Tag Archives: Dr. Usha Jain

Dr. Usha Jain for Equality in Justice for Pro Se Self-Representation

There are two sides to a lawsuit. If one is denied access to file using the same ‘system’ as the other side, that’s not “Equal Justice Under Law” as inscribed on the highest court of the land’s building. See Greene v. Frost Brown Todd, LLC, 856 F.3d 438 (6th Cir.2017) It’s unconstitutional. In Florida, state court efiling is mandatory for all parties. That is exactly how it should be in Federal Courts or the Constitution is merely a parchment with words with no meaning.

A person not represented by an attorney may file electronically only if allowed by court order or by local rule; and may be required to file electronically only by court order, or by a local rule that includes reasonable exceptions.

The self–represented litigants do not have access to an electronic system of the federal District court but it is only allowed to the one represented by a counsel thereby they are provided with the tools for safety and is not subject to clerical errors, lost and delayed mails. This is not equal access and is against the spirit of “Equal Justice Under Law” and this unlawful exception is unconstitutional and is against our democracy. There is no national uniformity per Professor
Edward H. Cooper and can be checked by clicking on the following link:
https://lawsintexas.com/electronic-filing-by-pro-se-in-federal-district-courts-should-bemandatory-as-per-state-courts/

The risk of exposure and spread of the deadly virus is increased when people are required to visit the post office to mail the paper filings as they must stand in line with those who may be infected in order to calculate and purchase postage or they must touch unsanitized self-service machines that are touched by many others each hour. Hand delivery to the court also increases exposure to other members of the public unknown to them as well as employees.
The appellate Federal Court (11th Circuit) and state court both allow filing electronically for self-representing citizens. Because electronic filing has ZERO risks of spreading COVID-19, it should be granted as an exception to prevent the spread of the deadly disease by any judge in the Federal Court.

Judge Mendoza disregarded the exceptional criteria of the national emergency and denied electronic filing. Instead, Judge Mendoza advised to mail the documents which also has inherent risk of exposure.
The risk of exposure and spread of the deadly virus is increased when people are required to visit the post office to mail the paper filings as they must stand in line with those who may be infected in order to calculate and purchase postage or they must touch unsanitized self-service machines that are touched by many others each hour. Hand delivery to the court also increases exposure to other members of the public unknown to them as well as employees.


Endorsed Federal Remand Order is not Valid Remand Order by Dr. Usha Jain

Endorsed order is a order entered in the computer and there is no document attached to it.

Federal Statutes of Congress comes under Supremacy clause and should be followed precisely without any exceptions. Judges have a fiduciary obligation to follow the statute as it is written by congress especially there is plain text in the statute without any ambiguity.

Federal Remand Order should be a written order and endorsed order is not a valid remand order which can transfer the jurisdiction from federal court to state court. Why endorsed order is not a valid remand order is explained below.

Upon careful review of the relevant statutes, case law, and procedural rules, it is evident that a valid remand order must possess certain essential elements to ensure clarity, fairness, and efficiency in the remand process. These elements typically include:

To begin with, an endorsed remand order lacks a clear and concise explanation of the court’s decision to remand the case. It is crucial that the court should outline the legal or factual grounds justifying the return of the case to the lower court. This requirement is essential for the parties to understand the legal and factual grounds upon which the remand is predicated thereby It should leave no room for ambiguity or confusion ensuring transparency. Without a clear explanation, the parties may be left with ambiguity regarding the court’s reasoning, potentially leading to confusion and delays in subsequent proceedings.

Notice to All Parties: It is essential for a valid remand order to provide notice to all parties involved in the case. Proper notice ensures that the parties are aware of the remand decision and allows the parties to prepare and participate effectively in the proceedings on remand.

 Compliance with Applicable Statutes and Rules: A valid remand order must comply with the applicable statutes, rules, and procedural requirements governing remand procedures. It should align with the jurisdiction’s legal framework and any specific provisions related to remands.

Electronic Filing Denied to Pro Se During National Emergency by a Federal Judge

Electronic Filing is denied by District Judge to Dr. Usha Jain during a national emergency and the Stay at Home order from COVID-19 in 2020.

 District Judge ignored unforeseen and exceptional circumstances during the pandemic and stay-at-home order due to COVID-19 and refused to grant electronic access which would have provided no risk of exposure to coronavirus. Federal Judge advised the Jains to submit the documents via US mail which required the Jains to go inside the post office, stand in line with the general public to get the correct postage from postal employees according to the weight of the document, and touch multiple surfaces not sanitized after each visitor. Thus, the advice of mailing increased the health risk to the Jains who are high risk as they are over age 70 with many comorbid conditions such as diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and high blood pressure. The CDC guidelines clearly identified life-threatening health risks for visiting public places including the US Post Office. The CDC also identifies the following as high risk: older people with diabetes, heart disease, and lung disease and CDC recommended preventing exposure … “to stay at home for a period of time.”  Thus, mailing instead of electronic filing significantly increases the health risks to pro se citizens over those who have hired legal representation and are thus allowed to file electronically.  The denial of the electronic mode of filing with zero exposure is frankly undeniable

Moreover, Federal Judge disregarded ADA guidelines and made the petitioner Mr. Jain with chronic pain deliver the documents for filing to the courthouse. Mr. Jain had to have surgery on his knee on August 3, 2021.

Also, when Mr. Jain could not walk and climb the stairs of the courthouse, Dr. Usha Jain had to close her emergency center to deliver the documents.

All of the above shows that a federal Judge is an Article III Judge and should not disregard unforeseen and exceptional circumstances of the global pandemic against CDC guidelines and disability against ADA guidelines. 

Denial of electronic filing during a state of emergency is a violation of Human Rights articles three and Seven.

Article 3

Right to life

Everyone has the right to life and to live in freedom and safety.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 7

Right to equality before the law

The law is the same for everyone and should be applied in the same manner to all.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Human rights are inalienable. They should not be taken away, except in specific situations and according to due process.

Inhumane Acts of Attorney Chuck David Johnson of Leesburg

Dr. Usha Jain, who is medical director for the Emergi-Care Medical Center for 31 years. Dr. Jain worked in the emergency room of a trauma hospital in Orlando and is an expert in the emergency medicine.

Dr. Jain owns a hotel in Clermont and was given a citation for the sign which had a grandfathered in status but the code officer went after the owner anyway.  Owner have an alleged fear of another Govt. agency collaborating with the Code Enforcement.

Special Master Chuck Johnson gave the order, regardless of the motion presented for an extension because of health reasons.

Owner feel that Chuck David Johnson who is the Special Master for the Lake County is biased due to  Indian owner of a small business. Owners also feel that Special Master Chuck David Johnson may have some collaboration with attorney Rick Strong who has a personal vendetta against Dr. Jain. Special Master Chuck Johnson may have done this inhumane acts due to connection with Rick Strong. Chuck David Johnson an attorney of Leesburg ignored the motion of Dr. Jain for conflict of interest.

Dr. Jain decided to run for the Governor of State of Florida for that reason and signed up after the hearing on May 18, 2016 in Lake County with Chuck David Johnson.

 

Proactive Dr. Usha Jain & Disqualification of Chuck David Johnson

Dr. Usha Jain is the medical director and her goal is to serve the medical needs of the community.

Dr. Jain was given a wrongful violation which was defended by Dr. Jain without an attorney.

Dr. Usha Jain decided to run for County Commissioner District 1 which is her community she has been serving for 30 years.

Special Master Chuck Johnson gave the order of:

  1. fine of $250 dollars fine for the structures which is unsafe which is totally wrong.
  2. Fine of $50 dollars a day for the sign which was already repaired but he wants it to be removed because Chuck David Johnson thinks he can be a dictator in America.
  3. Dr. Jain is proactive and will countless hours to prove that Special Master is biased and is influenced by Rick Strong whose goal is to hurt Dr. Jain whatever it takes.
  4. Dr. Jain is also running for Orange County Commissioner District 1.

Amanda Ober News Reporter Anchor Wesh 2 Violates Fiduciary duty

Amanda Ober violates fiduciary duty to the citizens by violating the fiduciary duty to the citizens. News anchor should not be violating such duties to the citizens.  Amanda Ober’s duty was to giv ethe right news which was not biased and opinioneted. Moreover Amand Ober never talked to the owner and amanda Ober released the news by saying she tracked down the owner which she never did. Lying in the news is not acceptable for whatever reason.

Dr. Usha Jain was very devastated about Amanda Ober’s wrong news. How  Amanda Ober can get away with these kind of news. Jury will be out.

https://youtu.be/8vgGbvTL-CQ

 

Amanda Ober News Biased Unilateral about Jayma Ambe Hotel

Amanda Ober gave the news about Jayma Ambe hotel  few months ago. Dr. Usha Jain was very devastated that how the news anchor Amanda Ober can give the wrong news and bring Dr. Jain in the picture. Amanda Ober’s news was totally wihtout any facts. Dr. Jain is blessed to do the community service for all the urgent care needs and why Amanda Ober needed Dr. Jain in Amanda Ober’s  news. Dr. Jain is running for the commissioner of Orange County and Amanda Ober brought Dr. Jain in story of the hotel. VERY INTERESTING!!

Dr. Jain warned Amanda not to do the wrong things but Amanda Ober did not care as if somebody ordered her to do the story.

Anyway, Dr. Jain is doing her story now as Dr. Jain’s goal is to do her medicine and not ot rebutt Amanda. Dr. Jain decided that when she has time she will take care of the situation properly.

This is the video of the man and you can see that Amanda Ober was wrong.

https://youtu.be/xRqFwG_9BUU

 

 

Amanda Ober News Anchor Wesh 2 Political News of Dr. Jain

Amanda Ober Wesh 2 news is it political driven. Dr. Usha Jain who is an expert doctor in emergency medicine and anti-aging medicine was in news of Amanda Ober about Jayma Ambe Hotel. Amanda already knew or should have known that Dr. Jain is not the owner of the hotel. Amanda Ober’s wrong news about Dr. Jain had to be politically driven. Dr. Usha jain is running for the commissioner and why she had to bring that issue in the news., ONLY TIME WILL TELL THE CITIZENS.  This is a fight of Dr. Jain for truth, honesty and principles and let us see who would be the winner.

Amanda Weber news anchor wesh 2 news
Dr. Usha Jain running for commissioner for 2016 district 1

 

 

Amanda Ober Wesh 2 News not Trustworthy

Amanda Ober is a news anchor but her news are not trustworthy. She gave the news about Dr. Usha Jain who is an expert in emergency medicine and anti-aging. Amanda tried to her best to degrade but Dr. Jain is not an owner of the hotel. Amanda tried to walk in DR. jain’s  medical center and tried to ask her questions even when Dr. Usha Jain indicated that she was working. Amand Ober did not wait for the owner at the Palace hotel and wanted to get the information at the medical center. How horrible!!

 

 

Complaints of Amanda Ober WESH 2 news by Dr. Usha Jain 32819

Dr. Usha Jain is a medical doctor and does not own any hotel which was shown by Amanda Ober in the news. She went after Dr. Jain to give the publicity of Dr. Jain. Amanda Ober had no common sense and did not go in the County record to show who is the owner. If she wanted to give the news then her duty was to talk to the owner and not to harass Dr. Usha Jain who deals with the emergencies all day. Dr. Jains patient complained about Wesh 2 news parking on the side walk. Dr. Jain had to stop her work and had to go outside to talk to Amanda who was parked on the side walk.  Who gave her an authority to her to park on the side walk.

Dr. Usha Jain is planning to complaint about Amanda Ober to the higher authority. Dr. Jain’s priority is the patient care and not to complaint about Amanda Ober. Dr. Jain feels that if the time is given to Dr. Jain then Dr. Jain would be glad to complaint about Amanda Ober.  Do not trust the news of WESH 2 and a prime example is wrong news by Amanda Ober.