Tag Archives: medical doctor

Electronic Filing in a Federal Court and Equal Access to All by Dr. Jain

Dr. Jain is a dedicated and passionate physician who serves the community of Dr. Phillips for 37 years. Dr. Jain worked in the emergency room at Orlando Health. Dr. Jain is going beyond the scope of medicine to help citizen to get equal access to the Federal Courts.

In the spirit of equality under the law, Dr. Jain supports a change in rules that allows people who self-represent in court to have access to the electronic filing system.  Dr. Jain is working with Rules Committee to change the rules so no favors in federal courts.

The right to self-representation is guaranteed in the United States Constitution, but that right would be meaningless if people represented by a paid counsel are treated differently by the courts than those who self-represent. During the Covid-19 pandemic, many people feared for their lives and the lives of their families knowing that contracting the virus could be a death sentence. Many self-representing people had to put themselves, and their families, in harm’s way by filing a motion in person in a courthouse or at a post office. This reality is far from equal access to justice.

Before the pandemic, the reality was still far from equal justice. Self-representing people may have still faced barriers to filing a motion in person. They may not have had regular transportation to a courthouse or post office. They may have had to work during business hours without the ability to leave, even briefly, to file a motion. 

It is necessary to allow self-representing people access to the electronic filing system to promote equal access to justice under the law. Dr. Jain has been working to bring the notion of equal justice for all into reality. Dr. Mendoza in Federal Court denied granting electronic filing during the national emergency from COVID-19, especially during stay-at-home orders when people were working remotely. CDC considers the post office as a high-risk place and to mail a document with many papers requires one to go inside the post office, stand in the line with the general public and touch many surfaces which are high risk

Electronic Filing for Self-Representing Citizens Dr. Jain

Dr. Usha Jain is an expert in Emergency medicine, anti-aging and regenerative medicine and also pediatricts.

Dr. Usha Jain is very proud American citizen who migrated from India after getting married to her husband who had just finished the masters in Engineering from Youngstown Ohio University.

Dr. Usha Jain has defended many frivolous cases of her husband’s hotels in the past and truly believes that frivolous cases should be come to an end.

Dr. Jain and Mr. Jain had represented themselves in the Federal Court and were successful by their hard work.

The Federal Court allows self-representation but does not allow electronic filing through the computer. The attorney can file electronically but self-representing citizens are barred from electronic filing.

Dr. Jain is helping the self-representing citizens to be able to file electronically during COVID-19 Pandemic to prevent exposure to Coronavirus and to save the lives of the citizens.

Dr. Jain has submitted her reasons to Rulemaking committee to get electronic filing during Covid-19 pandemic.

The letter submitted is as below:

1
Dr. Usha Jain, Board certified in Emergency Medicine, Anti-aging, and Pediatrics
Date June 23, 2020
Rebecca A. Womelsdorf, Secretary
Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure
United States Judicial Conference
One Columbus Circle, NE
Washington, D.C. 20544
Via email: [email protected]
Re: Comment on Emergency Rulemaking and URGENT Efforts to prevent the spread of deadly COVID-19 and related deaths
Respected Ms. Womelsdorf:
As a concerned board-certified emergency medicine physician, I respectfully request that you, as a member of the rulemaking committee, facilitate an administrative change allowing self-representing people to file electronically in the Federal Court so that self-representing people have equal access to filing and receive the real-time orders of the court. This is especially relevant during the current tragic times of global pandemic and the spread of COVID-19. 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 for spreading COVID-19
and thus could help prevent the spread of the deadly disease, I urge you to allow the Federal Court, by administrative order, to provide the electronic filing option to self-representing citizens.
There are GUIDELINES set forth by the CDC, FL Surgeon General, President Trump and Florida Governor DeSantis, and many other leaders and experts to prevent the spread of coronavirus. These guidelines have included closing government offices when possible and having many employees work remotely and electronically.
Electronic filing for self-representing citizens would also help those with medical conditions,
physical limitations, and handicapped status. It would “level the playing field” for those who choose not to hire an attorney.


I humbly request that you evaluate and use logical reasoning for equal opportunity to prose litigants. This would increase judicial efficiency, lessen hardship due to medical disability and now to protect the safety of lives of prose litigants, especially those over 70 with comorbid conditions and high risk of mortality.
Gratefully yours,
Dr. Usha Jain
Compelling Reasons for the Changes in our Democracy
Inherent Prejudice to Prose Litigants due to Risk of Safety of Lives, Hardship due to Medical Disability, Real-Time Lag in receiving the Orders, and Unequal Opportunity to Access the Court.
In Federal Court in Orlando, electronic filing is only for attorneys and the only option for prose is via postal mail or hand delivery for filing motions and receiving orders. This inequality has inherent prejudice to citizens who are representing themselves in the court (pro se).
Following are the compelling concerns:
A. Risk of the safety of lives from exposure from COVID-19
Not allowing prose litigants to file electronically conflicts with the GUIDELINES set forth by the CDC, FL Surgeon General, President Trump, and Governor DeSantis to prevent the spread of coronavirus as well reckless disregard to lives of the citizens from exposure to
COVID-19.
1. Mailing exposes risk for coronavirus as one has to stand in the line with the general public to get an estimate of postage for the weight of papers which varies with every filing;
2. Plaintiffs have to leave in fear from exposure of coronavirus;
3. Delivery to the courthouse has a similar higher risk
The above risks are higher if a prose litigant is in a high-risk group due to their age and medical conditions like diabetes, high blood pressure, kidney, and heart condition.
B. Prejudice due to Medically disable prose litigants and Undue Hardship:
1. This prejudice toward medically disabled litigants is against the guidelines to accommodate disabled citizens, as the disabled person still has to drive and walk either to the post office or courthouse. In our democracy, citizens should be aided in their path for justice and accommodations should be made for those with physical and/or health issues so that they may obtain the same justice as those without such issues.
2. If the accommodation of electronic filing can be granted at the discretion of the judge, it seems reasonable that this is an appropriate accommodation for those with a medical disability.
C. Prejudice and risk of Technical Default due to not Receiving the Orders Timely Prose litigants are subject to the risk of lost mail, clerical error, misdeliveries, etc. Prose litigants receive the order in the mail which may take several days and may not come in the mail. Once again, this is not equal access. Prose litigants are penalized for not having access to
electronic delivery of the court order. Those represented by counsel are given this electronic access and are NOT subject to that risk.
D. Unequal Justice and Violation of First Amendment Rights
The prose citizens should be allowed equal access to electronic filing. Granting access only to attorneys is unwise since it is attorneys who are least in need of such service; rather, the pro se litigants who might have mobility or cost issues would need such access the most. This is a
violation of the 1st Amendment rights of the citizens.
Also, for the service of the Order, in electronic filing, the document automatically comes to your email address and would be seen right away vs waiting for the mail for several days risking the physical loss of the mail as it changes hands frequently. Attorneys get more time to file; they are permitted to file by midnight vs prose citizens who have to reach to the court by 4 pm to avoid default. Mail also has uncertainty and the extra
burden of cost (legal carriers or mailing by certified mail).
Because lawyers and courts are so intertwined, there seems to be a bias that legal professionals are needed for access to the court. This is neither democracy nor our law but maybe a bias. The prose citizens should be allowed equal access to the court system by electronic filing.
The prose citizens should be given equal access to the current electronic filing procedures afforded to others, and this is especially critical during a time of national pandemic and threat of exposure to deadly COVID-19 virus. The infrastructure for electronic filing exists, the prose citizens who own technology required to utilize the system in place for electronic filing should be able to use the court system currently being used by counsel for the benefit of other citizens as well as by some other citizens approved by a judge. Finally, lack of equal access opens the door for manipulation of technical default for prose citizens. If some judges have predetermined opinion regarding prose litigants, they can refuse electronic access to prose and the case can be easily be manipulated for technical default for
prose citizens. Other judges grant access to prose litigants, further deteriorating equal access for some. Some have been denied equal access even after showing undue medical hardship and among COVID-19 risks during a stay-at-home order.
The following are the statements by other people in favor of electronic filing:
From: Buck Maker
To: Rules Committee Secretary
Subject: emergency rules
Date: Monday, May 11, 2020, 8:17:35 AM
Rather than use the pandemic to make access to courts more restricted than it is now, you might make it more open by allowing all plaintiffs to file electronically, without the favor of lawyers, or fear of the pro se, especially, who are routinely, treated like “trash” in the notorious words of
your former Justice Posner.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
____________________________________________________________________________
From: David Michaels
To: Rules Committee Secretary
Subject: Proposed Rule Amendment
Date: Thursday, May 07, 2020, 12:32:55 PM
Dear US Courts:
Please pass a rule that requires all district courts to allow any party to a proceeding to electronically file documents in their proceeding, even if they are self-represented parties acting pro se. The WDNY has a local rule that requires prose litigants to file documents either in person or by mail. This creates a disadvantage for a party when there are time constraints or tight filing deadlines. Thank you,
David Michaels, J.D
_____________________________________________________________________________
From: Lemuel Bray
To: Rules Committee Secretary
Subject: Prose CM/ECF privileges
Date: Thursday, May 07, 2020, 12:21:15 PM
Recommend Prose litigants be granted CM/ECF privileges if they meet rules and decorum in filing in a trial period. No frivolous filing accepted and frivolous and impropriety filings a reason for withdrawal of the privilege on the order of a clerk.
Lemuel C Bray
_____________________________________________________________________________
From: Andrew Straw
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2020 12:38 PM
To: Rules Committee Secretary
Subject: COVID-19 and US Courts Rule Changes
I am interested principally in prose litigants and disabled court participants.
All court filings should be electronic (email or CM/ECF) for all prose filers.
All prose litigants should automatically be enrolled in “one free look.”

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.

 

 

 

Amanda Ober Invalid News & Illegal Acts WESH 2 & Dr. Usha Jain

Dr. Usha Jain is a medical doctor and not a hotel owner. Amanda Ober barged in Dr. Jain’s office Ober and wanted to talk to Dr. Jain. Dr. Usha Jain informed Amanda Ober that  Dr. Usha Jain is working in the emergency center. Dr. Usha Jain explained to Amanda Ober that Dr. Usha Jain has an ethical obligation and cannot talk to news people while she is working. Amanda Ober insisted that she talke to Dr. Jain at that time. Dr. Jain refused and told Amanda Ober that Dr. Usha Jain is not the owner of the hotel. Dr. Jain also pointed to Amanda that she should look in the record who is the owner and talke to the owner. She made inconvenient for Dr. Usha Jain and distrcted from her practice. Amanda Ober waited for Dr. Usha Jain outside and parked the car on the side walk and gross of the clinic. Dr Usha Jain’s patient who was seen for the chest pain informed Dr. Jain that car of  Channel 2 news is parked on the side walk.

At that point, Dr. Jain was very frustrated when Dr. Usha Jain saw the car parked illegally on sidewalk and her clinic area. Dr. Jain told her that she is parking illegally.  Amanda Ober was accompanied by a gentleman who started recording Dr. Jain. Dr. Jain told Amanda Ober that Dr. Jain is not giving the permission for recording but the gentle man continued to record.

Later on Dr. Jain asked for the information including the name of the gentleman but Amanda refused to give the identity.

How horrible to do these kind of acts by  Amanda Ober of Wesh 2 News