You are on page 1of 28


Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 1 of 28 Page ID #:1392



622 WALL STREET 20i1.l~ I3 P~ 4~ ~b
90014 - ` ._'3
3 ..
(562) 826-9088 ~ , . . .. _ ~ .~:,7


9 Plaintiff,
13 Defendant.
The prohibition ofnon-consensual human medical experimentation has long been
internationally recognized and is consistent with the Hippocratic Oath, in which doctors
swore to "never do harm to an.~." Treating men "as less than beasts" through medical ~,
experimentation is no less " perverse" and "distorted" today than it was during the Nuremberg
The Plaintiff in this case stands as a "human test subject" who the Defendants carried
out illegal experiments without the knowledge, consent, or informed consent of the Plaintiff.
Funding for many of these experiments is provided by the United States government;
to include the United States military, the Central Intelligence Agency, and/or private
corporations involved with military activities.
The Plaintiff submits to the Court medical records that reflect the Plaintiff has
experienced exposure to chemical and biological weapons (to include the infection of deadly
or debilitating diseases), human radiation experiments, surgical experiments, interrogation

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 2 of 28 Page ID #:1393

and torture experiments and test involving mind control among others.
This case is a representative sampling of the continued and despicable human rights
3 violations that took place in the form of non-consensual research and human medical
4 experimentation against the Plaintiff by the Defendants beginning in 2008.
5 The U.S. government has "formally waived sovereign immunitX," yet this Court,
6 "shamefully" acts to deny the Plaintiff his day in court.
8 Title 50, Chapter 32 of the United States Code 1520a -Restrictions on use of human
9 subjects for testing of chemical or biological agents states:
to (a)Prohibited Activities The Secretary of Defense may not conduct (directly or by
11 contract)
12 (1) any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on

13 a civilian population; or

14 (2)any other testing of a chemical agent or biological agent on human subjects.

15 (b)Exceptions Subject to subsections (c),(d), and (e), the prohibition in subsection (a

16 does not apply to a test or experiment carried out for any of the following purposes:

l~ (1) Any peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical,

agricultural, industrial, or research activity.

(2) Any purpose that is directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or
biological weapons and agents.
(3)Any law enforcement purpose, including any purpose related to riot control.
(c)Informed consent required
The Secretary of Defense may conduct a test or experiment described in subsection (b)
only if informed consent to the testing was obtained from each human subject in advance of
the testing on that subject.
(d)Prior notice to Congress
Not later than 30 days after the date of final approval within the Department of
~ Defense of plans for any experiment or study to be conducted by the Department of Defense

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 3 of 28 Page ID #:1394

(whether directly or under contract) involving the use of human subjects for the testing of a
chemical agent or a biological agent, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee
3 on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
4 Representatives areport setting forth a full accounting of those plans, and the experiment or
5 study may then be conducted only after the end ofthe 30 -day period beginning on the date
6 such report is received by those committees.
(e)`Biological agent" defined in this section, the term "biological agent" means any
8 micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses, fungi, rickettsiac, or protozoa), pathogen, or
9 infectious substance, and any naturally occurring, bioengineered, or synthesized component
to of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious substance, whatever its origin or method
11 of production, that is capable of causing
12 (1) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant, or

13 another living organism;

14 (2)deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or materials of any kind; or

15 (3) deleterious alteration of the environment.

16 For an individual to give valid informed consent, three components must be present:

l~ disclosure, capacity and voluntariness.

While Disclosure requires the researcher to supply the subject with the information

necessary to make an autonomous decision, the investigators must ensure that subjects have
adequate comprehension of the information provided. This latter requirement implies that the
consent form be written in lay language suited for the comprehension skills of subject
population, as well as assessing the level of understanding during the meeting.
Capacity pertains to the ability of the subject to both understand the information
provided and form a reasonable judgment based on the potential consequences of his/her
Voluntariness refers to the subject's right to freely exercise his/her decision making
without being subjected to external pressure such as coercion, manipulation, or undue

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 4 of 28 Page ID #:1395

In this instant action the Defendants failed to obtain the consent of the Plaintiff and
z rather subjected the Plaintiff to "external pressure such as coercion, manipulation and undue
3 influence" for being a whistleblower.
4 When obtaining informed consent the Defendants capture and manage informed
5 consents while utilizing hospital management systems that typically use paper-based consent
6 forms which are scanned and stored in a document handling system after obtaining the
necessary signatures. Hospital systems and research organizations are adopting an electronic
8 way of capturing informed consents to enable indexing, to improve comprehension, search
9 and retrieval of consent data, thus enhancing the ability to honor to patient intent and identify
to willing research participants.
it However, in this instance, despite repeated requests, the Defendants have failed to
12 produce any informed consents that authorized them to perform any experiments on the
13 Plaintiff.

14 Per DoD Directive 5240.1-R, Department of Defense, Procedures Governing the

15 Activities ofDoD Intelligence Components that Affect United States Persons, Chapter 13,

16 Page 58-59, states:



This procedure applies to experimentation on human subjects if such experimentation
is conducted by or on behalf of a DoD intelligence component. This procedure does not apply
to experimentation on animal subjects.
C13.2.1. Experimentation in this context means any research or testing activity
involving human subjects that may expose such subjects to the possibility of permanent or
temporary injury (including physical or psychological damage and damage to the reputation
of such persons) beyond the risks of injury to which such subjects are ordinarily exposed in
their daily lives.

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 5 of 28 Page ID #:1396

C 13.2.2. Experimentation is conducted on behalf of a DoD intelligence component if ii

is conducted under contract to that component or to another DoD Component for the benefit
ofthe intelligence component or at the request of such a component regardless of the
existence of a contractual relationship.
C13.2.3. Human subjects in this context includes any person whether or not such
person is a United States person.
C 13.3.1. Experimentation on human subjects conducted by or on behalf of a DoD
intelligence component may be undertaken only with the informed consent of the subject, in
to accordance with guidelines issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, setting
11 out conditions that safeguard the welfare of such subjects.
12 C13.3.2. DoD intelligence components may not engage in or contract for

13 experimentation on human subjects without approval of the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of

14 Defense, or the Secretary or Under Secretary of a Military Department, as appropriate.

15 On February 9, 2017, the Plaintiff attempted to file a "Stipulated Protection Order"

16 (Docket No. 77-1), however, the Court on its own measures "received bud did not file" the

l~ order. The Stipulated Protective Order were to maintain the counts and allegations against the

same Defendants from the original complaint but were to add additional Defendants to

include; the Federal Bureau of Investi ~ation (FBI), the Central Intelli~ence Agency (CIA),
the National Security Agency(NSA),the Office of Special Counsel(OSC), the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),the Department of Defense(DOD),the
Department of Energ_Y (DOE), the Department of Health and Human Services(HHS),the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration(NASA),the Defense Advanced Research
Proiects Agenc~(DARPA),the SRO Housing Corporation to include its agents, officers and
employees both (past and present), and the Volunteers of America to include its agents,
officers and employees both (past and present) to name a few. Additionally, this Stipulated
Protection Order would most likely add additional counts and allegations.
The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants actions have placed the Plaintiff in harm's

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 6 of 28 Page ID #:1397

way by using advanced biomedical technology. The Defendants to include its components,
partners, and third party subcontractors to include both private and public corporate health
3 care providers who contract with the government agencies are not entitled to qualified
4 immunity. See McDuffie v. Hooper, 982 F. Supp. 817(M.D. Fla. 1996); Hartman v
5 Correctional Medical Services, Inc.,
6 On February 10, 2017, Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar wrote saying "Failure to comply
with material provisions of the sample protective order on the Courts Procedures and
8 Schedules. Not signed by defense counsel" and on February 15, 2017, Jason K. Axe, Defense
9 Counsel, Department of Justice wrote saying "Mr. Mitchell, Thank you for your email.
to Defendant does not agree with the stipulated protective order and therefore will not sign it.
11 Sincerely, Jason K. Axe, Assistant U.S. Attorney." Yet, despite a well pleaded Stipulated
12 Protection Order, this Court to include the Department of Justice still denied the Plaintiffs

13 request to be protected.

14 On December 28, 2016, under Title 38, U.S.C. 501, the Plaintiff filed "Individuals

15 Request for a Copy of their Own Health Information." In block three (3), under "description

16 ofinformation requested," the Plaintiff requested "codes of all consent forms" from the West

l~ ~ Los Angeles VA Medical Center. EXHIBIT No. 1

On February 17, 2017, the Department of Veterans Affairs, Greater Los Angeles

Healthcare System, via the LISPS mail sent the Plaintiff a catch of medical records beginning
from February 2008 to March 2011 that failed to contain any "consent" forms authorizing the
Defendants to perform any research or experimentation on the Plaintiff Instead, the Greater
Los Angeles VA Medical Center provided well over 100 pages of medical notes that
"substantiates" the Plaintiffs allegations of non-consensual research; to include research
related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, and all other
research activity. EXHIBIT No. 2
On April 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a "Notice to the Court" withdrawing consent to
any further human subject research.(Docket No. 92)As indicated above, in light of the
Defendants mailing of medical records, the Plaintiff sent a letter to the appropriate individuals

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 7 of 28 Page ID #:1398

notifying them of withdrawal of consent.
On May 31, 2017, Walt Dannenberg, Medical Center Director, VA Long Beach
3 Healthcare System, emailed the Plaintiff saying "Good afternoon Oliver, I want to follow up
4 with you from our last communication earlier this month (below email string). I have since
5 checked with both the Privacy Officer and our ACOS for Research at VA Long Beach
6 Healthcare System. We were able to locate healthcare records for you; however, we were not
able to locate any research records where we have you listed as a participant. With that said,
8 do you have any specific details with regards to employee names, research study (number,
9 title, or name), or other identifiable information that could help us conduct a more thorough
to search of our research records? If so, please let me know, as we are happy to help and
11 research the information that we have. With regards to your medical records, Mr. Troy Evans,
12 our Privacy and Freedom OfInformation Act(FOIA)Officer, will be sending you (if he has

13 not already) the form to complete so that we can release a complete copy of your health

14 records to you. Also, with the attached document, you had requested that we withdraw you

15 from research. Although we currently do not have any records for you with regards to our

16 research program, we can place the attached document in your record. If you would like for

this to happen, please sign the form and we can have it added to your record. If you have any

additional questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to let me

i9 know. Thank you for your service. All my best, Walt Dannenberg, FACHE." EXHIBIT No.
On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, the Plaintiff emailed Director Walt Dannenberg saying
"Director Dannenberg, Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I apologize for
not being able to respond to you in a timelier manner. Attached is a signed copy of the
withdrawal form. With regards to your question of study related materials, please allow me
some time to gather that information for you. I have another fire to put out that involves the
Volunteers of America and the West Los Angeles VA.I have received Terry's letter today
and will forward him the signed copy shortly. FYI, I have yet to hear from Ms. Ann Brown.
Talk to you shortly. Oliver." EXHIBIT No. 4

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 8 of 28 Page ID #:1399

This case embodies the principle that "to perform its high function in the best way
3 justice must satisfy the appearance ofjustice" by establishing an "objective standard designed
4 to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process."
5 Despite the seriousness and critical internal issues, this judiciary sits en banc, as there
6 exists unusual circumstances where both for the Plaintiff and Judges sake and for the
appearance ofjustice and public interest, this Court should grant the Plaintiffs "Stipulated
8 Protective Order."
9 It is indefensible for the Defendants to have illegally placed any biomedical device
to into the Plaintiff and then claim immunity from prosecution. The Plaintiff contends that he is
11 not a candidate for former President Obama's "brain imitative" thus therefore, should not be
IZ subjected to the terrors of having one.
13 The Plaintiff submits under penalty of perjury that as a result of this biomedical

14 implant he has received "radiation" burns to the top of his head to include various other parts

15 ofthe body as a result ofthe Defendants "state sponsored terrorism" against the Plaintiff. The

16 continued surveillance by Fusin Centers, the local police and military intelligence for legally

l~ and lawfully blowing the whistle is indefensible. It has been reported that the U.S. military is

conducting classified, long term testing of"radiation" weaponry on American civilians across

the country and in many cases without one's consent.
Accordingly, we conclude that, in the best interest, and appearance, of fair and
impartial administration ofjustice, this Court should re-consider its decision to deny the
Plaintiffs "Stipulated Protection Order" and GRANT the order to protect the Plaintiff from
the Defendants conspiracy to commit murder simply because Mr. Mitchell is a black

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 9 of 28 Page ID #:1400






















Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 10 of 28 Page ID #:1401


JUNE 1Z,2017


Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 11 of 28 Page ID #:1402

OA~1B IJuniber. ?94(1-0?6(1

Grl+mated Uui'den: ? mmiur
~ ~
~~ b~- '~ 2 A C~PV Or THCI92
' ~~ OWN
The Papeivvorlc Reduction Act of 1995 requi
res us to notify you th t this
ol'section 3507 of the Act. We may nut 'inFoimation collection is in accordance
conduct or sponsor, and yo dare not with the clearance requircmrn
required to respond to, a collection of ts
valid OMB number. VVe anticipate information unless it dis~~lays a
tlia[ the time expended by nll ii [Iivid
Elie time it will take to read the inslru uals wl~o must complete flits form will average 2
cjions, gather the necess~sy f cts and till minutes. This includes
the means to matte a written request out the form. The purpose of flits form
for a copy of their information maintained is tq provide nn individual
CFR 1.577. by the Department of Veterans At'fairs
(VA)in accordance with ~8
The information on this form is requested
under Title 38, U.S.C. pl. Your disclosure
However, ii [he information including of the information requested on
Social Security Number SN)(the this form is vulunlnry.
completely and accurately, VA will be unabl SSN will he used to locale records for
e ~o comply with the r goes. Failu release) is not lurnish~d
benefits to which you may be entitled. re to t'urnish the information will not have
any ufFecl on any usher

r ~ ~ r. ..
i ~.;~'. ., i4 r,, . _.,
- I~~ ~ ~ / ~u? t4ili. ', p~,~yi,~~~~ +
q ::{t,t.~i ` p~j,,fit 't :
J~r ~. y,
~~:~~ ., I i ~. r , . i f .~,~ ,!: inat~ -~1&
y}~ e },;y"i
"~U~YI'51~4 :l~~Y r:,~i3~ ,cy *~.~ ~ f1y~~!e~d~. J~I 9L~ }~ ~-, r I .
~.1 I '~~F'hkW1~rA~ '62i ;1~:S+l w'Yi`,
,w~ _,.,.


lUrJ"i G~13 s} ~vc~

~=G1=J' i/A- /11EDf~~4L


~THER (Speclly)

I~ IN-PERSON Ir eY MAIL, TO ADDRESS BELOW (fnclud~ C(fy, Stefe &ZIP)

~ PHONE NO. 4~/~ %~~ . ~~~V

f~:~ wx+c~ ~s;7~t=T


N OTt.: If signed s 'one other than the patient, indicalc the utl~ority (e.g, guardianship or power ofattornc.y) u der which request is made.

vA r-oRnn 10-534
M AY 2005
~~ ~~r~~
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 12 of 28 Page ID #:1403

X114 9012 3

80 3816 445

NG # I
3 24

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 13 of 28 Page ID #:1404

From: Dannenberg, Walt C

Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 2:14 PM
Subject: RE: Notice of Consent to Withdraw from Human Subject Research

Hi Oliver,

Thank you for your reply.

Please know that the attachment did not come through in your previous email. If you could re-send the
attachment, I will be sure to forward it to the appropriate staff.

Best regards,

Walt Dannenberg, FACHE

Medical Center Director
VA Long Beach Healthcare System

-----Original Message-----
From: B M [mailto:redgatchmarine(]
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 1:29 PM
To: Dannenberg, Walt C
Cc: B M
Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: Notice of Consent to Withdraw from Human Subject Research

Director Dannenberg,

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I apologize for not being able to respond to you in a more
timely manner.

Attached is a signed copy of the withdrawal form.

With regards to your question of study related materials, please allow me some time to gather that information for
you. I have another fire to put out that involves the Volunteers of America and the West Los Angeles VA.

have received Terry's letter today and will forward him the signed copy shortly.

FYI, I have yet to hear from Ms. Ann Brown.

Talk to you shortly.


Sent from Mail<> for Windows 10

From: Dannenberg, Walt C<>

Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 12:45 PM
To: B M<>
Subject: RE: Notice of Consent to Withdraw from Human Subject Research

Good afternoon Oliver,

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 14 of 28 Page ID #:1405

want to follow up with you from our last communication earlier this month (below email string). I have since
checked with both the Privacy Officer and our ACOS for Research at VA Long Beach Healthcare System. We were
able to locate healthcare records for you; however, we were not able to locate any research records where we
have you listed as a participant.

With that said, do you have any specific details with regards to employee names, research study (number, title, or
name), or other identifiable information that could help us conduct a more thorough search of our research
records? If so, please let me know, as we are happy to help and research the information that we have.

With regards to your medical records, Mr. Troy Evans, our Privacy and Freedom Of Information Act(FOIA) Officer,
will be sending you (if he has not already) the form to complete so that we can release a complete copy of your
health records to you.

Also, with the attached document, you had requested that we withdraw you from research. Although we currently
do not have any records for you with regards to our research program, we can place the attached document in
your record. If you would like for this to happen, please sign the form and we can have it added to your record.

If you have any additional questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to let me know.

Thank you for your service.

All my best,

Walt Dannenberg, FACHE

Medical Center Director
VA Long Beach Healthcare System

From: B M []
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 7:52 PM
To: Dannenberg, Walt C
Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: Notice of Consent to Withdraw from Human Subject Research

M r. Dannenberg,

Thank you for your response. I look forward to what you may uncover.

Best wishes and congratulations on becoming the director.


Sent from Mail<> for Windows 10

From: Dannenberg, Walt C<mailto:Walt.Dannenber>

Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 4:13 PM
To: B M<>
Subject: RE: Notice of Consent to Withdraw from Human Subject Research


Thank you for your email communication and for speaking with me a few moments ago.

As discussed, I will review and follow up with you.

Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 15 of 28 Page ID #:1406

Best regards,

Walt Dannenberg, FACHE

Medical Center Director
VA Long Beach Healthcare System

From: B M []
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 2:58 PM
To: Dannenberg, Walt C;<>
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Notice of Consent to Withdraw from Human Subject Research

Dear Director Walt C. Dannenberg,

M y name is Oliver B. Mitchell III, I'm a U.S. Veteran and former U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs employee
turned whistleblower. I'm writing you today regarding ongoing events surrounding my "prior' whistleblower

On April 26, 2017, I sent you a letter via USPS Certified Mail. However, according to information obtained from the
USPS, that letter may not have reached you yet. For your review, I have attached the text of the letter along with
both letters as attachments. Please be advised that this email along with any response will be placed on court
docket as stipulated to in the letter to your office.

thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Oliver Mitchell

Oliver Bruce Mitchell III

622_ Wall_Street
Los Angeles,California

April 26, 2017


Director Walt C Dannenberg

VA Long Beach Healthcare System
5901_East_7th Street
Long Beach_California

Subj: Notice of Consent to Withdraw from Human Subject Research

Dear Director Walt C Dannenberg,

M y name is Oliver B. Mitchell III, I'm a U.S. Veteran and former U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs employee
turned whistleblower. I'm writing you today regarding ongoing events surrounding my "prior" whistleblower

It has come to my attention that while both employed at the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center and as a patient
receiving care at your facility, members of your staff engaged me in both biomedical, behavioral and
pharmaceutical research.
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 16 of 28 Page ID #:1407

write you today, not motivated by any political party, agenda or ideology but out of a genuine interest in finding a
solution to our problem.

As a former federal employee and VA whistleblower, I'm aware that the VA performs "cooperative research"
projects with various other institutions and agencies.

While employed at your facility, on March 24, 2009, I blew the whistle on the hospital's wait times and attempt to
cover up that wait time data. In response to my legally protected disclosures, agency officials began a series of
test and experiments against me.

understand your time is valuable and I appreciate your time and assistance regarding this matter. However, it has
recently come to my attention that Donna Beiter, the former CEO and Director of the West Los Angeles VA Medical
Center; along with Dr. Robert Petzel, the former Undersecretary for Health and the VA Office of Inspector General
may not have been forthright regarding my allegations.

have recently requested and received a copy of my VA medical records from the West Los Angeles VA Medical
Center that substantiate non-consensual research. Additionally, I'm in receipt of evidence that suggest both
Donna Beiter and Dr. Robert Petzel; targeted, selected and manipulated situations by illegally placing me into the
VA's organ donation program. Specifically, the organ, tissue and eye donation program.

Human trafficking is considered the most common form of modern day slavery and is considered amulti-billion
dollar industry in the United States. According to the FBI, human trafficking is the fastest growing business of
organized crime worldwide. In this instance, accountability and the enforcement of the rule of law to protect
human dignity is necessary.

Despite my reports of gross mismanagement and falsified data and records at the West Los Angeles VA Medical
Center, it was determined that agency officials had intended to commit a far greater crime by engaging me in
targeted individual by engaging in body snatching and the harvesting of my body parts.

Before we continue, please be advised that on August 16, 2013, a complaint was lodged and accepted against the
VA in the Central District Court of California. That case is active and current. In fact, the complaint has been
a mended to reflect current leadership both individually and jointly as defendants.

As I have previously stated before, my complaints were meant to address systemic employment, mismanagement,
fraud, waste -and abuse issues within the Greater Los Angeles VA Medical Center.

In February of 2008, I began working for the Greater Los Angeles VA Medical Center as a GS-5, Patient Services
Assistant in the Imaging/Radiology Department. Although my original title and billet was as a Lead Patient Services
Assistant I wasn't paid for that position.

In October of 2008, Donna M. Beiter, RN, MSN, became the director of the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare
System. During her tenure she managed the nation's largest and most complex integrated healthcare facility in the
Department of Veterans Affairs. The West Los Angeles VA Healthcare Center is affiliated with more than 45
colleges, universities, and vocational schools with 964 beds, over 5,000 employees and an annual operating budget
of over $900 million.

On November 24, 2008, I attended a "Systems Redesign" meeting in which VA officials made the following
statement (as transcribed to the Office of Special Counsel):

Ms. Nelson, I went ahead and reviewed the audio, my initial complaint as well as the transcripts from my EEO
i nvestigation. Now you state, that the IG's investigation and the facility's response to my allegations show no
wrong doing. However, as I listen to the recording and compare it to the IG's investigation I come to the same
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 17 of 28 Page ID #:1408

conclusion. The facility fabricated (lied) their story in an effort to deflect from their wrong doing.

1. In the recording I state "why are we still scheduling orders 5yrs and back, im still canceling orders from 2001."

2. In the recording Dr. EI-Baden states "anything over a year old should be canceled."

3. I then ask "should be canceled or scheduled."

4. Dr. EI-Baden clearly states "canceled because they wouldn't let us do a mass purge, so it's just a matter of
getting in there and canceling them ourselves."

5. Dr. EI-Baden states "your backlog should start at Aprii '07."

6. Then Dr. EI-Baden poses a question to Craig Morioka asking "isn't that right Craig not anything earlier than

7. The committee chairman then states "somebody needs to be canceling those orders."

8. Then Dr. EI-Baden states "cancel everything and not just MR cancel any of those orders before April '07."

9. Randy Jones then states "if they don't read the history it maybe please do a year from now."

10. Then Dr. EI-Baden states "well that is where the April 7 came from because I got permission..."

11. However she is interrupted by Randy before she could finish her statement.

12. Lastly, Dr. EI-Baden states "and the mass purge thing is not going to happen is that right?"

13. Then Craig responds to Dr. EI-Baden stating "not that I know of nobody wants to even take the chance of fear
of losing their job or something."

On March 24, 2009, Dr. Suzie EI-Baden, Department of Radiology, Greater Los Angeles VA and Professor,
Department of Radiological Sciences &Neurology, UCLA detailed Herlinda Valdovinos, Patient Services Assistant
(PSA), to the MRI Clinic located in bldg. 507. In doing so, Dr. EI-Baden stated that "Ms. Valdovinos was detailed to
the department because she was a "fresh face" and that "women" could do the job better."

As previously stated before, on March 24, 2009, I blew the whistle due in part to the Systems Redesign meeting
held on November 24, 2008, in which Dr. EI-Baden instructed me to delete appointment records within the VA's
electronic health record system. Having refused to do so, Dr. EI-Baden and Hannah Nishimoto then hired a new
employee (Herlinda Valdovinos) and had given her the sole task to delete, destroy and purge the records. In my
complaint to the VA OIG, I alleged the following (excerpted below):

"As an honorably discharged veteran and an employee of the VA West Los Angeles it is with great sadness that
m ust report suspected acts of fraud, waste and abuse within the Imaging Department at this facility. Since I began
m y employment with this department I have noticed questionable practices ranging from excused absence from
the work place, comp and/or over time abuse, suspected improper use of department funds, inflated department
performance averages, cancellation of MRI request and improper storage of patient data... On June 3, 2008 I met
with the local union office to discuss the issues. During my meeting with the local union office it was suggested
that I speak with Mary Moore regarding my issues. A complaint was submitted to Mary Moore, Manager
Employee Relations. On June 6, 2008 Ms. Moore stated I should contact the OIG hotline and file a complaint. In
June of 08 the department decided to lease a mobile MRI unit costing $40,000 dollars a month. The unit is being
leased to allow the department an opportunity to catch upon the patient back log. We currently average about
2200 request for MRI's monthly. Our current availability for MRI's is approximately 800 to 900 monthly. Thus
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 18 of 28 Page ID #:1409

creating a backlog of patients each month. On several occasions I have approached the Department Chief Dr. Suzie
EI-Saden with suggestions on how to increase the number of patients and reduce cost and overhead. Each time
was met with hesitation and skepticism. Dr. EI-Saden has stated on several occasions that she would like for me to
schedule all patients within 30 days. I'm aware that the VA has a mandate that states patients should receive care
within 30 days. This clinic does not have the equipment or personnel to accomplish such a task. Within a 30 day
period we are closed 4 days thus leaving 26 days of operation. In order to meet the required benchmark set forth
we would have to perform 85 MRI's per day. Since my employment within this department I have witnessed "valid
request for MRI's" being cancelled and/or deleted from the system as a means of reducing the number of request
for MRI's pending. This has been an ongoing trend since my employment here. It is my opinion that the
harassment, death threats and threats of termination I have received are due to my vocal opposition to this
practice. Canceling any patients request for service is unjust, unfair and harmful to the health and well-being of
the patient. Cancelling any patients request for service due to a failing administrative process is criminal and
negligent. It is my opinion that this department has not been able to meet its mandated obligations with regards
to performance. The administrative process is flawed and has resulted in deaths, continued pain and suffering and
an overall decline in veterans' health due to the lengthy wait for an MRI."

W hile the complaint itself does not mention the word wait times, it is the supporting evidence that was submitted
to both the VA Office of Inspector General and the Office of Special Counsel that substantiates my allegations of
wait time fraud.

On November 25, 2009, in response to my allegations to the VA Office of Inspector General, Donna Beiter provided
the following response:

During the period of time in question, the backlog of outstanding requests for MRI imaging studies across the
Veterans Health Administration dated back 10 years. Central Office and the Office of Dr. Charles Anderson,
National Radiology Director, instructed all Imaging Services across the country to mass purge all outstanding
i maging orders for studies older than 6 months, where the procedure was no longer needed, and with approval
from the individual healthcare systems Medical Executive Committee (MEC). Upon investigation of the backlogged
i maging orders within GLA Imaging Service, it was found that most were no longer needed as the patients had
received imaging with another modality, received alternate therapy obviating the need for MRI, or were no longer
receiving their healthcare at GLA. Afl patient imaging requests that were found to still be valid were
scheduled. Approval was granted for this process by the MEC, and in collaboration with the Service Chiefs and/or
Careline Directors within the healthcare system.

On February 26, 2014, Bryant Jordan, reporter for the Military Times ran an article "VA Defends Veteran Medical
A ppointments<
appointments.html>." In that article, Catherine Gromek, Congressional Relations Officer with the VA's Inspector
General Office, said "the agency contacted the center's director after receiving a complaint on its hotline in March
2009 that MRI appointments were being deleted from the system for 2000 through November 2008 without
proper notification." The article continues, "the IG was satisfied with the response and did not open an
i nvestigation."

On February 26, 2014, Dr. Dean C. Norman, Chief of Staff, West Los Angeles VA Medical Center publically
responded to my allegations saying "You may have seen recent news coverage alleging the mishandling of patient
records by a VA medical facility in 2008. Some media reports on this issue have been inaccurate. VA did not
destroy patients' personal medical records in VA's electronic health record system, which has been in place since
the 1990's. VA has established a record of safe, exceptional health care that is consistently recognized by
independent reviews and organizations. Under Secretary for Health Dr. Robert Petzel addressed questions from
members of the House of Representatives today on this topic saying, "There was no attempt to eliminate records"
and that several hundred records were properly closed only after a thorough administrative review. The Greater
Los Angeles VA Medical did identify that there were large numbers of very old imaging requests in the system. As
part of appropriate patient care processes and in accordance with nationally established VA guidelines, the
medical center performed a carefully planned project of administratively clearing old imaging requests after an
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 19 of 28 Page ID #:1410

extensive review of each individual request. At no time were "group" close-outs of imaging studies
completed. See story here:

Now Director Dannenberg, as you may be aware, the department is facing both criticism and backlash for wait
time manipulation, and this case is no different.

In March of 2008,just one month after my employment began, Dr. Suzie EI-Baden along with seven (7) other
collaborators published "A methodology to integrate clinical data for the efficient assessment of brain-tumor

The document published in the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health states:

Careful examination of the medical record of brain-tumor patients can bean overwhelming task for the
neuroradiologist. The number of clinical documents alone may approach 100 for a patient that has a 3-year-old
brain tumor. The neuroradiologist's evaluation of a patient's brain tumor involves examining the current imaging
exam and checking for previous imaging exams that may occur pre- or post-treatment. The goal of this research is
to develop an effective method to review all of the pertinent patient information from the medical record. We
have designed and developed a medical system that incorporates Hospital Information Systems, Radiology
Information Systems, and Picture Archiving and Communications Systems information. Our research improves
clinical review of patient's data by organizing image display, removing unnecessary documents, and mining for key
clinical scenarios that are important in the assessment and care of brain-tumor patients.

Here in Dr. EI-Sadens own words she states:

Our "research" improves clinical review of patient's data by organizing image display, "removing unnecessary
documents",and mining for key clinical scenarios that are important in the assessment and care of brain-tumor

The key phrase within the entire document being "removing unnecessary documents."

As a result of whistleblowing, on June 5, 2009, Dr. Suzie EI-Baden detailed me to "unclassified" duties in Primary
and Ambulatory Care.

During the course of the investigation, I received information substantiating my allegations of "research." On June
3,2009, I received via email that Dr. EI-Baden and VA facility have routinely performed and examined veteran
patients for the purpose of "research." In fact, that research was approved by Dr. Dean C. Norman,former Chief of

On Wednesday, September 9, 2009, I emailed Dr. Dean Norman, Chief Of Staff; Gary Sugg, Equal Employment
Opportunity Office; Mary Moore, Chief, Employee Labor Relations and Lynda K. Eaton, Vice-President, AFGE

"To all interested parties: To recap all previous conversations held this Wednesday September 9, 2009 the
following is provided: I had a conversation with the Patient Advocate Office with regards to my healthcare here at
GLA. I informed the advocate that:(not a complete list) 1) My primary provider has been changed without my
advance written consent. 2) Appointments have been made without my prior approval and consent. 3) I have
received several phone calls and voicemails stating I'm to contact the Mental Health Clinic for an appointment. 4)
have received several mailings stating I'm to contact the Mental Health Clinic for an appointment. 5)The
continuity in my care has been disrupted by unauthorized changes in my heath care providers. 6) I clearly stated
that my care here as a U.S. Veteran is separate from my employment here and that it is my opinion that
Management has taken it upon there selves to interfere with my healthcare. 7) Since I personally did not
authorize any changes to my healthcare record, primary provider or appointments I find that those individuals who
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 20 of 28 Page ID #:1411

have accessed my record have done so fraudulently and without cause. As a result of informing the Patient
Advocate I was advised by such to contact EEO. I informed EEO (namely Mr. Gary Sugg) the same information as it
was related to the Patient Advocate. However I disagree with Gary when he states that this should be reported to
E mployee Relations. Clearly this is not a matter for Employee Relations. This is a patient and facility issue not an
employee and facility issue. The manager Mary Moore has no real authorization to conduct or investigate these
claims as stated. Accordingly, I informed my union representative the same as it has been previously related to
others. It is my opinion that managements continued surveillance, harassment and manipulation of my healthcare
to be directly related to my previous and/or current EEO and OIG activity. This behavior is unacceptable to me and
shall be dealt with accordingly. Therefore, under the rights afforded me through the Collective Bargaining
Agreement I hereby exercise and reserve the right to contact the appropriate officials for assistance. This matter
should be investigated through the Patients Advocate Office not EEO. As a result I have at this time decided to
stop receiving care at this facility until the appropriate authorities have been notified. Oliver Mitchell."

In April of 2013, the Government Accountability Office prepared and submitted "Prescription Drugs: Comparison of
DoD and VA Direct Purchase Prices." The GAO was asked to compare prices for prescription drugs across federal
programs. The report described direct purchase prices paid by DoD and VA for a sample of prescription drugs. The
sample contained 43 brand name and 40 generic drugs.

W hile reviewing my VA medical records experts have determined that officials at the West Los Angeles VA Medical
Center and the Long Beach VA Medical Center engaged in both biomedical, organ, tissue and brain research, to
i nclude drug trials against me as a form of retaliation and reprisal for whistleblowing. Of the sampled drugs,
records show that VA officials prescribed well over a dozen drugs during the time of my filing my VA OIG
complaint, my EEO complaint, my FLRA complaint and my complaint to the Office of Special Counsel. Additionally,
it was noted that several of the drugs were contradictory to one another and at the time prescribed could have
caused death. Am I to believe that VA officials engaged in "ATTEMPTED MURDER" for whistleblowing?

From February 2008 til present, agency officials have prescribed the following medications:


Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 21 of 28 Page ID #:1412



In addition, it has been determined that VA officials have illegally placed a biomedical implant into me as a means
of retaliation and research. Well over 185 pages of VA medical records corroborate and substantiate that
allegation. According to government documents these devices are radiofrequency (RF) controlled and
powered. They have been specifically developed for the Department of Defense and are capable of data
collection, human research, surveillance and behavior modification. In this case, officials at both the West Los
Angeles VA Medical Center and the Long Beach VA Medical Center have illegally placed the devices into me as a
defense to my legal and lawful whistleblowing activities.

Progress notes within my VA medical records state that t'm both crazy, homicidal and suicidal. However,these
notes were placed there AFTER I blew the whistle on agency officials.

Director Dannenberg, the facility, the agency nor the government can deny the existence, usage or applied use of
any microchips, implants or neural devices as they have been reported on over the course of the last 30 years.

In both 2012 and 2013, it was confirmed to me by VA personnel that Los Angeles officials did implant me for the
purpose of targeting and testing.

In fact, records show that agency personnel engaged in testing and experimentation for the following (not an
exhausted list):

1. Klinefelter Syndrome
2. Sleep Apnea
3. Multiple Sclerosis
4. Bronchiectasis
5. Chronic Bronchitis
6. Cystic Fibrosis
7. Allergic Bronchopulmonary Aspergillosis (ABPA)
8. Syphilis
9. HIV
10. Herpes Simplex
11. Gender Reassignment
12. Cancer Research

On July 21, 2008, Dr. Neal M. Rao and Dr. Robert W. Baumhefner entered into VistA an electronic health record
saying "Neurology Clinic Note: Chief Complaint: patient is a 36 yo RH male with a h/o headaches since 2002 while
in service. Headaches are described as throbbing in back of head (occipital), then becoming generalized,
occasionally has throbbing behind the eyes as well. Can progress to "cry baby pain" up to 10/10. HA last all night
and can come on at any time, sleep does not necessarily relieve it. May be triggered by hot weather, also notes
throbbing HA with high blood pressure up to 190/100. Sometimes preceded by small flashing white
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 22 of 28 Page ID #:1413

lights. Associated with photosensitivity, dizziness (feeling faint), occasional blurred vision. Pt did report one ep of
arm numbness with ha and hypertension which resolved fully. No n/v. Last visit on 4/08 pt rec to:(1) do Vicodin,
as he was taking 3-4 tab per week for HA. Pt was able to d/c this med. (2) Start amitriptyline 20mg uptitrate to 40
Qhs. However, unable to tolerate 2/2 SI, nausea. (3) Take zolmitriptan 5mg prn HA, with repeat after 1 hr if
needed. Patient was given only 4 tabs. Did not feel that it helped at all. Since last visit, he has been noting HA
once per week, as usual. He takes Excedrin migraine daily as prophylaxis. This med will relieve the HA for a few
hrs, but HA will sometimes come back. Neuro: MS: Alert and oriented to person, place and time; speech
spontaneous and fluent; comprehension intact, able to follow 3 step commands; calculations intact. Hearing intact
bilaterally. Studies: 4/08 MRI: Impression: (1) Normal MRI of the brain,(2) No evidence of abnormal
enhancement and (3) Normal MRA of the brain. Impression: 36 yo Rt handed man with hx of HTN who presents
for f/u of HA. HA have following components: Associated with hypertension with SBP up to 190. Also have
m usculoskeletal component as associated with neck pain and neck tension. Also has migraine like features of
visual scotomata and photophobia. Also may have rebound component as pt's prior Vicodin use and current daily
use of Excedrin migraine. Plan: Will start metoprolol 50mg BID noting current sbp of 145/95, pulse of 70. Pt
should tolerate this med well from hemodynamic stand point. Will help with HTN, and BB action may serve to
reduce HA severity as well and provide some component of prophylaxis. Pt given prescription for sumatriptan
i njection- up to 6mg dose. Pt asked to keep a HA diary to see if above therapies are working and to see if there are
any other associations (sleep, food, etc). D/c amtriptaline. RTC in 3 months."

On February 1, 2010, Cheryl L. Ferguson, CRTT entered into VistA an electronic health record saying "Mr. Mitchell
was given a remstar Auto m series unit serial #m003592714 set at APAP 9-16 cmh20, humidifier #H003009429,
Medium comfort gel mask with headgear, premium chin strap given. Pt was instructed on the operation, cleaning,
and safety (including electrical) of unit. Patient was then instructed on how to tune on machine and fit mask,
adjust all straps, and clean all parts of the unit including filters, mask, tubing and humidifier. Pt was able to
verbalize and demonstrate the operation, maintenance, and safety of the new unit and its set up. Patient was
given the phone number to the sleep center for any questions or concerns with all needed information in the
event of equipment malfunction or emergency. Sleep hygiene literature was given. RTC on 3-24-10. Patient
informed if he is hospitalized to bring unit. If hospitalization is not planned must have a family member or friend
bring unit."

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a serious condition that is common among "neurological" patients. If
undiagnosed and untreated, it may lead to hypertension, coronary heart disease, pulmonary hypertension,
m yocardial infarction, stroke, psychiatric disorders, cognitive impairment, and, ultimately, death.

Source: http;//

On September 1, 2010, Dr. Xiao-Tang Kong entered into Vista an electronic health note saying "Neurology Consult
Note: Requested the consult by Dr. Alt in the ER but no consult note is available. Called ER, Dr. Alt has already
been off work per nurse; current attending does not know the patient, this follow up note is used as a consult
note. (1) Chief Complaint: 38 year old male presented with right eye blurred vision, pounding headache, right
hand tingling for one day. (2) Neurological History: patient is a 38 year old right handed African American male
with pmh of migraine, seizure x1 and refractory hypertension who was referred to ED by PCP Dr. Bui for evaluation
of stroke. Patient woke up with headache and blurred vision yesterday, no nausea, vomiting, neck pain or
dizziness. The headache was pounding in feature, at both sides of the head, associated with photosensivity. After
taking Excedrin, the headache resolved 4-5 hours later but the blurred vision has had no improvement through the
day. Today, patient again woke up with pounding headache, also associated with right hand tingling and right side
chest pain. Then patient came to the walk-in clinic. The patient was sent to the eye clinic for vision loss and was
considered that the loss of vision was related to uncontrolled hypertension. The patient was sent back to
PCP. The PCP considered the patient might have a stroke and then was referred to ER for further
evaluation. Patient also reports recently he has had right ear tinnitus, admitting he has abnormal hearing loss at
right ear after noticing reduced hearing capability during the neurological exam. Patient has had migraine since he
was in his 20's when he was in military service. He was given Imitrex for the migraine years ago. But now he only
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 23 of 28 Page ID #:1414

takes Excedrin for headache which is effective to relieve the headache. His migraine always starts with flashing
lights and is followed by bilateral pulsating and pressure like headache. About once per week. Lasting about 1-2
hours if he takes medication, and lasting for days if he does not take medication. Patient denies nausea, vomiting,
dizziness, vertigo, unstable gait, limb weakness. Denies dysarthis, dysphagia over the past days. Denies
palpitation, shortness of breath. ROS: unremarkable, denies head trauma history. Hypertension: refractory since
he was in his twenties, average by is 160/200's. Now is relatively well controlled by 4 anti-HTN
medications. Seizure: patient had one seizure several years ago when he had fever up to 105 degree. Patient was
in unconsciousness for 2 days and hospitalized in non-VA outside hospital. His seizure was witnessed by his
mother; patient himself did not remember the seizure. He was told by the doctors in OSH that he had febrile
seizure. No AED's was given and no recurrent seizure since then. Mother dies of brain aneurysm at age 58 years
old. Mother also had stroke and hypertension. Physical examination with by 125/79. Focused Neurological
Examination alerted and oriented x3, speech fluently, follow command correctly, and responses are appropriate,
full affect. Intact judgement. No slurry speech, gag reflex is intact, corneal reflex intact. No tremor, normal
m uscle bulk and tone, 5/5 strength and no pronator drift. Recommendations: stat CTA to rule out aneurysm- Dr.
Alt ordered CTH only because the VALB MC does not do CTA at night over Dr. Alt. Admit to hospital for close
m onitor, neuro check every 2 hours.

On September 1, 2010, Bishoy Said and Dr. Diep Ngoc Bui entered into VistA an electronic health note saying
"please refer to technician screening note for additional details. Poorly controlled HTN, migraines that have
progressed over the curse of the last 10-12 years, 3-4x week now with flashing lights, blurred vision, that now
resolves over 1-2 hours, used to resolve over a few minutes. Patient says family says he has had history of slurred
speech. Strong family history of htn, no pain, no trauma. The patient was seen and cared for under the
supervision of the Attending Physcian Willis Ingallis, M.D. Assessment plan:(1)sudden loss of vision od, no apd, no
e/c crao/crvo, no e/o optic neuropathy, no e/o retinal detachment. (2) Likely 2/2 uncontrolled htn, rec by
optimization, consider neuro imaging, consider Multiple Scelorsis(MS) given history of intermittent slurred speech,
worsening of symptoms with exercise. Discuss with Dr. Wade who agrees."

M ultiple Sclerosis(MS)is a demyelinating disease in which the insulating covers of nerve cells in the brain and
spinal cord are damaged. This damage disrupts the ability of parts of the nervous system to communicate,
resulting in a range of signs and symptoms, including physical, mental, and sometimes psychiatric
problems. Specific symptoms can include double vision, blindness in one eye, muscle weakness, trouble with
sensation, or trouble with coordination. MS takes several forms, with new symptoms either occurring in isolated
attacks (relapsing forms) or building up over time (progressive forms). Between attacks, symptoms may disappear
completely; however, permanent neurological problems often remain, especially as the disease advances. The
cause of MS is unknown; however, it is believed to occur as a result of some combination of genetic and
environmental factors such as infectious agents. MS is more common in regions with northern European
populations and the geographic variation may simply reflect the global distribution of these high-risk
populations. The expected future course of the disease depends on the subtype of the disease; the individual's
sex, age, and initial symptoms; and the degree of disability the person has. The average life expectancy is 30 years
from the start of the disease, which is 5 to 10 years less than that of unaffected people. Suicide is more common,
while infections and other complications are especially dangerous for the more disabled. MS is the most common
autoimmune disorder of the central nervous system. In Africa rates are less than 0.5 per 100,000, while they are
2.8 per 100,000 in South East Asia, 8.3 per 100,000 in the Americas, and 80 per 100,000 in Europe.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.or~/wiki/Multiple sclerosis

On November 2, 2010, Nisha Reddy and Dr. Chetty Kota entered into VistA an electronic health note saying "39 yo
Black or African American here for evaluation of continued cough productive of sputum. Given patients long
standing history of productive cough and Bronchiectasis seen on CT chest by pulmonology review, differential
diagnosis includes alpha 1 antitrypsin deficieny versus ABPA versus IgA immunodeficiency versus chronic bronchitis
versus klinefelters syndrome versus cystic fibrosis variant. Check immunoglobulin levels: IgG, IgA, IgE, eosinophil
count, alpha one antitrypsin and phenotype level, full PfTs, rtc in 3 months."
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 24 of 28 Page ID #:1415

Bronchiectasis is a disease in which there is permanent enlargement of parts of the airways of the lung. Other
symptoms include shortness of breath, coughing up blood, and chest pain. Bronchiectasis may result from a
n umber of infective and acquired causes, including pneumonia, tuberculosis, immune system problems, and cystic
fibrosis. Worsening may occur due to infection and in these cases antibiotics are recommended. Typical
antibiotics used include amoxicillin, erythromycin, or doxycycline. The disease affects between 1 per 1000 to 1 per
250,000 adults. The disease is more common in women and increases as people age.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.ors/wiki/Bronchiectasis

Bronchiectasis is a permanent dilatation and thickening of the airways characterized by chronic cough, excessive
sputum production, bacterial colonization, and recurrent acute infections. It may develop after lung infections,
particularly in childhood and in association with underlying problems, such as immunodeficiency and cystic
fibrosis. Epidemiology: A large study across 640 general practices in the UK published in 2012 found: Prevalence in
2011 in men was 227/100,000, and 309/100,000 in women. Incidence increased each year between 2004 and
2011,from 18/100,000 person-years at risk, to 32/100,000 person-years at risk. Prevalence was higher in women
than in men. Prevalence was higher in the older age groups (>60 years).


Bronchiectasis affects extremes of age in certain indigenous populations with a slight female dominance. It is
difficult to estimate the prevalence because it is often misdiagnosed. In developed countries, it is important to
diagnose the underlying cause. The age of onset is adulthood. In developing countries, infection in childhood is a
common cause. Bronchiectasis strikes predominantly women.

Source: mah :// epidemiolo~v and demographics

I n medicine, a differential diagnosis is the distinguishing of a particular disease or condition from others that
present similar clinical features.

Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency is an inherited disorder that may cause lung disease and liver disease. The signs and
symptoms of the condition and the age at which they appear vary among individuals. People with alpha-1
antitrypsin deficiency usually develop the first signs and symptoms of lung disease between ages 20 and 50. This
condition is inherited in an autosomal codominant pattern.

Source: https://~hr.nlm.nih.~ov/condition/aloha-l-antitrvpsin-deficiency

Worldwide racial and ethnic distribution of alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency is a genetic disease that is widely known
i n Europe as a disease of white individuals, who, along with their descendants in other parts of the world, are at
the highest risk for liver and/or lung disease.


Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) is a condition characterized by an exaggerated response of the

i mmune system (a hypersensitivity response) to the fungus Aspergillus (most commonly Aspergillus fumigatus). It
occurs most often in patients with asthma or cystic fibrosis.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.or~/wiki/Allergic bronchopulmonary asperQillosis

Selective immunoglobulin A (IgA) deficiency is a genetic immunodeficiency, atype of

hypogammaglobulinemia. People with this deficiency lack immunoglobulin A (IgA), a type of antibody that
protects against infections of the mucous membranes lining the mouth, airways, and digestive tract. It is defined
as an undetectable serum IgA level in the presence of normal serum levels of IgG and IgM, in persons older than 4
years. It is the most common of the primary antibody deficiencies. Most such persons remain healthy throughout
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 25 of 28 Page ID #:1416

their lives and are never diagnosed. Selective IgA deficiency is inherited and has been associated with differences
in chromosomes 18, 14 and 6. The afflicted person usually has no other family members with the disorder.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.or~/wiki/Selective immuno~lobulin A deficiency

Individuals with Selective IgA Deficiency lack IgA, but usually have normal amounts of the other types of
immunog~obulins. Selective IgA Deficiency is relatively common in Caucasians. Many affected people have no
illness as a result. Others may develop a variety of significant clinical problems.

Source: http://primarvimmune.or~/about-primary-immunodeficiencies/specific-disease-types/selective-i~a-

Bronchitis (bron-Kl-tis) is a condition in which the bronchial tubes become inflamed. The two main types of
bronchitis are acute (short term) and chronic (ongoing). Bronchitis is a very common condition. Millions of cases
occur every year. Women are more than twice as likely as men to be diagnosed with chronic bronchitis.

Source: https://www.nhlbi.nih.sov/health/health-topics/topics/brnchi/atrisk

Klinefelter syndrome (KS) also known as 47, XXY or XXY, is the set of symptoms that result from two or more X
chromosomes in males. The primary feature is sterility. Sometimes symptoms are more prominent and may
include weaker muscles, greater height, poor coordination, less body hair, smaller genitals, breast growth, and less
interest in sex. Intelligence is usually normal; however, reading difficulties and problems with speech are more

Source: https://en.wikinedia.ors/wiki/Bronchiectasis

Klinefelter's syndrome, characterized by a 47, XXY chromosomal pattern, has largely been associated with physical
abnormalities. Case studies have been published describing patients with Klinefelter's syndrome and
schizophrenia, and reporting higher rates of Klinefelter's syndrome among people with schizophrenia (DeLisi et al,
1994). Studies of psychiatric pathology in Klinefelter's syndrome have been limited to psychiatric samples; there
has been no systematic report of levels of schizophrenia psychopathology in a large sample of people with
Klinefelter's syndrome unselected for psychiatric disorders. Klinefelters Syndrome is an inherited disease that
mainly affects whites or Caucasians and is passed down from mother to child.

Source: htt~;l/bip.rcpsvch.or~/content/189/5/459

Cystic fibrosis is a life-limiting autosomal recessive disorder with a highly variable clinical presentation. The classic
form involves characteristic findings in the respiratory tract, gastrointestinal tract, male reproductive tract, and
sweat glands and is caused by loss-of-function mutations in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance
regulator (CFTR)gene.

Source: https://www.ncbi.nim.nih.~ov/qubmed/12167682

To have cystic fibrosis, a child must inherit one copy of a CF gene mutation from each parent. That means that
each parent must be a carrier of the CF Gene. CF gene mutations are most common in Caucasian Americans (white
people whose ancestors or family are from Europe).

Source: https://www.cff.or~/What-is-CF/Testing/Carrier-Testing-for-CF/

According to professor, psychiatrist, and cultural commentator, Jonathan M. Metzl, medical psychiatry came to
view schizophrenia as a disease rampant amongst Black men. Once considered a nonthreatening disease that
primarily targeted White middle-class female populations, schizophrenia became associated with Black men and
the perceived hostility, rebellion, mistrust, and violence of Black men during the civil rights movement.
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 26 of 28 Page ID #:1417


On November 29, 2010, Dr. Hanh V. Pham, Neuroradiologist enteved into VistA an electronic health record saying
"MRI, Brain (including brain stem) w/o contrast. Clinical History: rule out aneurysm. Report: MRI of brain without
i ntravenous contrast and MRA of the circle of Willis without intravenous contrast. Technique: Sagittal T1, axial TZ,
corona) T2, axial FLAIR, axial T1, axial gradient, axial diffusion images were obtained. No intravenous contrast was
administered. Time of flight MRA of the circle of Willis was performed without intravenous contrast. Findings: No
prior similar exam is available for comparison at the time of dictation. There is no evidence of intracranial
hemorrhage. There is no evidence of an acute infarct. The FLAIR images are limited due to the patient motion
artifact eight. There is no evidence of significant FLAIR signal abnormality. The midline structures are
unremarkable. There is no tonsillar ectopia. There is no evidence of hydrocephalus. The images of the posterior
fossa are unremarkable. Visualized paranasal sinsus and mastoid air cells are unremarkable. MRA of the circle of
Willis: There is no evidence of an aneurysm or a hemodynamically significant stenosis of the anterior or posterior
circulation. Impression: Examination of the brain and circle of Willis are within normal limits."

Director Dannenberg, this is, in no way a complete list of test and experiments performed. However, as a clinical
health provider I'm sure you understand the implications of such behavior.

For the record, I'm an African American male with no history of whites in my family. Nor have I, nor haveany of my
i mmediate family members been to or traveled to Europe. To my knowledge my ancestors hail from Africa as my
parents were sharecroppers and their parents were slaves. As listed above those diseases are more commonly
found in both Whites and Asians and mainly affect women.

W hile I understand the differences in chemical makeup amongst the races, I also am aware of the horrid and
sorted history America has involving "secret" research against blacks. I find this entire situation to be unsettling as
this paints a picture that agency officials engaged in research to prolong and benefit white people while
simustanesouly placing my life and that of my ex-partner in harms way. In no short terms Director Dannenberg,
God didn't place me here on earth to save white nor anyone else, and if he did, it should be my choice to do so.

With respect to any non-consensual research, I never gave the VA, NSA, FBI, CIA nor the Military Industrial
Complex my consent whether written or oral, permission to perform any medical, experimental, or military grade
experiments or research on my persons.

find these actions to be heinous crimes for whistleblowing and the basis is simply because I'm BLACK.

The Government Accounting Office (GAO) published and released HRD 86-56 "Drug Company-Sponsored Research
at VA Medical Facilities." The report highlighted:

In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed drug companies' medical research activities in Veterans
Administration (VA) facilities. The review included:

1. Examining VA research involvement with drug companies.

2. Determining whether the VA practice of using drug company donations for medical research violates federal
prohibitions against an agency supplementing its appropriations.
3. Reviewing VA procedures concerning financial controls imposed on investigators conducting such research.
4. Determining whether VA recovers all costs of performing drug company-sponsored studies.
5. Reviewing VA investigations of allegations involving Drug Company funded research at the VA Medical Center in
Long Beach, California.

The VA plays a major role in the medical research. The VA spends nearly $1 billion a year on about 15,000 studies
involving 150,000 patients.
The VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System boasts about its ability to collect and consolidate genetic, health,
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 27 of 28 Page ID #:1418

military exposure and lifestyle information in its database. That database is to be used for the conduct of health
and wellness studies to determine which genetic variations are associated with particular health diseases. I find
that the VA is in a superb position to conduct such complex genomic research.

Please be advised that pursuant to 45 CFR 46(Code of Federal Regulations), Section 46.116 states "no investigator
may involve a human being as a subject in research covered by this policy unless the investigator has obtained the
legally effective informed consent of the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative. An investigator
shall seek such consent only under circumstances that provide the prospective subject or the representative
sufficient opportunity to consider whether or not to participate and that minimize the possibility of coercion or
undue influence. The information that is given to the subject or the representative shall be in anguage
understandable to the subject or the representative. No informed consent, whether oral or written, may include
any exculpatory language through which the subject or the representative is made to waive or appear to waive any
of the subject's legal rights, or releases or appears to release the investigator, the sponsor, the institution or its
agents from liability for negligence."
Informed consent is swell-established legal rule developed traditionally in common law and more recently
embodied in statute. It applies most commonly to procedures used by medical personnel, and requires a patient
to be fully informed of the relative risks and benefits of a procedure, and their consent to the procedure. The
same rule applies to experimentation and research involving human subjects.

Director Dannenberg, it appears that the federal government has engaged me in unethical human radiation
experiments for quite some time and may continue to engage me until I withdraw my consent. While
Congressional hearings were held, and measures have been, or are being implemented to stop such practices;
there may have been some loopholes that allowed experimentation to take place without the knowledge and
consent of myself as a human subject. I pray that this will eliminate the quasi-legal nature of any unethical
research activities and expose them to the light of day. These acts are a blatant disregard for the rule of law and

During the course of litigation, the Court construed certain acts to fall under the Prison Litigation Reform Act
(PLRA). All biomedical and behavioral research conducted or supported by the Department of Health and Human
Services involving prisoners is subject to the law. In this instance, the Court has classified me as a "prisoner" even
though I am a free man thus establishing my right to challenge the agencys abusive practice of human and animal
subject research.

All research involving human subjects conducted, supported or otherwise are subject to regulation by any federal
department or agency which takes appropriate administrative action to make the policy applicable to such
research. This includes research conducted by federal civilian employees or military personnel, except that each
department or agency head may adopt such procedural modifications as may be appropriate from an
administrative standpoint. It also includes research conducted, supported, or otherwise subject to regulation by
the federal government outside the United States.
I'm reminded of the story of Henrietta Lacks. If you are unaware of Ms. Lacks, Director Dannenberg; Henrietta
Lacks was an African American woman whose cancer cells were the source of the HeLa cell line, one of the most
important cell lines in medical research. Lacks was the unwitting donor of these cells from a tumor biopsied during
treatment for cervical cancer at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S. in 1951. These cells were then
cultured by George Otto Gey who created the cell line known as HeLa, which is still used for medical
research. With knowledge of the cell line's genetic provenance becoming public, its use for medical research and
for commercial purposes continues to raise concerns about privacy and patient's rights. Neither Henrietta Lacks
nor her family gave her physicians permission to harvest her cells.

In the 1980s, family medical records were published without family consent. A similar issue was brought up in the
Supreme Court of California<htt~s://en.wikipedia.ors/wiki/Supreme Court of California> case of Moore v.
Regents of the University of
California<https://en.wikipedia.or~/wiki/Moore v. Regents of the University of California> in 1990. The court
ruled that a person's discarded tissue and cells are not their property and can be commercialized.
Case 2:13-cv-06030-ODW-AS Document 105 Filed 06/13/17 Page 28 of 28 Page ID #:1419

In this instance Director Dannenberg not only can I prove that government officials engaged in illegal research, but,
that government officials engaged in a "conspiracy to commit murder" in order to profit by commercializing the
tissue and cells "illegally" obtained from me during patient care.
Attached you will find a "Notice of Consent to Withdraw" from any further targeting, testing, manipulation, data-
collecting, and injurious harm byway of any biomedical, neurological or brain fingerprint implant. It is requested
that once this notice to consent to withdraw is received, that it is scanned and placed within my VA medical
records. Additionally, it is requested that within 30 days you provide all data obtained, stored, categorized,
scanned, published and researched pertaining to the illegal acts as described above. For your convenience I have
attached a "release of information" form which will allow you to enter and access my VA health record for the
purpose of scanning the notice of consent to withdraw and for the purpose of obtaining all research data as

In closing, not as a patient, employee or whistleblower, did I ever consent to the United States of America, to
include its agents, officers, or employees; both foreign and domestic the right to experiment, research, or secure
any tissues, blood or bodily fluids for the purpose of research or commercialization. Nor did I consent to the
placement of any said biomedical implant for the purpose of inducing any injuries to include death.

1 highly recommend that you cease and desist in any further targeting and testing to include the inducing by means
of implants, microchips, radiofrequency, neural implants and brain fingerprinting against me, my ex-partner and
our family pets.

Should you have any questions you may contact me at(562)826-9088 or directly at the address above.

Oliver B. Mitchell III