (because a judge
shall know the Constitutional Rights) willful or negligent DISREGARD
RESPECT FOR THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, THE
SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, THEIR FAILURE TO DEFEND,
SUSTAIN AND OR TO UPHOLD IT, to me, all this: Is a lack of decency,
an indignity!!! The Government demands from citizens to have decency on
their conducts with other citizens, however:
Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials
shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the
citizens. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be
imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously (Ibid). And I think
it clear that even an inmate retains an inalienable interest in liberty, at
the very minimum the right to be treated with dignity-which the
Constitution may never ignore
(Meachum V. Fano, 427 U.S. 215 ) , (1926).
According to the Law.com Dictionary: Due Process is
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS IN LEGAL MATTERS,
both civil and criminal, especially in the courts. All legal procedures set by
statute and court practice, including notice of rights, must be followed for
each individual so that NO PREJUDICIAL OR UNEQUAL
TREATMENT WILL RESULT. While somewhat indefinite the term can
be gauged by its aim to safeguard both, private and public rights against
unfairness. The Universal Guarantee of Due Process is in the Fifth
Amendment to the United States Constitution which provides that No
person shallbe deprived of life, liberty or property without Due
Process of Law and is applied to all states by the 14th Amendment. From
this basic principle flow many legal decisions determining both procedural
and substantive rights.
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION under the light of : Byars V. United
States 273 US 28 (1927) and it is the duty of the courts to be
watchful for the Constitutional Rights of the citizens, and against any
stealthy encroachments thereon.
1- Is the courts denial to a Plaintiff of his Constitutional Right to a Trial
by Jury, a: VIOLATION OF THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW?

2- Is the use of a court Summary Judgment motion or order, during a

PRETRIAL HEARING, used as a Hiding Bush for a judge to
dismiss Plaintiffs case therefore NOT ALLOWING THE
PLAINTIFF TO REACH, BE IN FRONT OF THE JURY, AND
IPSO-FACTO DENYING THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO
A JURY TRIAL, is it VIOLATION OF THE DUE PROCESS OF
LAW?
3- In the initial complaint the Plaintiff requested and demanded a Trial
by a Jury, the Court gave to him the Complaint Form, he filled it out
and in the Form Box for DEMANDED JURY TRIAL the Plaintiff
marks YES, then gives the form back to the Courts Clerk who
accepted and CHARGED THE FEE, DATED AND STAMPED
THE TRIAL BY JURY AGREEMENT within the COMPLAINT
FORM but then later the judge(s) refuse to allow the Plaintiff to go,
reach, be in front of the Jury:
IS THERE VIOLATION OF THE DUE PROCESS?
4- When a court or judge(s) refuse to interview witnesses, does not
allow them to be confronted and to testify in front of the already
agreed and demanded jury to trial the case, then allowing the
witnesses and or the defendants to escape the Confrontation
Clause, IS THERE VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS?
5- In the already discussed experience and situation in the court(s):
Was it a sly, a stealthy encroachment, a trespass and or intrusion from
the judge(s) into my GIVEN AB INITIO* CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT
TO A TRIAL BY A JURY? , TO THE DUE PROCESS? , TO
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS or CIVIL RIGHTS?
*(given first by the U.S. Constitution, ratified by Congress with the Title
VII Act, and by the U.S. Federal District Court itself in the Original
Complaint Form that was handled out to the Plaintiff).
One of the Judges justifications or arguments TO DENY ME
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT(S) and then to drop my case to the favor of
the employer was based on that I did not comply with the Mc Donnell
Douglas case requirements!!! And although I had complied but their biases,

prejudices against a Trial by a Jury and their blindness prevented them from
recognizing it, here and now I want to say and stress that: NONE
ALREADY DECIDED CASE SHALL BE USED TO DENY A
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, NOR TO TAKE AWAY OTHER
RIGHTS FROM THE ONE THAT WAS OR IS BEING CLAIMED!!!!
However, this in no way means that jurisprudence cannot or shall not be
used to illustrate, to bring light to the Judge in a case, to support and or to
enhance a Constitutional Right BUT NOT TO DENY, TO REDUCE,
LIMIT, OR TO INTERFERE IT; because NO JURISPRUDENCE
CASE CAN BE STRONGER THAN THE UNITED STATES
CONSTITUTION, THE LAW OF THE LAND, THE SUPREME
LAW OF THE LAND!!!
Therefore when a judge(s) engage in the denial of Constitutional
Right(s), simultaneously is engaging in war against the State and the United
States Constitution, acting then without Jurisdiction, engaging in or
committing treason to both: The State and The United States Constitution.
But courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their
criminal acts and:
TREASON TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION IS A CRIMINAL ACT
(Refer to:
United States of America V. City of New York, 1:07-CV-01067-NGGRLM)
And to this effect now I share with you some Constitutional supportive
and constitutional rights enhancers jurisprudence cases that I gave in
the APPENDIX to the court in my RESPONSE TO THEIR ABUSE:
1-the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens 1 L. Ed. 440, pp.
471
2-A Sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal
conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground
that there can be no legal Right as against the authority that makes the
law on which the Right depends
(Kawananakoa v. Polyblank, 27 S. Ct. 526, 527, 51 L.
Ed 834 (1907).

3-The courts indulge every reasonable presumption against waver of

fundamental rights The purpose of a jury is to guard against the
exercise of arbitrary power- to make available the commonsense of the
community as a hedge against the over-zealous or mistaken prosecutor
and in preference to the professional or perhaps over-conditioned or
biased response of a judge
Justice Byron
4-The guarantee of trial by jury contained in the Constitution was
intended for a state of war, as well as a state of peace, and is equally
binding upon rulers and people at all times and under all
circumstances
Justice White
5-and it is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the Constitutional
rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon.
The makers of our Constitution undertook to protect Americans in
their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations.
99 S. Ct. at 1936
6-An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes
no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office, it is in legal
contemplation, as inoperative as though it have never been passed
US Supreme Court
7-It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a
government outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in
our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court
than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of
the Constitution. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds
contempt for law: it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it
invites anarchy
Justice Louis Brandeis in 277 US
at 485. (1928)

THE JUDGES ACTIONS UNDER THE LOOP

OF THE CONSPIRACY AND, OR, FRAUD
THEORY:

Fraud Upon The Court is to embrace that species of fraud

which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud
perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery
cannot perform in the usual manner, It is directed toward the
judicial machinery itself, When it is committed during a proceeding
in the court, the person then engaged in fraud upon the court. A
decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at
all and never becomes final, A judge is an officer of the court. A judge
is not the court, When any officer of the court has committed fraud
upon the court, the orders and judgment of that court are void, of no
legal force or effect, Courts has repeatedly ruled that judges has no
immunity for their criminal acts.
Source:
(U.S. Federal Law), (U.S. 7th Circuit Court), (Moores Federal Practice,
2d ed, P 512, &60.23), (1CFRDefinitions), (United States of America
V. City of New York 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM), (People V. Zajic, 88 I
11.App.3d 477, 410 N.E. 2d 626 (1980), (Bullock V. United States, 763
F.2d 1115, 1121, C 10 Cir.1985), (Kenner V. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689, (1968).
Now using the information given as frame of reference, let us analyze a
Job Employment Discrimination case, under the light of Civil
Conspiracy:
A- Formation, Operation, Perpetration of the Conspiracy by the
employer:
The employer through its/his representatives agree to hire a person as
Permanent Worker, the person had refused to be hired as Provisional.
After long time passed, the worker wanted to be promoted and or to
move to a higher and better paid position within the corporation. The
employer refused and failed to promote the employee stating that He is
not qualified, He is a Provisional employee, He is not a QHP, not a
Qualified Health Professional, and using these arguments the employer
PRE-EMPTED, BARRED, FORBID the employee from promotions
and if the employee would still applying and makes it to an interview,
however he would not have qualified ( The employee found this in
a written statement issued by the employer to the EEOC and none of
them had informed of this to the employee, he found it through the
Discovery during the Pretrial Hearings). Therefore the employer was
committed to the Common Plan or Design of the Conspiracy, to

conspire to, for, not to allow the employee to move up the ladder, the
scale, to a better paid position and better ENJOYMENT OF LIFE
AND PROPERTY.
When the employee found out more corruption in the Hiring and
Promotion Procedure, that the Administrator had outside referral
sources and was giving preference and offering the positions to those
referred by his friends, and that the applicants were being pre-chosen,
that some candidates against who he competed did not meet the
Education Qualification Requirements for the position been applied for
but were chosen or pre-chosen over him and employer refused to
correct the error: He was haled into court and filed a lawsuit in the
Federal District Court. Probably to cover their back, administration
promoted the employee but kept him with the same salary of the previous
title; months later the employee claimed retroactively the corresponding
salary and was signing his name with the newly given title; then the
employer asked him to give up the title and to stop signing with that title
because that was a mistake, the employee refused and claimed his
rights to the promotion. The employer and the other tortfeasors
(including his Union whose representatives wanted him to sign a new
work contract stating that he was going to surrender all his rights and
claims from the past, present and future against the employer as a
condition for him to keep his job) that joined the corporation in the
perpetration of the conspiracy and its common plan and design
RETALIATED AGAINST THE EMPLOYEE and he was forced out
of his office
and fired.
B- Formation, Operation, Perpetration of Conspiracy by the Federal
Courts:
The employee goes to a Federal District Court to file a Job
Employment Discrimination Suit, it was based on Race, National Origin,
and other acts and conduct from the employer. The court gives to plaintiff a
filing form where it was stipulated all the Jurisdictions that covers the
complaint and the kind of trial requested or demanded; the employee agreed
to the Jurisdictions and demanded a Trial by Jury, he put in the lawsuit Form
the name of the Hospital where he was working, the Corporation to whom it
belonged, and the City, et-al. The court accepted, charged the fee, and

stamped the Form. He requested litigation help but the court denied it. The
Chief Judge never interviewed the Plaintiff and assigned a Magistrate
Judge to the case; in a pretrial hearing the magistrate insinuated to the
defendants to file a Summary Judgment Motion and REFUSED to
provide the Plaintiffs Demanded Jury Trial Constitutional Right!!! The
magistrate granted to the defendants the winning of her suggested course
of action Summary Judgment Motion and recommend to the Invisible
Chief Judge to drop the case. The Invisible Chief Judge agrees to the
magistrates recommendations and drops Plaintiffs case in open violation
to the United States Constitutions Rights to a Trial by a Jury and Due
Process of Law!!!
To justify the violations, The Magistrate and The Invisible
judges cunningly framed the Plaintiffs claim into:
IAnother case so they could justify to drop plaintiffs case and
deny to him the Right to Trial by Jury because the Plaintiff did not
comply with the standards or frame of work of such a case
( McDonnell Douglas V- Green).
IIA Federal Question that they themselves refused to answer in
their conclusory allegations and or hallucinations of their written
opinion to drop the Plaintiffs case and their denial of his
Constitutional Rights to Due Process and Trial by a Jury.
AMONG THEIR CONCLUSORY ALLEGATIONS AND
OR HALLUCINATIONS, these two called more my attention as
it relates to items I and II above:
1- but the question needs not to be answered
(they cunningly, arbitrarily classified the case into, or as a:
Federal Question, a question that they themselves refused to
answer).
2- No juror could find on plaintiffs favor (without allowing
the Plaintiff TO REACH, TO BE IN FRONT OF, THE JURY,
nor allowing the jury to render a verdict, fantasizing and
impersonating or acting as a Jury and then attempt to make the
American Public believe that a Jury Trial took place when IN
REALITY THAT WAS NOT TRUTH) !! And as a Matter of
Fact, their false assumption and or fantasy that no juror could
find on plaintiffs favor: THIS WAS, IS, SHALL BE,
DETERMINED BY THE JURY, THE JURYS VERDICT,

AFTER THE TRIAL BY JURY FINISHES, BUT NOT

BEFORE, NOT AFTER A PRETRIAL HEARING OF A
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION ARGUMENTS WHERE
THERE WAS OR IS NOT THE JURY PRESENT, NOR
WITHOUT ALLOWING THE PLAINTIFF TO BE IN
FRONT OF THE JURY TO ARGUE HIS CASE!!!!
AUTHORITY:
A- There is no Res Judicata for the issues raised
B- The United States Constitution.
C- Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as Amended
1-Executive Order 11246, as amended, and requires Affirmative
Action to ensure Equality of Opportunity in all aspects of
employment. Discrimination based on Race and National Origin is
prohibited also.
2-Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, prohibits
discrimination in hiring, promotion, discharge, pay, fringe benefits,
classification, referral and other aspects of employment, on the
basis of Race and National Origin. Retaliation is prohibited by
all Federal Laws.
3- Title VI and IX, for Programs or Activities Receiving Federal
Financial Assistance If causes or may cause discrimination in
providing services under such program, Employer has a
contractual obligation to comply with Equal Employment
Opportunity.
Upon the District Courts failure to recognize
AUTHORITY as mentioned above, the Plaintiff then goes to
Federal Court of Appeals to claim his Constitutional Rights that
the District Court denied; but the Court of Appeals assume
familiarity with the case and sustains the District Courts
Violation(s) of Constitutional Rights!!! Therefore it, they, became
part of the Conspiracy to commit Fraud Upon the Court, to
Deny Constitutional Rights, became co-conspirator and, or,
tortfeasor, committed treason and or engaged in war
AGAINST the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!!!!

ELEMENTS OF FRAUD OR CONSPIRACY:

1- Because of their position and duty, they should and are expected to
know the Constitutional Law; and because they are swear to defend
the United States Constitution, therefore it can be a direct and or
inferred assessment that their failure, denial and refusal to provide to a
Plaintiff the claimed, demanded and paid for service of the
Constitutional Right to a Trial by Jury, then and THERE WAS AN
INTENTIONAL VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW!!!
2- The judges acts of the denial of the Constitutional Right to a Trial by
Jury, their preventing of the case and the plaintiff from reaching the
jury, their protection of the defendants to allow them to ESCAPE
THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE preventing the Plaintiff from
confronting defendants with the truth and facts of their actions IN
FRONT OF THE JURY, not to allow the jury to deliberate:
THERE WAS A DELIBERATE VIOLATION OF LAW!!!
3- The interaction, consultation(s) or conferences of the, or the
combination of the Magistrate Judge and the Superior Judge (who
failed or refused to show himself to the Plaintiff) actions to dismiss
the Plaintiffs case, their failure to examine and weigh the case and
their decision AT THE LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE
SUSTAINING THE FACTS committing then a DELIBERATE
DISREGARD OF MATERIAL FACTS, their refusal to provide
litigation assistance, their denial to allow the jury to render a verdict
and to hear the witnesses, their violation to a Plaintiffs Rights to a
Trial by Jury and Due Process of Law, this CONSTITUTES
ELEMENTS OF FRAUD, FRAUD UPON THE COURT, AND,
OR CONSPIRACY!!!!
4- Under the laws, an EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION case can
be brought under several jurisdictions and the court itself states it
within the Complaint Form. Once the case is filed under the Original
Jurisdiction(s), no judge(s) shall arbitrarily change such Original
Jurisdiction(s) under which the case was filed, to another jurisdiction
calling it A Federal Question and then subsequently tell the
Plaintiff: Weather the Plaintiff has a Prima Facie case is a close

question,(WITH THIS STATEMENT THE JUDGE(S)

ESTABLISHED REASONABLE DOUBT, A REASON, THAT IF
NOT FOR THEIR BIASED MIND AGAINST THE UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION AND ITS JURY TRIAL RIGHT,
MUST HAVE HAD ALLOWED THE TRUE COURSE OF
JUSTICE, ALLOWED THE PLAINTIFF WITH HIS CASE TO
REACH THE JURY). But instead, THEY CHOSE TO
OBSTRUCT AND THEY OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE, by creating a
bush and then hiding behind it to achieve their conspiracy goal(s).
And here is the bush: But the question needs not to be answered.
And then and again in an arbitrary form or manner INTRODUCES
ANOTHER JURISDICTION, ANOTHER BUSH AGAINST THE
PLAINTIFF by claiming that he did not comply with the Mc.
Donnell Douglas v Green case, attempting to make the Plaintiff
believe that such jurisprudence case is a law, and moreover: THAT
THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO JURY TRIAL AND DUE
PROCESS CAN BE DENIED IN A JOB EMPLOYMENT
DISCRIMINATION CASE THAT DOES NOT MEET THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE MC. DONNELL DOUGLASS
CASE!!!! But right now and here in this book I want to tell these
judges, the American Public and to You the reader(s) that: THERE
WAS BLOCKING OF A LAWFUL CONCLUSION OF THE
CASE, BECAUSE THE CONSPIRATORS AND OR THE
FRAUD COMMITTING AGENTS CONDUCT AND THE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS: WAS, WERE,
UNLAWFUL. And were unlawful because their conduct and acts
was, were, is: UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!
5- When the judges in a Court of Appeals claim that they have an, and:
assumed familiarity of the case and sustain the District Courts
fantasies pretending to make believe that a jury trial took place (No
juror could find on plaintiffs favor, U.S. District Federal Court,
Eastern District of New York) when in reality THERE WAS NO
TRIAL because the Plaintiff WAS NEVER ALLOWED TO
REACH, TO BE IN FRONT OF: THE JURY, with or without his
case and witnesses, THEN AND THERE WAS, IS, A VIOLATION
OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENTS
V AND VII.

6- To pretend, or the pretending to believe or to make believe to a

Plaintiff in a State or Federal Court, AND TO THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC, that a jurisprudence case (Mc. Donnell Douglas v Green) is
a law (but we all know that it is not), to pretend that it has more
power than, and that it could be used instead of, or to replace: The
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, by sustaining this, the
violations and or the violators: THE COURT OF APPEALS
JUDGES AND THEIR SUPPORTER(S) BECAME
ACCOMPLICE(S), TORTIOUS INTERFERERS,
EMBELLISHERS TO THE EMBELLISHMENT, COCONSPIRATORS TO THE CONSPIRACY, WARRIORS IN A
WAR AGAINST THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION,
THE LAW OF THE LAND, THE SUPREME LAW OF THE
LAND!!!
7- The reader does not need to be versed in laws to realize that when
Constitutional Right(s) is or are denied, there is or are violation(s) to,
of, the following RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, LAWS, CODES OR
STATUTES, and under the analysis of THE EVIDENCE
REVIEW OF THE HIDDEN CASE ( see it at: www.scribd.com)
if not all, most of the mentioned violations to, within the jurisdiction
of the following Laws, Rights, Privileges, Codes, Statutes or Acts
occurred:
A- Equal Protection of The Laws (U.S. Constitution Amendment
XIV)
B- The Citizens Privilege(s) and Immunities
C- Equal Rights Under The Law (Section 1981 of Title 42)
D- Deprivation of Rights (42 U.S.C.1983)
E- Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (18 U.S.C. 242)
F- Violation to Jurisdictional Status for Civil Rights Cases (28
U.S.C. 1443) My comments: Can a Judge make jurisdiction
under Federal Question and then refuse to answer the
question?
G- Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights (42 U.S.C. 1985)
H- Conspiracy Against Rights of Citizens (18 U.S.C. 241)
I- Denial of Full Enjoyment of Rights
J- Violation(s) to the United States Constitution

SUMMARY
(There shall not be issued a Summary Judgment of a case
that was originally carded or docketed as a Trial by Jury if
there was derail, manipulation of the Court and or Defendants
for deviation, obstruction, interruption of proceedings that did
not allow the Plaintiff with his case to reach the Jury; if issued
it becomes a summary of proceedings but NOT OF ALL THE
PROCEEDINGS because there are MISSING PARTS that
logically and rationally shall be together at, in, FRONT OF
THE JURORS, ending all proceedings of the case with THE
JURY VERDICT after the Jurors render it. Therefore a
Summary Judgment Motion or Order shall be used to
put in motion to move the case to reach the jurors but not to
obstruct, interfere, derail the true course of Justice and stop
the case in its way to the Jury. Then logically and rationally
ANY ORDER OR JUDGMENT OF JUDGE(S) RENDERED
OVER ANY SUMMARY MOTION OR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT MOTION CANNOT AND SHALL NOT
REPLACE, NOR USED INSTEAD OF, AS A, NOR TAKE
THE PLACE OF THE JURORS AND THEIR JURY
VERDICT!!!! ).
A- Summary Judgment Motion is a motion; that shall not be
used by any judge or court officer(s) in a United States Court to
impede, to deny or block access to the Constitutional Right(s)
of the citizen(s), the Right to a Trial by Jury is included. If used
and it impedes, blocks or denies one or more of the
Constitutional Rights then Ipso Facto is Unconstitutional.
B- Jurisprudence case(s): this is not law, it shall not be
considered law, nor shall be used to as basis to dismiss a case
without the full Due Process of Law, nor to deny any of the
United States Constitutional Rights of the citizen(s). The Equal
Protection of Law is included. If considered and used to deny

one or more of the Constitutional Rights of the Citizen(s), then

Ipso Facto is Unconstitutional.
C- Court or Judge(s) Ruling(s) that base decision(s) on
assumptions, and, or, use such, their, assumption(s) to deny
Constitutional Right(s), then and there may have committed
Fraud Upon the Court, Conspiracy to Deny and or Interfere
with a U.S. Citizen(s) Constitutional Rights of Due Process,
Equal Protection, Right to Trial by Jury, as for real example:
No juror could find on Plaintiffs favor (But the Judge(s)
dismissed the case, seized and denied the requested and the
paid for service of his Right to a Trial by Jury, and then
made a ruling or decision in their already mentioned fantasy or
false assumption that No juror could find on plaintiffs
favor without allowing the plaintiff to reach, to see, to be
in front of The Jury to argue his case)
D- ( U.S. Federal District Court, NY Eastern Circuit in
Centeno V. City of New York, et al ). Therefore that Courts or
Judge(s) statement or finding of facts is not factual or not
based on the facts, on what happened or occurred within the
court, is delusionary, is speculative, biased, is prejudiced, is
conclusory allegation(s) of something that had not concluded
except in their biased minds because there were no jurors
present and none were selected except in THE JUDGE(S)
DELUSIONAL, SPECULATIVE, HALLUCINATIVE AND
OR BIASED MIND(S)!!!!
E- Unlawful and Unconstitutional Act(s) occur when the
Constitutional Right to a Trial by a Jury has been claimed, but it
is seized, stolen, and or denied; incurring then in Unlawful
interruption and or Interference of the Proceeding(s).
1-Therefore NO judge(s) or Court(s) can lawful claim, rule, or
issue any Summary or Judgment against the Plaintiff stating or
attempting to make him believe that he lost the case when in
reality he has not; because there was no conclusion of the
trial because there were hearings but there was no trial
because of the same court or judge(s) unlawful interference
and interruption of Proceedings because the judge(s) did

not allow the Plaintiff with the case to reach the Jury for a
trial of the issues involved as it was originally testate AbInitio by the United States Constitution, later Ratified by
the United States Congress in the Title VII Act as Amended,
then requested and demanded by Plaintiff to whom the
court had charged a fee to provide that jury trial service
and both the Plaintiff and Court had accepted the
DEMANDED JURY TRIAL clause within the
COMPLAINT FORM that was stamped by the Court
Clerk of the same Court!!!!
2-Thus because the Court or Judge(s) denied, seized and or
stole the Plaintiffs claimed Constitutional Right to have his
case tried by a Jury, they cannot legally or lawfully claim or
state that there was a conclusion of the trial; because there was
no conclusion because of their unlawful unconstitutional
interference-interruption and stop of the proceedings, there
was illegal blocking of the case and or the Plaintiff so he
could not proceed with the proceedings and get his case
tried by the Jury; and The Plaintiff and the Jury were not
allowed to meet, therefore The Jury could not answer the
Verdit Sheet.
:

THE END?
THE END SHALL BE:
CORRECTION OF THE ERROR, COMPENSATION,
RESTITUTION OF PROPERTY AND THE
HAPPINESS THAT THE EMPLOYER AND THE
SYSTEM THROUGH ITS REPRESENTATIVES AND
OR NAMED DEFENDANTS STOLE FROM THE
PLAINTIFF AND FROM THOSE SIMILARLY
SITUATED.