7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
1/26
UNITED STATES
COURT
OF APPEALS FOR THE
SECOND CIRCUIT
Thurgood
Marshall U.S. Courthouse 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007 Telephone: 212-857-8500
MOTION INFORMATION STATEMENT
_1_5_ _1_3_2_8 = a = p = t i = o n ~ [ u = s e ~ s h = o = r t ~ t i = t l = e ] . _ _
In Forma Pauperis
statement of relief sought:
against
Leena Varughese, M.D.
LL I
Plaintiff Defendant
[ljAppellant/Petitioner Appellee/Respondent
pending
~
Varughese v Mount Sinai Medical Center et al
OPPOSING PARTY:
Mount Sinai Medical Center et al
OPPOSING ATTORNEY: Rory McEvoy
~
[name
of
attorney, with firm, address, phone number and e-mail]
Blank Rome
P
405 Lexington Avenue
New York,
Y
10174-0208
from:
Southern District of New York - Judge McMahon
e check ap propria te boxes:
o ~ n o t i ~ o p p o s i n g counsel required by Local Rule 27 .1 :
LL I
YeslJNo explain):
position on motion:
LJ UnopposedDopposed
[ lpon ' t
Know
Yes O o llJoon t Know
FOR
EMERGENCY MOTIONS, MOTIONS FOR STAYS
AND
INJUNCTIONS PENDING APPEAL:
Has request for relief been made below?
Has this rel ief been previously sought
in
this Court?
D Yes l l JNo
0 Y e s l l JNo
Requested return date and explanation of emergency:
oral argument on motion requested? D Yes ll No requests
for
oral argument will not necessarily be granted)
of
appeal been set?
D Yes l l JNo f yes, enter date:
r : ~ 1Jtorney:
. ~ ' - ~ ~ - - = = = - = _ , , , , _ - _ D a t e :
09/06/2015
rev. 12-13)
Service by: lllcM/ECF O othe r [Attach proofofservice]
-- -
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page1 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
2/26
Motion for In Forma Pauperis Memorandum
o
Law
Varughese v. Mount Sinai Medical Center SDNY 12cv8812, 2nd Cir. 15-1538, is a prima
facie case
of
discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment with torts, and with
questions
of
violations
of
FMLA, which was called a blockbuster lawsuit as per New York
Post Mt. Sinai docs drank on job: axed resident article on December 16, 2012 by Kathianne
Boniello, and see the memorandum
of
law from the motion to dismiss. Varughese v. Mount Sinai
Medical Center,
US
Dist Ct, SD
NY,
2012 Civ 8812, Not Reported in
F.
Supp.2d, McMahon,
J.,
2013 WL 1385015.
I am a woman physician
of
Indian Nation Origin. I submitted the motion for in forma
pauperis where I signed an affidavit with the risk
of
penalty
of
perjury, I am disbelieved by the
court with reference to marital status as indicated in the motion for in forma pauperis. (Exhibit 1
I am not married. Dr. Rajit Malliah informed me that he was willing to write a set
of
declarations to dispel any current false beliefs on our marital status, and on matters that are true
to his personal knowledge with regard to me. (Exhibit 2 I am unemployed. I also have
significant student loans
1
in the hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars that are increasing daily with
interest. I recently applied to what seemed to
be
an excellent opportunity for me but they now
require a letter from program director from the former employer, Mount Sinai Medical Center
Prior motion for In forma pauperis is resubmitted to the Court
of
Appeals.
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page2 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
3/26
that I am litigating against
2
, and again, here is the problem
o
my being barred from appropriate
employment opportunities because o my civil rights activities and because o wrongful
termination from a former employer. Therefore, whenever I apply to a job, the Caucasian
employer changes the criteria for hiring after I apply, deviating from their standard practices to
exclude me, as recently as in the past three months. I have deposition testimony from Dr. Billie
Fyfe who testified to my superior qualification as an employee candidate but I was excluded
because
o
the Defendants' interferences with prospective business relations, an ongoing tort, by
their refusal to provide my employment records. Varughese v. Mount Sinai Medical Center
12cv8812, electronic document ID 10459039, 10459937, 10465646, submitted 115-1/6 2015.
The Defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted erroneously. In
determining whether or not summary judgment is appropriate, we must resolve all ambiguities
and draw all reasonable inferences against the moving
party. See Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co.
v.
Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986), quoting Tolbert
v.
Smith, 14-1012, 2nd Circuit
June 24, 2015./ Summary judgment must be denied where dispute o genuine material fact can
lead a reasonable jury to return the verdict in favor
o
the non-moving party. Anderson v. Liberty
Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 106
S.
Ct. 2505 (1986). Judges are not to weigh the evidence or
evaluate the credibility
o
the parties or to make credibility assertions at the summary judgment
Injunction to obtain the record
o
work where I completed the first 3 years
o
my residency training
in
Anatomic and Clinical Pathology from Mount Sinai Medical Center from a competent professional doctor
in the field, a party other than the involved and named Defendants, such as the current program director,
Adolfo Firpo-Betancourt MD. He was involved in several federal litigation prior to his commencing his
employment at Mount Sinai Medical Center. I was informed that I was on their final warning on July
14
or 15, 2011, which is a date that falls within my 4th and final year
o
my residency, and the program
director at this time was Patrick Lento MD. The Defendants ignored my legal counsels for several
months with regard to my legally protected complaints, as much as they ignored my own legally protected
complaints, until this date, when they alleged that I had been unprofessional also known as pretext for
discriminatory conduct, and a pattern with the Defendants in retaliating against me.
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page3 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
4/26
stage, that's the jury's duty. id. at 248, 255. Donnelly v. Greenburgh Cent. School Dist. No. 7,
691
F.3d 134, 146 (2d Cir.2012). The standard to defend against the summary judgment is not
onerous, and only requires that there are disputes o facts to support the causes o actions on
which the lawsuit was brought are contained in the depositions, evidence, and declarations
3
The
U.S. Supreme Courts' prior decisions such as in Adickes v. S.
H.
Kress Co., 398
U.
S. 144
(1970) may not have uniformly recited the same language in describing genuine factual issues
under Rule 56, but it is clear enough from our recent cases that at the summary judgment stage
the judge's function is not himself to weigh the evidence and determine the truth o the matter but
to determine whether there is a genuine issue for trial quoting 477 U.S. at 249.
The Defendants did not meet their burden o production. In discrimination cases, the
employers burden
o
production revolves around them articulating non-discriminatory reasons
for termination
o
the employee by the Defendants having acted in a nondiscriminatory manner,
such as treating comparators as equals. Recently U.S. Supreme Court found that there is a
genuine dispute as to whether UPS provided more favorable treatment to at least some
employees whose situation cannot reasonably be distinguished from Young's. In other words,
Young created a genuine dispute o
material fact as to the fourth prong
o
the McDonnell
Douglas analysis. Young
v.
United Parcel Service, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1338, 575 U.S., 2015 U.S.
L.E.X.I.S. 2121 (2015) at 1355. A comparator need not be an identical twin outside my
protected class but employees whose situation or duties cannot be reasonably distinguished from
mme.
3
Hollander, Eugene
K.
EMPLOYMENT EVIDENCE.
(2013).
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page4 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
5/26
Unlawful discrimination is particularly intolerable and discovery is broad to allow the
Plaintiff to find the evidence relating to her termination or adverse employment claim, Before
discovery has unearthed relevant facts and evidence, it may be difficult to define the precise
formulation
of
the required prima facie case in a particular case. Given that the prima facie case
operates as a flexible evidentiary standard, it should not be transposed into a rigid pleading
standard for discrimination cases. quoting Swierkiewicz v. Sorema NA, 534 U.S. 506, 122
S.
Ct. 992, 152 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2002) at 512. The discovery is supposed to be extensive, to answer
questions
of
discriminatory practice by employer such as with Evidence relating to company-
wide practices may reveal patterns
of
discrimination against a group
of
employees, increasing the
likelihood that an employer's offered explanation for an employment decision regarding a
particular individual masks a discriminatory motive. quoting Hollander v. American Cyanamid
Co., 895 F.2d 80, 84 85 (2nd Cir.1990).
In Varughese v. Mt Sinai Medical Center et al.
12cv8812, the discovery was voluminous but not broad as it should have been, because it was
severely limited with Magistrate Francis's rulings on discovery to limit key elements such as
various comparator performance records
4
, in addition, to lack
of
the court's action with issues
with delays in production and the ongoing redactions and removal
of
various pieces
of
key
evidence, and spoliation, relating to evidence on retaliation and hostile work environment, as
well as problems with my own legal counsel with regards to his unethical conduct during the
proceedings
of
my case. (Varughese v Mount Sinai Medical Center et al 12cv8812, electronic
record
of
docket prior to Motion for Summary Judgment).
4
I have considered this particularly troubling because Magistrate Francis was informed by Rory McEvoy
that I had no performance issues at the meet and confer on July 11
2012.
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page5 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
6/26
McDonnell Douglas ruling set the standard for indirect legal testing for discrimination in
cases of pretext, meaning appearance of neutral reasons, as masking the unlawful discrimination
against the Plaintiff. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S Ct. 1817, 36 L Ed.
2d 668 (1973). Evaluation
of
pretext requires some sophistication, not the approach that I
observed in my case, to ignore the disputes of factual issues and equivocate these factual
elements to attack the character and reputation of the Plaintiff at the summary judgment stage or
any other stage in litigation. Varughese v Mount Sinai Med. Ctr., No. 12-CV-8812, 2015 WL
1499618, at *44 (S.D.N.Y. Mar 27, 2015).
Invariably, pretext consists
of
circumstantial evidence such as timelines, the
inconsistencies and shifting reasons for termination or the Plaintiff becoming a moving target
as reasons for termination and adverse employment actions are refuted with evidence by
Plaintiff, the implausibility
of
Defendants' explanations weighed against the Plaintiff's evidence,
are various methods that allow for dealing with the impermissible problem of bigotry,
discrimination, and retaliation in American workplaces
5
as alleged in lawsuits. Reeves v
Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U
S 133
(2000), Postal Service Bd. of Governors v
Aikens, 460 U S 711, 714, n 3 (1983). In 2003, the US Supreme Court ruled on a mixed-
motive discrimination case, where it recognized that evidence that a defendant's explanation for
an employment practice is unworthy
of
credence is one form of circumstantial evidence that is
probative of intentional discrimination. 530 U.S. at 147 (emphasis added). The reason for
treating circumstantial and direct evidence alike is both clear and deep rooted: Circumstantial
5 Proof
of
Pretext: A Review
of
case authority and strategy from a plaintiff's perspective y John F
Beasley, 2011 at htt.p://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/labor law/meetings/2011/
ac2011103 3 .authcheckdam.pdf
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page6 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
7/26
evidence is not only sufficient, but may also be more certain, satisfying and persuasive than
direct evidence. Rogers v Missouri Pacific R Co., 352 U
S
500, 508, n 17 (1957) quoting
from Desert Palace, Inc.
v
Costa, 539 U.S. 90,
123 S
Ct. 2148, 156
L
Ed. 2d
84
(2003) with
internal citations and quotations included.
In my case, I defended the motion for summary judgment with an extensive review
o
the
documents with exhaustive listing and referencing
o
documents, depositions, and declarations to
meet the standard required to rebut the paltry evidence proffered by Defendants to support their
obviously farcical, unbelievable, defense that their pre-textual conduct was not motivated by
racism, bigotry, sexism, retaliation, and unlawful ll motives and I preserved the objections to
affidavits and submissions by Defendants for appeals.
As
I reviewed the evidence, the
overwhelming evidence o fraud against me prompted me to also write to the court to meet with
me, with the Defendant's lawyers
6
, with specific issues in mind with regard to my case, an
attorney would have been given this audience, but as a pro
se
Plaintiff, I was not. In the sum o
text and decisions o the summary judgment, I was not provided with any injunctive and
declaratory relief? but further denigrated.
Judge McMahon failed to recognize me as a reasonable person with my filing the Motion
in Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment. The evidence that I submitted should
admissible on a number o grounds for a trial, these should give rise to the inference o
discrimination, and the evidence o retaliation, and hostile workplace as it has sufficiently
responded to any o the Defendants motion for summary judgment. The Defendant Institution
6
In the course
o
this litigation, I requested several meetings with the court, but not ex parte meetings, to
discuss
my
concerns with regard to the egregious conduct
o
my former employer against me but that was
not granted. see footnote 3.
see footnote 2
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page7 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
8/26
was a workplace where I was threatened with physical violence, verbally abused, subjected to
nonstandard working conditions, subjected to derogatory comments by leadership personnel
since 2009, the Defendants various false allegations against me amounting to adverse
employment action immediately started following the incidents in December 2010, despite the
admissions o guilt by the perpetrator, Samuel McCash about his conduct (whether Filipino or
Caucasian or both, he is squarely outside o
my protected class), speaking to the Caucasian
Adrienne Jordan was apparently considered a problem even though no one asked me not to speak
to her but she was informed that she was not to speak to me, Jordan was promoted, despite being
less qualified than me to a materially advantageous position, my work was sabotaged, my
reviews were based on the conduct o others not in my protected class, who were harassing me,
rather than the fact that I did all my work without error, culminating to at least 15,000 patient
cases over the years that I was employed by the Defendant Institution, the fact that my legal
counsels were ignored by the Defendants, and the fact that other coworkers who were not in my
protected class and who were engaged in far more egregious and detrimental conduct were not
reprimanded at all. Varughese
v
Mount Sinai Medical Center 12cv8812, Electronic document ID
10459039, 10459937, 10465646 submitted 1/05-1/06/2015.
f
all
o
these facts still presents
itself as a lack
o
evidence
to
support an inference
o
discrimination at the summary judgment
stage, then the courts are going beyond the acceptable standards
o
summary judgment into
idiocy, into pathological structural racism, sexism, and the upholding
o
institutional
discriminatory structures to allow unlawful discrimination and retaliation against professional
minorities, as seen in Varughese
v
Mount Sinai Med. Ctr., No. 12-CV-8812, 2015
WL
1499618,
at *44 (S.D.N.Y.
Mar
27, 2015).
-
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page8 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
9/26
In addition, there were also unjustified allegations made to appear as though I only made
conclusory statements in the Rule 56 statement
o
facts, which
i
one were to review the Rule 56
statements o facts and/or submitted declarations, it is obvious that this allegation is untrue and
unjustified. Defendants alleging there are conclusory statements made by Plaintiff does not
remove the burden o production or demerit a prima facie case o discrimination as it is not
enough to move for summary judgment without supporting the motion in any way or with a
conclusory assertion that the plaintiff has no evidence to prove his case. Celotex Corp. v.
Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S. Ct. 2548, 91 L Ed. 2d 265 (1986). at 328.
John
Beasley wrote in
his article for American Bar Association about evidence o pretext used as proof o
discrimination, .. . the Supreme Court has articulated some broad categories: instances in which
persons outside the protected class were treated better; the treatment the plaintiff received while
employed; other acts o discrimination and responses to other legitimate civil rights activities ...
and best or better practices that may have avoided discrimination .. .implausible or fantastic
justifications (see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 338-39 (2003)(quoting Purkett v. Elem,
514 U.S. 765 (1995))(in the context o jury selection); and qualifications evidence as an
additional level o comparator scrutiny (Ash v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 546 U.S. 454, 457 (2006)).
8
In addition, I submitted direct evidence
o
discrimination through documentary evidence such as
incidents o name calling, relevant derogatory commentary, and relevant directed specific acts
accompanied by the smoking gun statement such as it's because she is a woman o Indian
Origin who is making things
ugly making legally protected complaints, and direct reference to
my gender as female as an instructional on the expectations o me
by
named Defendants and
8
see footnote 6 at
6
7
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page9 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
10/26
other high level proxies for the Defendant Institution. Varughese
v.
Mount Sinai Medical Center
12cv8812, Electronic document ID 10459039, 10459937, 10465646, submitted
1/5
- 1/6/2015.
With regards to the termination letter from Defendants on September 21, 2011, I could
not voice my concerns about these specific issues because I was not informed about many o the
listed issues during my employment as an issue for termination, or
i
I expressed my concern,
then I was unprofessional is an infringement on my employment rights. Hishon v. King
Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 75 (1984). It was well known that I contested my grievances directly
with the Defendants with regard to unlawful treatment and unlawful discrimination and on any
matter that concerned my employment, so the Defendants also intentionally segregated me from
important meetings, and threatened me directly during meetings where I made protected
complaints. The Defendant Institution is a federally funded workplace that is rife with
discrimination and EEO violations that the courts have allowed to proliferate to the detriment o
minorities and women. The organization has been a dangerous workplace for me, other
minorities, minority women, and other protected classes
o
people, all reasonable United States
citizens, as we
do
our jobs in a workplace that is very polarized by race and gender, the
corporation is representative o Caucasian interests from Boards o Trustees to administrative
personnel with minimal minority representation, i any and so where even in cases o egregious
unlawful conduct, the specific Caucasians and the Caucasian organization cannot be held
accountable to the law or intent
o
the law in largely Caucasian courts, to afford people like me
the legal protections from harm and inequitable attacks on our prosperity and freedoms. It's as
i
my success is seen as a personal failure for the larger Caucasian population, not just the
Defendants who likely fear my success in my profession after all the obviously false allegations
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page10 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
11/26
they made to pretextually terminate my employment , destroy my reputation, and end my career
through unlawful discrimination against me.
The concepts
o
equality are logical, sound, and rational, yet it's impossible to engage in
a reasonable manner on issues o importance to minorities, as seen with the events during the
course o my employment with Defendants, and during this litigation. The Defendants had
stated that the reasons for the termination
o
my employment consisted
o
the six specific reasons
that they provided in the termination letter, I successfully rebutted the Defendants proffered non-
discriminatory reasons for termination
o
my employment, meeting the standard required
to
succeed at the summary judgment stage. The court is incomprehensibly arguing that it can cast
aspersions on my character and employment performance by comparing myself to myself, rather
than comparing
my
performance to others not in my protected class. Judge McMahon is arguing,
and not with subtlety, that I need be a model minority
9
to enjoy legal protections, not that I
need to be like others not in my protected class
10
I cannot meet standards
o
the unrealistic
discriminatory ideologies o perfection expected o Asian minorities by courts and whites,
as
the
defense against discrimination in hostile courts in prima facie cases litigated under Title VII o
Civil Rights Act o 1964 or the New York State Human Rights Law or NYC Human Rights Law
at any stage
o
the litigation11 l2.
9
Cheryan, Sapna, and Galen
V
Bodenhausen. When positive stereotypes threaten intellectual
performance: The psychological hazards o model minority status. Psychological Science 11.5 (2000):
399-402.
10
Suzuki, Bob H. Revisiting the model minority stereotype: Implications for student affairs practice and
higher education. New directions
for
student services 2002.97 (2002): 21-32.
11
Bijlani, Jagdish J. Neither here nor there: Creating a legally and politically distinct South Asian racial
identity. Berkeley a Raza L
16
(2005): 53 at 58, 60-63.
12
Dhingra, Pawan H. Being American Between Black and White: Second-Generation Asian American
Professionals' Racial Identities. Journal of sian merican Studies 6.2 (2003): 117-147 at 132-133.
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page11 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
12/26
The evidence that I presented to defend my case, when weighed against the moving party,
the Defendants, it is impossible to have awarded the summary judgment to the defendants and I
preserved many objections for appeals as a litigant. As the non-moving party, I met this
challenge by submitting evidence in the form
of
genuine factual issues that can be resolved only
by a finder
of
fact because they may reasonably be resolved in favor
of
either party 477 U.S. at
251. Thus, in ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the judge must view the evidence
presented through the prism of the substantive evidentiary burden. This conclusion is mandated
by the nature
of
this determination. The question here is whether a
jury
could reasonably find
either that the plaintiff proved his case by the quality and quantity
of
evidence required by the
governing law or that he did not . quoting Liberty Lobby., Inc., 477 U.S. at 254. Judge
McMahon's decision also contained de novo allegations that are farcical and untrue, and then,
she flipped out that she does not want me to appeal, because
of
these ongoing fraudulent
actions against me, that the Circuit Court will find shocking and impermissible. To be sure,
Judge McMahon's analysis
of
the evidence, disputes
of
fact, and application to the causes
of
action were wrong in Varughese v. Mount Sinai Med. Ctr., No. 12-CV-8812, 2015 WL 1499618,
at *44 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 27, 2015), as was her labeling me lazy , which the records clearly argues
against, as well.
I think that the federal courts act to normalize segregated systems
13
where I a woman
physician oflndian National Origin, a professional with extensive education who is licensed with
New
York
State Department
of
Health, with years
of
training in Anatomic and Clinical
13
Wei, Virginia
W.
Asian Women and Employment Discrimination: Using Intersectionality Theory to
Address Title VII Claims Based on Combined Factors of Race, Gender and National Origin.
CL
Rev 37
(1995):
771at780 812
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page12 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
13/26
Pathology, can be callously subjected to the ire o coworkers who routinely consume alcohol at
work contrary to hospital rules with leftover alcohol at work for them on standby, the creation
o
false allegations against me by my supervisors that when contested was met with allegations that
I am unprofessional , where I am disciplined for the conduct o others and even with updated
knowledge
o
their involvement and their admissions o guilt, the Defendants continued to
fabricate various allegations against me, I am excluded from certain material advantages with
increased pay and responsibilities, rather I am marginalized through whatever means they can
employ, my accounting o the events that occurred to me are unjustifiably criticized and my
statements and I am again described as unprofessional
14
because I do not take responsibility
for actions o the guilty parties, and I am subjected
to
further final warnings that are
disciplinary actions, and in closed meetings, I felt a degree
o threat against my person with the
demeanor, threatening language and tone o the individual Defendants and it's specific proxies
that had been an ongoing theme o terror for me
as
a petite woman who is 5ft1 in and 110-116lbs,
and my professional medical license is put into jeopardy and though, I am in good standing, I am
excluded from every job, and my professional career beyond residency are going to be filled with
long discussions on the events
o
the wrongful termination
o
my contracted employment, these
are illegal activities given the protections afforded in Title VII o the Civil Rights Act o 1964 per
Hishon
v
King Spalding. 467 U.S. 69 (1984).
14
Professionalism and the medical professional's code o conduct is a specific criteria, the definition
o
which is provided in the Motion in Opposition to the motion for summary judgment.
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page13 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
14/26
As discussed above and in my previously filed motion for pro bono counsel, I have a
meritorious and important case that I can argue effectively as a Pro Se litigant
5
or with the
assistance
of
a pro bono counsel who is knowledgable, intelligent, ethical/professional,
experienced, capable, and preferably, a labor and civil rights attorney. In federal courts with
employment civil rights cases, there is a significant issue
of
inadequate legal representation
available to professional minorities and Asian American Plaintiffs
6
, despite our cases being
meritorious on both substantive questions of law and the relief sought from litigation on
egregious violations
of
our civil rights protections by private parties. I do not want the current
trend
of
underrepresentation by legal counsels
of
professional minorities such as myself, through
no fault
of
mine, to disadvantage me from a case management and mediation program known as
Civil Appeals Management Plan (CAMP) in the Second Circuit that is currently unavailable to
Pro Se litigants
7
. Alternatively, if the court cannot afford
to
waive the fees for me and/or it does
not assign me with a pro bono counsel, I will borrow the money to pay the fee and proceed with
the appeals from that point onwards.
5
Rosenbloom, Jonathan D. Exploring Methods to Improve Management and Fairness in Pro Se Cases:
A Study of the Pro Se Docket in the Southern District of ew York.
Fordham urban law journal
30.305
(2002). There is no extensive research to support the prevailing notion of negative effect of pro se
litigants in the courts and there is evidence that represented case are more time consuming and had the
most docket entries at 312-314, 358-359
6
Myrick, Amy, Robert L Nelson, and Laura Beth Nielson. Race and representation: racial disparities in
legal representation for employment civil rights plaintiffs. NYU
Legis. Pub. Pol y
5 (2012): 705 at
712-715
7
Laural
L
Hooper, Dean Miletich, and Angelia Levy. Case management procedures in the Federal
Courts ofAppeals. Washington, DC: Federal Judicial Center, 2011 at 37-41.
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page14 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
15/26
Exhibit 1
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page15 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
16/26
pplication to ppeal In Forma Pauperis
v.
Afwv{
} ; ~
~ ~
Appeal No.
_1_5-_13_2_8
uvkf
i
v
ffidavit in Support o Motion
I swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that,
because of my poverty, I cannot prepay the docket
fees
of
my appeal or post a bond for them.
I
believe
I
am
entitled to redress. I swear or affirm under
penalty
of
perjury under United States laws that my
answers
on
this form are true and correct. (28
u.s.c. 1746; 18 u.s.c.
l / t .
Signed L
My issues on
appeal
are: (required):
District Court or Agency No.
__ 1-=2=--8=8=-1.:..=2=-----
Instructions
Complete all questions in this application and then
sign it. Do not leave any blanks: if the answer to a
question is O, none, or not applicable (N/A),
write that response.
f
you need more space to answer
a question
or
to explain your answer, attach a separate
sheet of paper identified with your name, your case's
docket number, and the question number.
Date: {
~ ~ 1 . . o _ t _ S _
1.
For both
you
nd
your
spouse estimate the average amount
of
money received from each
of
he following sources during thep st 12 months. Adjust any amount that was received
weekly biweekly quarterly semiannually or
annually to show the monthly rate. Use
gross amounts that
is
amounts before any deductions for taxes or otherwise.
Income source verage monthly mount expected next
amount during the past
month
12
months
.L...
You
You
Soofue
z
Employment
$
~
$
{ f.-..o._
$
Self-employment
$
r ~
$ $
tJ--
$
Income from real property
such
as
$
r J ' ~
$
$
rental income)
- I -
121ou2013 sec
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page16 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
17/26
Interest and dividends
t ~
J
Gifts
'Ja>O
Alimony
f.J',,....,._
~ M L
Child support
Npl\ >...
~
Retirement (such as social security,
r J ~
rJ6\\Q
pensions, annuities, insurance)
Disability (such as social security,
J ~
insurance payments)
Unemployment payments
t J ~ Il \U
Public-assistance (such as welfare)
Nrt
Other (specify):
tJ,vz_
Total monthly income:
9' _ {c JOO
0
Sil
0
2 List your employment historyfor the p st two years, most recent employer first. (Gross
monthly p y is before taxes or other deductions.)
Employer
Address
Dates of Gross
employment monthly pay
N""L
3.
Listyour spouse s employment historyfor the
p st
two years, most recent employer first.
(Gross monthly
p y
s before taxes or other deductions.)
Employer
Address Dates of Gross
employment monthly pay
~
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page17 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
18/26
4
How much cash do you and
your
spouse
have?
J O ~
Below state any money you
or
your spouse have in bank accounts or in any other
financial institution.
Financial Institution
Type of Account
Amount you have Amount your
spouse has
qyou
are a prisoner seeking to appeal a
judgment
in a civil action or proceeding you must
attach a statement certified by the appropriate institutional officer showing ll receipts
expenditures and balances during the last six months in your institutional accounts. f
you
have multiple accounts perhaps because
you
have been in multiple institutions attach
one
certified statement
of
each account.
5. Lis t the assets
and
their values which
you
own or your spouse owns. Do not list clothing
and ordinary household urnishings.
Home
~ I A
Other real estate
i_{lt
Motor vehicle
1
JMPr
(Value)
(Value)
(Value)
Make and year:
Model:
Registration :
Motor vehicle 2
Other assets Other assets
(Value)
(Value) (Value)
Make and year:
Model:
Registration :
- 3 -
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page18 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
19/26
6 State every person business or organization owing
you
or your spouse money nd the
amount owed
Person owing you or your spouse
Amount owed to you Amount owed to your
money spouse
7
State the persons who rely on
you or your
spouse for support.
Name [or,
i
a minor
(i.e.,
underage), initials only] Relationship Age
8.
Estimate the average monthly expenses of o nd
your
family. Show separately the
amounts p id by your spouse. Adjust any payments that are made weekly biweekly
quarterly semiannually
or
annually to show the monthly rate.
You
Y o ~ s e
Rent or home-mortgage payment (including lot rented for
mobile home)
Y e s R N o
NAA
Are real estate taxes included?
Is property insurance included?
Yes No
Utilities (electricity, heating fuel, water, sewer, and telephone)
i
Home maintenance (repairs and upkeep)
> J 4 \11\L.
Food bO
Clothing
~
Laundry and dry-cleaning
~ . e .
Medical and dental expenses
J ~
- 4 -
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page19 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
20/26
Transportation (not including motor vehicle payments)
Recreation, entertainment, newspapers, magazines, etc.
l
S 0
Insurance (not deducted from wages or included in mortgage payments)
Homeowner's or renter's:
72.
Life:
_ _
Health:
Motor vehicle:
0
--------------
Other:
D
Taxes (not deducted from wages
or
included in mortgage
D
payments) (specify):
Installment payments
Motor Vehicle:
__Q_
Credit card (name):
0
Department store (name):
0
Other:
0
Alimony, maintenance, and support paid to others
0
Regular expenses for operation o business, profession, or
0
farm (attach detailed statement)
Other (specify):
D
Total monthly expenses:
s)l
4U
so
9.
Do you expect any major changes to your monthly income or expenses or in your assets
or liabilities during the next 12 months?
0ves N o f yes, describe on an attached sheet.
S ~ ~
d ~
10.
Have you spent- or willyoul' ' fpenl'nJ-any money for expenses or attorney fees n
connection with this lawsuit?
Yes No
f es how much? 40
ooo
-
~ Y I , ~
- 5 -
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page20 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
21/26
11 Provide any other information that will help explain whyyou cannot p y the docket fees
for your appeal
12 Identify the city
nd
state
of
your legal residence
State tJ j
Your daytime phone number:
tofr
'Z- >> 7> 6
Yourage:
34 Y o u r y e a r s o f s c h o o l i n g ~ ..{);>
Last four digits o your social security number: o\ f(o
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page21 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
22/26
9. I have student loans that have been compounding interest for extensive periods of
time on which I cannot
afford to make
a payment I
have
tried
to
obtain various
employment
in
my profession
and
I cannot because
of
the illegal actions of the
Defendants to destroy
my
career
and
employability in
my
profession through falsified
allegations discrimination retaliation and hostility towards
me
for being a
woman
of
Indian
descent
and
engaging
in
legally protected
activity
~
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page22 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
23/26
Exhibit
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page23 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
24/26
I declare the following statements to be true under penalty
of
perjury.
1
I am not married.
2. I am not married to Dr. Leena Varughese.
3. I accompanied Dr. Varughese to some ofher depositions and court appearances and I have
briefly met Judge McMahon and Judge Francis during the court appearances.
4. While I accompanied Dr. Varughese to her case related events, I never misrepresented
myself as her husband, and vice versa, Dr. Varughese never referred
me
to as her husband.
5.
t
the deposition ofDr. Adrienne Jordan, her mother and she requested that I be removed to
Judge Francis, who denied that request on grounds that I could remain as a witness as Dr.
Varughese instructed.
6 I provided material support as other family and friends have given to fund Dr. Varughese s
legal expenses in the past.
7. Dr. Varughese is not gainfully employed
to
my knowledge but she actively sought
employment since the termination
ofher
employment from Mount Sinai Medical Center on
September 21, 2011.
8
To my personal knowledge, Dr. Varughese is competent and capable
of
completing her
residency and practicing as a competent physician, as I have worked with Dr. Varughese
directly, and I have recommended her to utilize any externship opportunities, since the
termination
of
her employment, to gain experience
in
Pathology.
9. My impression is that Dr. Varughese is not being given fair employment opportunities since
her filing
of
EEOC complaints. I and other doctors have repeatedly recommended Dr.
Varughese for residency positions
in
New Jersey for which she is eminently qualified for as
a professional ethical physician of
the highest caliber.
10. To my personal knowledge, Dr. Varughese has a large student loan debt and minimal assets
other than her potential wealth consistent with her career and chosen profession.
11. I
am
concerned Dr. Varughese is perceived as a threat and she has been labeled as such since
her employment with Mount Sinai Medical Center and following the termination
of
her
employment, because of
her civil rights activities and activism for her
own
civil rights and
legal protections afforded by U.S., State, and local Law, statutes and policies.
12. In my opinion, Dr. Varughese s likely potential success as a competent physician is a threat
to the credibility
of
the defendants, with further escalation against her, given my review
of
the farcical allegations in memorandum and order
on
summary judgment, containing glaring
errors
of
fact and reason.
1
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page24 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
25/26
13. I recommend immediate injunctive rel ief be granted to Dr. Varughese so she can advance in
her chosen profession, obtain her Board certifications, and begin practicing. The State
ofNY
has investigated Dr. Varughese and they found no evidence
of
wrongdoing on her part, after
multiple investigations. Dr. Varughese has a valid
NY
State medical license and NY State
has apologized to her and they have encouraged her to fmd gainful employment immediately
to mitigate her losses.
14. n my opinion, it is in the interest
of
the federal government and public that Dr. Varughese
completes the final year ofher residency program in Anatomic and Clinical Pathology with
an organization other than her former employer, because she was obviously wrongfully
terminated after she completed the labor intensive Anatomic Pathology work for Mount
Sinai Medical Center in NewYork, NY.
Rajit B.
Malliah MD
Commonwealth
of
New Jersey
County ofMiddlesex
On this, the
th
day of September, 2015, before me a notary public, the undersigned officer,
personally appeared RA-J1r
}i J6:. U
,known to me or satisfactorily proven) to be the person
whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same
for the purposes therein contained. In witness hereof, I hereunto set my hand and official
seal. O : r ~ tJIJ / a:z-=-
1 ~ ( / / / ~ o t a r y Public ~
Sworn
to and subscribed
before
me this
_ Q_day of / ( ( ] 2 0 / ~
2
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page25 of 26
7/24/2019 Filed in Forma Pauperis Court Stamped 962015 Document
26/26
UNITE
ST TES COURT OF PPE LS FORTHE SECOND CIRCUIT
CAPTION:
_ V _ a _ r u _ g ~ h _ e _ s _ e _ _L
Mount Sinai Medical
Center
et
al
CERTIFIC TE OF SERVICE
Docket
Number:
15-1328
I, L _ e _ e _ n _ a _ V _ a _ r _ u ~ g _ h _ e _ s e _ _ M _ . D _ .
hereby
certify
under
penalty of perjury
that on
(name)
_ S _ e ~ p _ t e _ m _ b _ e _ r _2_ _15 I served a copy of Motion for In forma
Pauperis
Exhibits
1
2
(date)
by (select all applicable)*
(list all documents)
D United States Mail
D Federal Express
D
Overnight
D
Facsimile
ZJ
D Hand delivery
on the following parties (complete all information
and add
additional pages as necessary):
Rory
McEvoy 405
Lexington
Avenue
NY NY
Name
Address
City
State
Name
Address City State
Name
Address
City State
Name
Address
City State
September
6 2015
sl Leena Varughese
Today s
Date
Signature
10174
Zip Code
Zip Code
Zip Code
Zip Code
If
different methods
of
service have been used on different parties, please indicate on a separate
page, the type of service used for each respective party.
Certificate of Service Form
Case 15-1328, Document 31, 09/06/2015, 1592687, Page26 of 26