2216 Katzakian Way

Lodi, CA 95242
Phone : 209-687-1180
Fax: 209-687-1180
Email: jjw1980@live.com

March 3, 2023

Via Fax

Michele Kem
Secretary to Trial Counsel
State of California
Commission on Judicial Performance
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, CA 94102

MOTTO: “THIS IS HOW THE HOLOCAUST HAPPENED. EVIL PREVAILS WHEN

GOOD MEN AND WOMEN DO NOTHING.”

Subject: Request for Assistance

Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District (3DCA) case Waszczuk v. Regents of the University of
California, et al., Case No. C095488 Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 34-2013-34-
00155479

RE: RESPONDENT’S BRIEF, WHICH WAS DUE FEBRUARY 16, 2023

Dear Ms. Kem:

With this inquiry, I am enclosing a letter addressed to the 3DCA clerk dated February 22, 2023
(Attachment #1) and a March 1, 2023 letter addressed to attorney Karen Bray
(https://www.horvitzlevy.com/karen-m-bray), from Horvitz & Levy LLP, based in Burbank, CA
https://www.scribd.com/document/629179226/03-01-2023-Letter-to-Karen-Bray-Failure-to-File-
Respondents-Brief
Ms. Bray has represented the Defendants, the Regents of the University of California (UC Regents)
in this appeal since March 2022, together with her colleagues, Thomas Watson
(https://www.horvitzlevy.com/h-thomas-watson) and Lindsay Goulding, from the Porter Scott law

1
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
firm, based in Sacramento. As you were previously informed, Goulding, in July 2021, robbed my
wife of $22,284 from her savings while appearing before Judge Thadd Blizzard and his court clerk in
an unsuccessful attempt to set her up for an interrogation and criminal prosecution and to break into
her bank and 401(K) accounts.

After I sent my February 22 , 2023 inquiry to the 3DCA clerk to find out whether the Defendants’
attorneys had submitted their Respondent Brief, I received a copy of the 3DCA Notice on that same
day. It stated:

Dear Counsel:

The respondents' brief in the above case is overdue.

If the brief is not on file by March 9, 2023, the appeal may be submitted for
decision on the record and appellant's opening brief currently on file, unless
good cause is shown for relief. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.220(a)(2).)
Very truly yours,

COLETTE M. BRUGGMAN Clerk/Executive Officer

After a 90 days’ extension, default to file brief time, and another 15 days’ extension per Cal. Rules of
Court, rule 8.220, I saw that Bray and her colleagues were not very anxious to file this appeal, despite
the case having been pending for almost 10 years in three different courts without being brought to
trial. I guessed that Bray would opt not to file a Respondent Brief, or that she and Goulding would
wait until Shama Hakim Mesiwala returned as an associate justice to 3DCA in Sacramento County
Superior Court Department 53. I previously disqualified Judge Mesiwala, on June 29, 2021, pursuant
to C.C.P 170.6. Judge Mesiwala had replaced Judge Brown in Department 53 on January 1, 2021.
Brown colluded in 2014 with my former attorney and his friend, Douglas Stein, and Porter Scott
Attorney Michael Pott. Documents and records that I recently received from Wells Fargo Bank, the
California Controller’s office, and court records from June 2014 in Sacramento County Superior
Court Case No. 34-2013-34-00155479 and the 3DCA records in Case C79524 (anti-SLAPP motion),
including an unpublished opinion in Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No. C079524 (Cal. Ct.
App. Oct. 10, 2017) from June 2014, Petition for Rehearing
https://www.scribd.com/document/597635412/10-25-2017-3DCA-SLAPP-Petition-for-Rehearing-
Waszczuk-v-Regents-of-Univ-of-Cal-No-C079524-Cal-Ct-App-Oct-10-2017
and my Petition for Review, https://www.scribd.com/document/621715952/11-20-2017-Cal-

2
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
Supreme-Court-Petition-for-Review-Waszczuk-v-Regents-of-Univ-of-Cal-No-C079524-Cal-Ct-App-
Oct-10-2017 left no doubt that a large amount of money was in play in 2014 for Judge Brown to
erase my wrongful termination case in December 2014 or January 2015. Looking at the records and
using the preponderance of the evidence standard, it is more likely than not that Stein would have
been awarded in January 2015 a large amount of money by his co-conspirators, Liberty Life
Assurance Company of Boston and the UCOP executives, in exchange for ending in December
2014 my litigation against the UC Regents and an agreement not to sue Liberty for conspiracy and
racketeering, under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, 18 U.S.C. §1961 et seq.
(“RICO”).
As I previously briefed the Commission of Judicial Performance, I dismissed Stein on
December 16, 2014 and turned him in to the State Bar of California for stealing my retainer money
and for engaging in a conspiracy against me with the Defendants’ attorney from the Porter Scott law
firm, Michael Pott. Stein was used his friendship with Sacramento Superior Court Judge David I.
Brown to help my adversaries destroy my lawsuit against them with an anti-SLAPP motion
On January 14, 2015, the State Bar of California informed me by letter that Investigator
Amanda Gormley had been assigned to investigate my complaint, under the direct supervision of
Senior Trial Counsel Robin Brune. They would be investigating and prosecuting Stein, if warranted.
Furthermore, the letter instructed me to provide additional information about Stein’s alleged
misconduct. On January 28, 2015, I provided to the State Bar all knew at that time in a 20-page-long
letter about Stein’s misconduct .
https://www.scribd.com/document/621488012/01-28-2015-State-Bar-o-California-Complaint-
against-Douglas-E-Stein-Case-No-15-0-10110).
Gormley interviewed me on July 13, 2015. On September 25, 2015, I sent e-mail to her
asking about the status of my complaint against Stein. That same day, Gormley replied to my e-mail
as follows
Mr. Waszczuk:

Your file with be submitted to the prosecutor by October 9.

Please communicate with me via regular mail or via fax.
You will receive a letter from our office when the case is submitted to the
prosecutor.
You will be contacted by the prosecutor if she needs additional
information.

3
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
 Also on September 25, 2015, I sent to Gormley a draft of my Third Amended Complaint
(TAC). I intended to file this TAC to replace the defective SAC filed on September 30, 2014 by Stein
in conspiracy with Porter Scott attorney Pott and blessed by Judge Brown’s two Court orders of
September 22 and December 17, 2014.
After September 25, 2015, I never received an official letter from the State Bar stating
that Stein’s case had been submitted to the prosecutor. Gormley and Brune, who directly
supervised Gormley’s investigation against Stein, and Supervising Senior Trial Counsel Robert
A. Henderson, vanished and disappeared together with my complaints against Stein, just as my
unemployment insurance benefits, which were reinstated by the EDD on May 14, 2014 and then
stolen from me by the UC General Counsel and his deputies, judges, justices, and deputes of the
California Attorney General. My September 1, 2016 inquiry to State Bar of California Executive
Director/CEO Elizabeth R. Parkerand September 15, 2016 inquiry to California Senator Cathleen
Galgiani did not help at all. One year later, in September 2017, I learned that Gormley was
removed from the case in 2015 and that a new investigator supervisor from the State Bar’s
Chief Trial Counsel office, Laura Sharek, and Deputy Trial Counsel Laura Huggins, precisely
coordinated and synchronized their investigation and prosecution of Stein with 3DCA staff in the
proceedings of my two pending appeals, Waszczuk v. the Regents of the University California et
al, Case No. C079524 (anti-SLAPP motion) and Waszczuk v. California Unemployment
Insurance Appeal Board (CUIAB) Writ of Mandamus (dealing with my unemployment benefits
stolen in 2014 by judges and justices). As I learned six years later, on December 8, 2022, from
documents I received from the State Controller showing $272,097.51 and $4546.08 related to
Stein’s August 2014 deal with Liberty, it appears that the State Bar investigators
coordinated their actions with not only 3DCA staff but also coordinated with UC General
Counsel Charles Robinson and his deputies via University of California Chief Deputy General
Counsel Karen Jensen Petrulakis, SBN #168732, who became a member of the State Bar’s
Litigation Section Executive Committee in October 2014, and then with Liberty’s litigation
manager, Paula J. McGee.

In my cover letter to the Petition for Review from the unpublished opinion in the anti-SLAPP
motion Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No. C079524 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017), I
wrote:

4
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
 My opponents have manipulated the case and done everything possible to
prevent me from filing anything. In the Petition, I have included a long list of
the ways in which the case has been manipulated and delayed. I had an
attorney representing me, but he defrauded me of my retainer and attempted to
sell my wrongful termination case for $300,000 to my opponents because of
his addiction to drugs. See the enclosed State Bar of California stipulation in
this matter.

I am also submitting a Request to Waive Court Fee due to the devastation of

my life by the UC Regents five years ago. I am now on Social Security and
struggling with two lawsuits against the UC Regents. If it is impossible to
wave the fee, then I hope to get some money back from my former attorney,
who was ordered to repay the retainer he spent for his

In the Petition for Review (pp. 20–26) under the paragraph “Manipulation and delay of the
Waszczuk v. Regents of the University of California et al. anti SLAPP motion appeal in the
Court of the Appeal, Third Appellate District,” I chronologically listed and dated facts
showing how the State Bar-assigned investigators handled my complaint against Stein and
coordinated their investigation with UCOP lawyers and 3DCA staff (Attachment #28) to
prevent its use as evidence of their finding of Stein’s misconduct and conspiracy with my
adversaries in my briefs and pleadings (see

https://www.scribd.com/document/621715952/11-20-2017-Cal-Supreme-Court-Petition-for-
Review-Waszczuk-v-Regents-of-Univ-of-Cal-No-C079524-Cal-Ct-App-Oct-10-2017).

Most likely, Gormley got too deep into her findings by investigating Stein, and in October 2015, she
vanished along with my complaint. Her successors, Sharek and Huggins resolved the case by a
STIPULATION with Stein
The stipulation was signed by Stein on October 10, 2017, the same day 3DCA issued its unpublished
opinion in the anti-SLAPP motion Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No. C079524 (Cal. Ct. App.
Oct. 10, 2017) Laura Huggins signed the STIPULATION on October 11, 2017. The unpublished
opinion was delivered by a three-justice panel from 3DCA comprised of Presiding Justice Vance W.
Raye, Justice Ronald B. Robie, and Justice George Nicholson.
Instead of condemning both Stein and Brown’s misconduct, for covering up his friend’s crime and
denying the anti-SLAPP motion, the 3DCA justices praised Stein in their fraudulent opinion, saying:

5
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
 To the contrary, Stein was diligent and transparent—making an ex parte
application to assure the integrity of the document he inadvertently filed
during the briefest of suspensions for a minor transgression unrelated to
his professional performance. He should be commended, not chastised, for
his fervent representation of plaintiff’s interests.
The STIPULATION signed by Stein and Huggins on October 24, 2017 languished for two weeks
before being signed by State Bar Judge Maria Lucy Armendariz and filed in the State Bar Court.
This prevented me from using the STIPULATION as new evidence of Stein’s crimes in my Petition
for Rehearing based on the unpublished opinion Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No. C079524
(Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017).
One year later, on October 11, 2018, Armendariz was appointed by California Governor Jerry
Brown as a Judge in Los Angeles County Superior Court.
Judge Armendariz was appointed by former Supreme Court Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye to the
California Judicial Council and currently serves as a commissioner on the California
Commission on Access to Justice and on the Committee to Review the Operations and Structure
of the Commission on Judicial Performance.

The Judicial Council is the policymaking body of the California courts, the largest court system
in the nation. Under the leadership of the Chief Justice, and in accordance with the California
Constitution, the council is responsible for ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial,
and accessible administration of justice.

My Petition for Rehearing from the unpublished opinion on Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No.
C079524 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017) was denied by 3DCA Presiding Justice Raye on November 9,
2017
The above-presented facts and documents show that I did not receive a consistent, independent,
impartial, and accessible administration of justice in the four California Court from its judges
and including the State Bar Court.

This scheme of corruption, cover ups, and racketeering, with the involvement of the UCOP
executives, Liberty litigation manager Paula McGee, State Bar executives and the State Bar
Court, judges and staff from the Sacramento County Superior Court’s four departments, justices
and staff from 3DCA, and the full knowledge of former California Supreme Chief Justice Cantil-
Sakauye continued through March 20, 2019 and was finalized by the transfer of $272,097.51

6
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
and $4546.08 to the SCO by Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and the March 20, 2019
California Supreme Court rubber stamp justice, which denied my Petition for Review of
Waszczuk v. Cal. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd., No. C079254 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 27, 2018),
thus legitimizing further the theft of my unemployment insurance benefits which had been
reinstated by the EDD on May 14, 2014.

It is not my pleasure to constantly bother the Commission on Judicial Performance with my

appeal in the above-captioned case, but I have no other option for dealing with 3DCA’s
collaboration between its staff and attorneys from the Porter Scott and Horvitz and Levy law
firms.

Bray is the 16th attorney hired by the Defendants, the Regents of the University of California,
involved this wrongful termination over the past nearly 10 years. This has nothing to do with
normal litigation and the law. Since I filed my wrongful termination case on December 4, 2013,
my wife and I have become prey for gangsters with J.D. degrees .

On March 1, 2023, at 2:10 p.m., I sent a letter to Bray about the Respondent Brief that was due
to be filed on February 16, 2023, after an extra 30 days’ extension had been granted above a
previous 60-day extension she had already been granted. Bray used her mother’s death as an
excuse for her failure to file.
https://www.scribd.com/document/629179226/03-01-2023-Letter-to-Karen-Bray-Failure-to-File-
Respondents-Brief
On February 17, 2023, the 3DCA should have sent her a notification about her failure to file the
brief in a timely manner. On February 22, 2023, I sent a reminder to the 3DCA clerk about the
Brief not being filed. Then, the 3DCA clerk reminded Bray on the same day about her failure to
file.

After I sent my letter to Bray on March 1, 2023 at 2:10 p.m., she, at 3:52 p.m., sent me a copy of
the Respondent Brief, which is merely a redacted and racially motivated piece of slander that
Lindsay Goulding filed as a Summary Judgment on May 14, 2021. This was most likely written
by Goulding herself.

7
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
https://www.scribd.com/document/629165406/03-01-2023-Respondent-s-Brief-Waszczuk-v-
UC-Regents
Bray did not have time, because she had another appeal in her representation of the UC Regents
in the 1st Appellate District against a UC employee who was represented by a powerful law firm
from Sacramento, Loan K. Le v. The Regents of the University of California, Case No. A162114.
An unpublished opinion was filed in that case on 02/23/2023.

Following Bray’s e-mail with the attached Respondent Brief, at 5:20 p.m., I received notification
from 3DCA saying “Transaction Occurred Re : Respondent Brief in the Case C095488.”
However, I did not receive a stamped copy via TrueFiling. There is no 3DCA case docket entry
in this matter; thus, I do not know whether the Respondent’s Brief was actually filed or not. It is
always the same game. I am finding out one or two weeks later whether the UC Regents
attorneys have filed something in court or not.

CONCLUSION
What happened my in wrongful termination case, and to me and my wife in 2014, 2018, and 2021
in Sacramento County Superior Court Department 53, with Judge David I. Brown; Department 54,
with Judge Christopher Krueger; Department 37, with Judge Jennifer K. Rockwell; and Department
43, with Judge Thadd Blizzard, is beyond judicial misconduct. It a crime what these judicial officers
have done to me and my wife, and it has nothing to with any justice or law.

With this letter, I am asking the Commission on Judicial Performance to intervene, fully investigate
this case, and invalidate all of the rulings and orders by former Judge Brown in the anti-SLAPP
motion proceedings. I would like to advise the Commission on Judicial Performance again that, on
June 18, 2021, I filed two motions in 3DCA, a motion to recall remittitur and motion/request for
judicial from the totally fraudulent unpublished opinion Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No.
C079524 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017),
https://www.scribd.com/document/512401861/06-18-2021-Motion-to-Recall-the-Remittitur-or-
Modify-the-Opinion-anti-SLAPP-motion
which praised Judge Brown’s collusion with my former attorney, Douglas Stein, and praised Stein’s
crimes. Stein, who stole my retainer money, practiced law with a suspended attorney’s license,

8
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
conspired with my adversaries’ attorney Michael Pott, and together with Pott colluded with his
friend Judge Brown to end my litigation in December 2014, was glorified by the 3DCA opinion in
Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No. C079524 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017).

As I pointed out in my previous inquiry, my June 18, 2015 motion to recall remittitur and request
were improperly denied by the rubber stamp justice of 3DCA under Vance Raye. Justice Raye, at
the relevant time, was under intensive investigation for alleged serious misconduct that victimized
many litigants, including me.

In my previous inquiry, I described in detail how my wife, on July 2, 2021, was terrorized,
terrified, and victimized by Goulding, Judge Blizzard, and his clerk or assistant from the
Sacramento County Superior Court. I think it is entirely proper for the Commission on Judicial
Performance to intervene with the Sacramento County Superior Court Presiding Judge and make
Judge Blizzard issue a court order that would mandate Goulding return the ransom she extorted
(in the amount of $22,284) from my wife on that day. This attempt is eerily similar to what
happened in 2012–2016 to my psychologist, Franklin Bernhoft Ph.D., and his wife, Dorothy
Bernhoft, a teacher from Lodi, CA.

On January 31, 2012, the California Social Services Agency and Lodi Police raided the Bernhofts’
residence in Lodi to provoke and harm Dr. Bernhoft. The raid was orchestrated by UC senior Vice
President Daniel Dooley and his wife, Diana Dooley, who was the newly appointed Secretary of the
California Health and Human Services Agency. Dr. Bernhoft did not arrive home until after the raid
was over. During the raid, his guns and other items were confiscated. His wife was criminally
charged for the alleged abuse of children she was taking care of in the licensed day care she ran.

The Dooleys made sure that Bernhoft would forget that he ever provided services to me or knew
me. You may read more about this here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/600581546/09-03-2022-IRS-WBO-ICE-FORM-211-
APPLICATION-FOR-AWARD-Polish-Refugee-v-University-of-California-White-Collar-Crime
(pages 94–154)

9
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
Prior to the raid on the Bernhofts’ residence, UCOP thugs, in conspiracy with Liberty Life
Assurance Company of Boston (Liberty), who denied my short-term disability insurance benefits in
November 2011, scheduled me for a psychiatric evaluation in Sacramento, on February 1, 2012.
The aim was to lock me up in a state mental health facility, under the orders of the Dooleys and
backed by San Joaquin County Court Judge Brett H. Morgan’s court order.
When I read the January 12, 2012 Notice, which I received unexpectedly from the then-unknown to
me MLS National Medical Evaluation Services, advising me of a scheduled psychiatric evaluation, I
knew it was a set up. My four-month stress-related sick leave had ended on January 5, 2012, and my
medical benefits were canceled by the university. My employment status was unknown in January
2012. My last day of work was August 31, 2011. My short-term disability insurance was cancelled
after Liberty denied my benefits in November 2011.

The statements in the January 12, 2012 MLS notice did not leave any doubt that I would not return
from the evaluation, if were to appear in the offices of Glenn Hakanson, M.D., a physician unknown
to me.

January 12, 2012

Jaroslaw Waszczuk 524 Swallow Lane Lodi, CA 95240
RE: (Shortl/Long) Term Disability Benefits
Company Name Liberty Mutual Claim #: 4154074
Dear Jaroslaw Waszczuk:
Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, your disability benefits
provider, has requested that MLS National Medical Evaluation Services
schedule you for an independent psychiatric evaluation.
You may not cancel or change this appointment without the approval of
your claims case manager. If an emergency situation arises which
prevents you from attending this appointment, you must contact your
claims case manager at Liberty Mutual as soon as possible at 800-210-
0268.
This examination will he performed by:
DOCTOR; Glenn Hakanson, M.D.
ADDRESS: 2300 N. St., Ste, 4
Sacramento, CA 95816
PHONE: 916-444-9231
Your appointment has been scheduled for:
DATE: 2/1/2012
TIME; 12:00 PM
Please contact the doctor's office to confirm your appointment and, if
necessary, obtain directions to the office. Liberty is responsible for paying

10
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
 for the IME, however, should you fail to attend the IME and you fail to
cancel the IME within the required timeframe (7 business days prior to the
appointment), you will be responsible for paying any missed appointment
fee that is assessed to Liberty
This physician is not authorized to give medical advice or treatment with
respect to your condition.
If you, or your representative, wish to review the results of this examination,
Liberty Life Assurance Company will provide the results to your attending
physician. You may then schedule an appointment with your attending
physician. Dr. Hakanson is not authorized to share the results with you
directly. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston will pay all fees for this
examination. Do not accept billing or make payment for this examination

Please call if you have any questions regarding this examination. Sincerely,
MLS National Medical Evaluation Services
cc: Liberty Life, Barbara Keaveney
I addressed the University of California employees mental health in my September 26, 2015
response to US Senator Dianne Feinstein letter dated June 7, 2015 with words:
https://www.scribd.com/document/629197222/09-25-2015-Letter-to-US-Senator-Dianne-
Feinstein-Request-for-Help

On June 25, 2013, I sent a seven-page inquiry for help to Hon. Darrell
Steinberg-California Senate President Pro Tempore; Hon. Das Williams-
State of California Assembly Member and Chair of the Higher Education
Committee; Hon. Roger Hernandez-State of California Assembly Member
and Chair on the Labor and Employment Committee with the same result.
In 2000, I was briefly involved, together with Hon. Darrell Steinberg, in
bringing back to work four suspended employees at the UC Davis Medical
Center Integrated Access Unit.
These four workers became the target of vicious and unscrupulous retaliatory
action by UCDMC management after they had complained about safety issues
in the department, and they were escorted off campus, suspended without pay,
and placed on investigatory leave. One of the complaining workers was
accused of serious misconduct and received a letter of dismissal.
The Hon. Steinberg responded to my inquiry but refused to help. If I had
known in 2013 about the 60-year-old William Prindible, who was fired from
his job because he was doing his duty, I would have mentioned this to Mr.
Steinberg as well. The previously mentioned William Prindible was suffering
from bipolar disorder, as was Mr. Steinberg’s daughter, Jordana, when she was
7 years old, according to many publications. Also, Mr. Steinberg’s daughter

11
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
 suffered and recovered from a more serious mental illness during a very
challenging and heart-touching journey. Mr. Steinberg daughter’s illness is
what drove Proposition 63.
However, in 2013, I did not know that Mr. Steinberg had secured for himself
the prestigious Director of Policy and Advocacy position for the new UC
Davis Behavioral Health Center of Excellence, the $7.5 million UC Davis
center funded by Proposition 63, California’s tax on millionaires that funds
programs for people who are mentally ill. Steinberg, a longtimeadvocate for
mental health programs, wrote the 2004 measure, and the institution was
funded by a measure he championed while in the Legislature. It was a
remarkable achievement. However, I am not sure whether Mr. Steinberg knew
before he became a Director of Policy and Advocacy for the new UC Davis
Behavioral Health Center of Excellence how many thousands of UC Davis
employees, including myself, were forced to visit psychiatrists and
psychologists to seek help due to unscrupulously abusive and vindictive Nazis
such as the corrupted UC Davis administration and management.
As I asked you in my previous inquiry for help, I am repeating my request and
am respectfully asking you again to intervene in this case with the UC Regents
and UC President Janet Napolitano and ask them to give me my job back,
which was guaranteed to me indefinitely by the Settlement–Agreement with
the UC Regents, and to restore my and my spouse’s life to its normal level.
This is what this letter is about, besides other issues. If you would like to see
my annual employee performance reviews, I will be glad to provide them to
you.
Furthermore, I believe it is also your moral obligation to help me and prevent
any further oppression and violation of my civil and human rights by the
Regents and their lawyers at the University of California, particularly as I am
almost 65 years old, have had heart surgery, and require nine different
medications to survive day by day. You are a Senator of the country that gave
me political asylum and protection from oppression due to my struggle against
communism. My life and my family’s prospects have been destroyed in the
very country that supposedly promised to protect me from oppression. This has
been done by the branch of government called the University of California
with a former United States Secretary of Homeland Security in charge. How
much worse could the situation get?
I appreciate your time.
Best Regards,
Jaroslaw Waszczuk
CC: California State Bar, EEOC
Hon. UC President Janet Napolitano, UC Regents.
Enclosed: Draft of the Plaintiff’s Proposed Third Amended Complaint
The Regents of the University of California’s Motion for Automatic Stay filed
on September 25, 2015.

12
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
Another victim of the Dooleys was a staunch adversary of the corrupt UCOP, the most popular
California State Senator, Leland Yee. Senator Yee served five years in federal prison by
making one call, prearranged by the FBI, with Diana Dooley’s help, to the California
Department of Public Health on October 12, 2012. Yee is also a psychologist, like Dr. Bernhoft.
It’s a long story, but life goes on.
I addressed witch hunt and prosecution of California Senator Leland Yee in my September 15,
2016 letter addressed to the California Senator Cathleen Galgiani as follow :
https://www.scribd.com/document/629205873/09-15-2016-Letter-to-California-Senator-
Cathleen-Galiagiani-Request-for-Assistance

After I read the March 26, 2013 unsealed 137-page Affidavit of Special FBI
agent Emmanuel v. Pascua in Support of the Complaint against Senator Leland
Yee; the July 15, 2015, 51-page Leland Yee's Plea Bargain the February 17,
2016, the United States sentencing Senator Leland Yee memorandum and the
November 13, 2013 Notice of Motion and Motion for Order to Show Cause
Why Government Should Not Be Held In Contempt for or Violation of
Magistrate Judge's Order Sealing FBI Affidavit; and the Request For Sanctions
in the California Senator Ronald Calderon's case I came to the conclusion that:
The former United States of America Secretary of Homeland Security Janet
Napolitano and her friend, the former United States of America Attorney from
the Northern District of California Melinda Haag and gangsters from the
University of California are entirely responsible for the destruction of
California Senator Leland Yee's existence in order to divert attention away
from and thereby protect the University of California's white collar criminals
who are responsible for more serious crimes.
The California Senator Yee was molested for three years by FBI until he was
attached to some Chinese gang from the San Francisco Bay Area to make him
criminal and to make him disappear from California's political arena. It took
the FBI almost three full years to take the 65-year-old Californian Senator Yee
down.
The FBI converted $70,000 of Leland Yee's debts from the San Francisco
Mayoral campaign into bribery, racketeering, money laundering, firearms, and
dealings with a terrorist organization in the Philippines, resulting in a five-year
prison term. It is unbelievable what the FBI is capable of. Even former
Speaker of the House Hon. Nancy Pelosi did not believe that it could be
true after Senator Yee was arrested and the Affidavit of Special Agent
Emmanuel V. Pascua in support of the complaint against Senator Leland was
unsealed two days after it was sealed and was then published to discredit,
humiliate, and prejudice senator.

13
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
 What was done to Leland Yee is like something from George Orwell's 1984 or
Animal Farm or like something from North Korean society with Kim Jung-Un
in charge.
The complaint against Douglas Stein is a small part of the picture related to
Leland Yee's prosecution, but it is an important part.
I am quite sure of this, and I believe that California Attorney General Kamala ,
half of the California government, Assembly Speaker John Perez and former
Senate President pro Tempore Darrel Steinberg are perfectly aware of what
really happened to Leland Yee and why.
History will show that this prosecution was the most shocking of all time. The FBI attacked
democracy, the right to vote, the People's voice, and spat in the eye of the legislature. They
forced the taxpayer to compete against the FBI to support elected officials and they used
taxpayer money to do it. The FBI lied, cheated, and stole. The United States Attorney's Office
protected political criminals and, at the same time, sought to credit itself with interfering with
crime the Government created. They knowingly imprisoned and prosecuted an innocent man.
The Government has shown a lack of regard for human life, even using it as collateral at times.
This operation was always about the end goal and every single agent and prosecutor went blind
while staring at it for so long.
THIS IS HOW THE HOLOCAUST HAPPENED. EVIL PREVAILS WHEN GOOD MEN
AND WOMEN DO NOTHING.

Sincerely

Sincerely,

Jaroslaw Waszczuk
https://www.scribd.com/document/494446114/Solidarity-Anti-Communist-Movement-
Poland-1980-1982

CC:
State Bar of California Executives
Katherine Mola -Senior Staff Counsel with the California State Auditor
Hon. Maria Lucy Armendariz- California Judicial Counsel Member
14
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
California Senator-Dr. Susann Talamantes- Eggman
California Governor Hon. Gavin Newsom’s Office

15
03-02-2023 Michelle Kem -CJP
2216 Katzakian Way
Lodi, CA 95242
Phone: 209-687-1180
Fax: 209-729-5154
E-mail: jjw1980@live.com

March 1, 2023

Karen M. Bray
Horvitz & Levy LLP
Business Arts Plaza
3601 W. Olive Ave., 8th Fl.
Burbank, CA 91505

Re: The Defendants’ Failure to File Respondents’ Brief, Which is Now Overdue, 3DCA
Case No. C095488 - Waszczuk v. Regents of the University of California et al.

Appeal from the Judgment after an Order Granting a Summary Judgment Motion,
October 28, 2021, Hon. Christopher Krueger - Sacramento Superior Court Wrongful
Termination Case No. 34-2013-00155479 Jaroslaw Waszczuk v. The Regents of the
University of California

Dear Ms. Bray:

After my intervention with 3DCA clerk on February 22, 2023 to find out why you failed to
submit the Respondent’s Brief on February 16, 2023, per a January 9, 2023 court order, I
received a copy of the 3DCA notice that you received an extension of time to file, per Cal.
Rules of Court, rule 8.220 until March 9, 2023.

In your declaration of your January 9, 2023 application for an extension of time, you wrote in
paragraphs 4 and 5 as follows: “This litigation has a complex history, as it has been ongoing
for over 9 years. I was not involved in any of the trial proceedings or the prior appeal from an
order granting an anti-SLAPP motion in favor of other defendants. (Court of Appeal Case No.
C079524.)

4. Appellant Jaroslaw Waszczuk is representing himself on

appeal, as he did in the trial court. Mr. Waszczuk is not a
lawyer and it is challenging to understand some of the
arguments in his opening brief.”
-1-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
As you stated in paragraph 4, this litigation has been in process for more than nine years.
During these nine years, the Regents of the University of California were represented by 14
attorneys, listed below, from the notorious Porter Scott law firm based in Sacramento. None
of these attorneys, judges from the Sacramento County Superior Court, justices from the
Court of Appeal, or justices from the California Supreme Court advised me or wrote in their
pleadings or opinions that my arguments are “challenging” for them, nor have any of them
asked me for a clarification of my arguments. Further, my writing is edited by professional
proofreaders. In contrast, in 2016, in 3DCA on the court’s own motion, the respondent’s brief
filed July 25, 2016 in the anti-SLAPP motion appeal case C079524 was stricken for failure to
“support any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number
of the record where the matter appears” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(c). The
respondent’s brief was ordered by Presiding 3DCA Justice “RAYE, P.J.” to be refiled with
proper citations to the record on or before December 15, 2016.

Despite the above, I have been accused of consistently violating the rules and failing to cite
the record. As an old Polish proverb says, “The blacksmith was at fault, but the gypsy was
hanged.” This is exactly what you did in your January 9, 2023 declaration filing when you
blamed me for your failure to file the Respondent Brief after the initial 60 days’ extension of
time and again after an additional 30 days. You have blamed me for your premediated and
deliberate failure to file this brief. In addition to deceiving me and the court, you used your
own mother’s death as an excuse not to file the brief in the case, where the Defendants are
represented by two powerful law firms paid by an entity with a $40 billion annual budget
against me, a self-represented litigant whose life was destroyed by the Defendants, the
Defendants’ lawyers, and judges and justices from three California Courts.

I would like to advise you that, 23 years ago, in December 1999, I prevailed on the appeal in
3DCA court while representing myself in cases C30005 & C036253, Jaroslaw Waszczuk v.
Destec Energy, in which the Defendants were represented by the powerful labor and
employment law firm Littler Mendelson, of San Francisco (see Attachment #1).

-2-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
As you read the December 3, 1999 unpublished opinion in this case, you will notice that one
of the 3DCA justices who decided the case was Vance W. Raye, who 11 years later, in
December 2010, was appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to serve as the court’s
Presiding Justice. Twelve years later, in May 2022, he was admonished and forced to retire by
the California Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) due to his judicial professional
misconduct (see https://cjp.ca.gov/wp-
content/uploads/sites/40/2022/06/Raye DO Pub Admon 6-1-22.pdf?emrc=f5c572).

In my January 9, 2023 inquiry of the CJP, I asked the CJP to investigate who, on July 15,
2021, denied my Motion to Recall Remittitur and Motion for Judicial Notice (Case No.
C079524) on Justice Raye’s behalf. At the relevant time, Raye was being investigated by the
CJP for misconduct.

As I pointed out in my inquiry to the CJP, I noticed from the 3DCA Docket in Chodosh v.
Commission on Judicial Performance et al., Number C091221 that, contrary to my appeal
in Case No. C079524, the Appellant’s motion and request for judicial notice filed on April 28,
2021 was returned on the same day to the Appellant for non-conformance. The following note
was attached to the docket:

… Appellant’s motion and request for judicial notice has been rejected.
The court information is incorrect and the pagination needs to be
corrected. The pagination needs to be corrected. Cal. Rules of Court,
rule 8.74(a)(2). The electronic page counter for the electronic document
must match the page number for each page of the document. The page
numbering of a document filed electronically must begin with the first
page or cover page as page 1 and thereafter be paginated consecutively
using only arabic numerals (e.g., 1, 2, 3). Correct and re-submit by
4/29/2021.
The appellant resubmitted a corrected request for judicial notice on the same
day, April 28, 2021.
Three weeks later, on May 20, 2021, the Appellant’s motion was denied by a three-justice
panel in 3DCA, with the clerk’s notification in the case docket:

-3-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 Appellant’s motion for judicial notice is denied. The material attached to the
motion will be disregarded. BLEASE, Acting P.J.; RENNER, J.; KRAUSE, J
In contrast to Chodosh v. Commission on Judicial Performance et al. Number C091221,
my motion for judicial notice in Case No. C079524, filed on June 18, 2021, was denied on
July 15, 2021 by rubber stamp justice by Justice Raye when he was under investigation by
CJP for the serious allegation of many years’ ongoing misconduct. I am waiting for the CJP to
investigate why my motion for judicial notice was not reviewed together with the motion to
recall remittitur by the 3DCA panel, as Chodosh’s motion was.

PORTER SCOTT ATTORNEYS WHO REPRESENTED AND ARE REPRESENTING

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IN THE SACRAMENTO
SUPERIOR COURT WRONGFUL TERMINATION CASE NO. 34-2013-00155479,
JAROSLAW WASZCZUK V. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
3DCA CASE NO. C079524 & C095488

1. MICHAEL WILLIAM POTT, SBN 186156, was a Porter Scott shareholder employed by
the firm from May 1997 through January 2015 (17 years, 9 months). Currently, Pott is
employed at PRISM, 75 Iron Point Cir Ste 200, Folsom, CA 95630-8813 as chief legal
counsel. Pott resigned or was fired from Porter Scott on January 23, 2015, one half hour after
I filed my opposition to his totally fraudulent anti-SLAPP motion (see
https://www.prismrisk.gov/about-prism/staff/).

From June–December 2014, Pott was a key perpetrator in conspiracy and collusion with my
former attorney, Douglas E. Stein, SBN 131248, and from September–December 2014, they
colluded with Sacramento County Superior Court Judge David I. Brown (Stein’s friend) in an
attempt to end my litigation against the University of California. Stein was disbarred by the
State Bar of California in January 2020 (see In re Stein, No. S245982, Cal. Mar. 1, 2018,
https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/131248). Judge Brown resigned from his
post in December 2020.

2. DOUGLAS LEE ROPEL, SBN 300486, was employed by Porter Scott as a law clerk from
-4-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 September 1–December 2, 2014. Thereafter, he was an associate attorney and assistant to
Michael Pott and David Burkett. Since March 2016, Ropel has been employed by Littler
Mendelson Professional Law Corporation (see https://www.littler.com/people/douglas-l-
ropel).

On February 27, 2015, Ropel appeared in Sacramento Superior Court for limited oral
arguments in Writ of Mandamus Superior Court Case No. 34- 2013-80001699, 3DCA Case
No. C079254, Waszczuk v. CUIAB, in lieu of UC General Counsel's Office attorney Cynthia
Vroom.

Neither Ropel nor any other Porter Scott attorney was the attorney of record in the Writ of
Mandamus case, and Porter Scott did not represent UC Regents in this case at all, until
Burkett stood in for Vroom on July 31, 2015. Vroom slandered me in her February 2, 2015
Opposition to the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Vroom died on November 27, 2019 after a
five-year-long battle with cancer (see
https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/sfgate/name/cynthia-vroom-obituary?id=2031898).

3. DAVID P. E. BURKETT, SBN 300933, was a Porter Scott shareholder employed by

Porter Scott from September 2006 through October 2019. He acted as the lead defense
attorney in my case from Jan. 23, 2015 through October 2019. Burkett is currently
employed by Knox Lemmon & Anapolsky, in Gold River, California

4. CECILIA GUEVARA, SBN 307159, served as Burkett’s assistant in 2016. She is now
employed by the California Legal Assistance Foundation, in Sacramento.

5. DANIEL J. BARDZELL, SBN 313993, was Burkett’s associate attorney from July 2017
through October 2019. Bardzell appeared for the first time in my case on October 3, 2018 in
an attempt to end my litigation via termination sanctions and to frame me for a bench warrant
by engaging in actions against me with two Sacramento County Superior Court judicial
officers, Judge Christopher E. Krueger, from Law & Motion Department 54, and Judge

-5-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 Jennifer K. Rockwell, from Department 37, or their clerks and staff from Departments 53, 54,
37 and 43. Bardzell is currently employed by the City of South Lake Tahoe.

6. NASIM SAHAR TOURKAMAN, SBN 300933, was employed by Porter Scott in

2016 as an associate attorney. She assisted Burkett in the anti-SLAPP motion appeal I
filed in 3DCA on June 11, 2015, Waszczuk v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., C079524 (Cal.
Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017). Tourkaman is currently employed by Littler Mendelson, in
Los Angeles.

7. CHAMBORD V. BENTON-HAYES, SBN 278970, was a Porter Scott associate attorney

from June 2015 through February 2017. Benton replaced Ropel in March 2016 as Burkett’s
assistant. She is the Founder and Principal of Benton Employment Law, based in Oakland,
California (see https://www.bentonemploymentlaw.com/).

On March 3, 2016, Ropel sent me the following e-mail:

From: Douglas Ropel [mailto:dropel@porterscott.com]

Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 4:50 PM
To: Jaroslaw Waszczuk <jjw1980@live.com>
Cc: Chambord Benton-Hayes <cbentonhayes@porterscott.com>
Subject: RE: Waszczuk - Stipulation
Hi Jerry,
I hope all is well; I have not heard from you in a while. I just wanted to let you
know that tomorrow is my last day here at Porter Scott. Chambord Benton-
Hayes will be taking over your case (along with David Burkett). She is a great
attorney and a good friend of mine, so I know you will enjoy working with her
(relatively speaking in light of the circumstances).
I do want you to know Jerry that it has been a pleasure to work with you. I
hope that your health is on the rebound and wish you and your family well.

8. COURTNEY DE GROOF, SBN 319334, was employed by Porter Scott as an associate

attorney from December 2017 through February 2019. She appeared briefly in Case No. 34-
2013-00155479, on July 2, 2018, by filing on behalf of Burkett a two-page-long Defendants’
-6-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Consideration of Order for Granting Legal Fees and
Costs Pursuant to C.C.P. § 425.16(C). de Groof most likely was recruited in May 2016 by
Burkett. de Groof worked for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) as a law
clerk, and Burkett represented SMUD in several court cases. From October 2001 through
January 2009, SMUD was buying surplus power from the UC Davis Medical Center’s 27-
MW cogeneration plant (see https://www.scribd.com/document/622460131/2012-UCDMC-
27-MW-Cogenaration-Plant-Power-Purchase-Agreement-with-SMUD).

De Groof is currently employed by Lozano Smith, in Sacramento, alongside Travis Lindsey

SBN 220935, the former UC Davis Medical Center Human Resources Labor Relations
Manager, who actively participated in my employment termination in May–December 2012.

9. NANCY J. SHEEHAN was an employee at Porter Scott and Porter Scott shareholder for 34
years. She and two other Porter Scott attorneys, Terence J. Cassidy and Katherine L.M.
Mola, SBN 264625, were the defense attorneys who participated in the settlement
agreement related to the November 11, 2011 orchestrated pepper spray provocation using
student protests on the UC Davis campus to remove UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi, UC
Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza, Lt. John Pike and Captain Joy Souza from their posts
(see https://www.scribd.com/document/622340707/09-26-2012-Most-Unwanted-Poster-and-
Pepper-Spray-Settlement-Agreement).

The case Baker v. Katehi, No. 12-cv-00450-JAM-EFB (E.D. Cal. June 11, 2012) and the
timing of the settlement agreement were precisely coordinated with my employment
termination in 2012 by the UC Office of the General Counsel, Porter Scott attorney Michael
Pott, and former Porter Scott attorney George Acero, SBN 266709. Acero has been a judge
in Sacramento Superior Court since May 2021. Pott and Acero were authors of the most
fraudulent anti-SLAPP motion since the Code of Civil Procedure – Section 425.16 was
enacted into law in 1992 and which was filed in California Yolo County Superior Court in
2005 and appealed in 3DCA. It is known as the “Vergos v. McNeal, 146 Cal.App.4th 1387

-7-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
(Cal. Ct. App. 2007) opinion” (see https://www.scribd.com/document/390497657/SI-22-
MeToo-Danny-Gray-Parts-Unknown-UC-Davis).

The second-most fraudulent ant-SLAPP motion was filed in Sacramento County Superior
Court by Porter Scott attorney Michael Pott on December 1, 2014 in my wrongful
termination case. It is known as the “unpublished 3DCA opinion Waszczuk v. Regents of
Univ. of Cal., No. C079524 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017).” I could explain you further why
these two ant-SLAPP motions are total frauds, legal hoaxes, and a travesty of justice, and
could cite a few cases, but I think it is unnecessary to do so, given your legal knowledge in
these matters.

In October 2019, Nancy Sheehan’s name was added to my wrongful termination case during
pleadings at a time when she was gravely ill with metastatic breast cancer; she died on
November 23, 2019, exactly one month after another evil-spirited and vexatious motion to
compel was filed by the Defendants’ attorney from Porter Scott, Daniel Bardzell. Sheehan
probably did not know that she had been added as an attorney in the case Waszczuk v.
The Regents of the University of California, (see
https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/sacbee/name/nancy-sheehan-
obituary?id=2059585).
Sheehan’s partner, Terence J. Cassidy, died two years later, on October 12, 2021 (see
https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/sacbee/name/terence-cassidy-
obituary?id=30483812).

The mentioned-above Katherine L.M. Mola coauthored with Pott a pamphlet titled
“Six Tips to Prepare Employee Evaluations.” Currently, Mola is employed as senior
staff counsel with the California State Auditor (see
https://www.auditor.ca.gov/jobs/join.html).

-8-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
10. AMANDA I. ILER, SBN 300268, was a Porter Scott senior associate attorney from
November 2019 through January 2021 and attorney from December 2014 through May 2018.
Iler appeared briefly in my case in December 2019 and resigned or was terminated from
Porter Scott in January 2021.

11. LINDSAY A. GOULDING, SBN 227195, has been a Porter Scott employee and attorney
since 2003 and a shareholder of Porter Scott since 2011. She is very well known in
Sacramento County Superior Court and in 3DCA.

As your office has been previously informed, Porter Scott’s Lindsay Goulding ambushed my
wife in April–July 2021 and stole $22,284 from her (see
https://www.scribd.com/document/505146196/202210427-Meet-and-Confer-Ex-Parte-l-
Goulding-Porter-Scott). Goulding’s crime was committed when my Motion to Recall the
Remittitur and Motion for a Judicial Notice from 3DCA’s unpublished opinion in Waszczuk v.
Regents of University of California, C079524 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10,2014) (an anti-SLAPP
motion), filed on June 18, 2021, was pending. My aim was to stop the terror against my wife
and the stealing of her money.

Goulding, in her reckless April–July 2021 conspiracy and collusion with Judge Thadd
Blizzard and the clerk from Department 43, unsuccessfully attempted to frame my wife for
criminal prosecution and clean out her bank and 401(K) accounts. Goulding’s criminal
misconduct led to the disqualification of Judge Shama Hakim Mesiwala on June 29, 2021,
pursuant to C.C.P 170.6. Judge Maesiwal replaced Judge Brown on January 1, 2021 in
Department 53.

Most likely, I would not have sought to disqualify Judge Mesiwala if I had known that George
Acero, a former intern in the UC General Counsel’s office at the UCOP and former Porter
Scott attorney at the relevant time, in March 2021, had been appointed to the bench in
Sacramento County Superior Court and was also named the remote judge for Law and Motion
Departments 53 and 54. Judge Acero resurfaced in my wrongful termination case on August

-9-
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
4, 2021. Recently, Judge Mesiwala was elevated to Associate Justice in 3DCA, where she
previously worked as a senior research attorney for Justice Ronald B. Robie for 11
years. Justice Robie was one of the three justices panel in issued unpublished Waszczuk v.
Regents of Univ. of Cal., No. C079524 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2017) opinion
As I wrote not so long ago to the Commission on Judicial Performance about
Goulding’s and other Porter Scott’s attorney criminal behavior my wife, IRENA
WASZCZUK, has been the target of the Porter Scott attorneys’ criminal activities
since February 2015.
On July 2, 2021, I arrived with my wife and my good friend and former co-worker from
the UC Davis Medical Center, WILLIAM BUCKANS, who has been a witness to
Goulding’s set attack aimed at my wife. Buckans has always attended the court
hearings in Sacramento Court with me, due to the previous vile threats by Porter
Scott’s attorneys in the Court against me and my wife. The threats have been reported
to the Court and the State Bar.
Upon arrival in Dept. 43, I noticed on the information board that Porter Scott attorney
DEREK HAYES was listed in this attack aimed at my 70 years old wife.. However,
Hayes was not present. Goulding appeared at the hearing and said she was the one who
was set and running whole interrogation . After the bailiff checked the names the court
clerk or judge’s assistant whose name I do not know became very rude and pushy to
get my wife interrogated. Then, I asked her what happened to my June 30, 2021 Ex
Parte Application for a continuance of this interrogation. She rudely responded that
she did not get the document and tried to begin my wife’s interrogation. The Court
received my Ex-Parte application on June 30, 2021 a same day it was filed in the Court
by Rapid Legal Services https://rapidlegal.com/ (ROA #262 Sacramento Superior
Court Wrongful Termination Case No. 34-2013-00155479 Jaroslaw Waszczuk v. The Regents
of the University of California)
Goulding was sitting there, but said nothing. Finally, I told the clerk that there would
be no interrogation of my wife in this courtroom, and I informed her that I had a check
- 10 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 in the amount of $22,284 to pay whatever should be paid. The court clerk did not like
this and tried to force my wife to be interrogated by Goulding anyway .She tried to cut
me out, stating that I was not a party of this proceeding . I told her again that there
would be no interrogation of my wife, and I asked Goulding to whom I should write
the check. The clerk interfered and said that she does not know how to proceed. She
then went to the judge’s chambers to get the judge. After 10 minutes, Judge Blizzard
appeared on the bench completely disoriented and unprepared for the hearing and not
knowing what the interrogation was to be about. He started looking with the clerk for a
Polish translator for my wife, even though I had written a check for $22,284.in my
hand. Finally, I forced Goulding to look at the check, which I issued to the UC
Regents and showed her my wife’s most recent Bank of America statement, which
verified that there were more than enough funds to cover the $22,284 .. Goulding did
not expect such an outcome when trying to set up my wife for the Bench Warrant to
frame her for criminal prosecution and to break into her bank account and her 401(K)
life savings. Judge Blizzard had no idea about these events because, apparently his
clerk did not give him to read my June 30, 2021 Ex Parte Application for a
continuance of the hearing, which included a copy of the Motion to Recall Remittitur,
a copy for Judicial Notice (without exhibits), and other attachments relevant to the ant-
SLAPP motion legal fees. Or perhaps Judge Blizzard pretended that he knew nothing
what the case is about .
Goulding left the court with the $22,284 bluntly stolen from wife’s account. I warned
her not to harass my wife anymore. Judge Blizzard issued a Court order to further
intimidate my wife by ordering her to return on August 6, 2021 if the case is not
settled. The return hearing was set just two days after the scheduled Court Hearing in
Dept. 54 for Motion for Summary Judgment before Judge Krueger.

12. OLATOMIWA T. AINA, SBN 325566, Porter Scott attorney from May 2019 to May 2021.
Aina appeared in my case as Goulding’s assistant in April 2021 in an orchestrated attack

- 11 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
against my wife. She resigned from Porter Scott in May 2021 after I sent her a letter about her
participation in the crimes and attack aimed at my wife (see
https://www.scribd.com/document/505164449/20210427-Meet-and-Confer-Order-to-Appear-
for-Examination-O-Aina-Porter-Scott#). Since May 2021, Aina has been employed by the
Fisher-Phillips law firm in San Francisco (see https://www.fisherphillips.com/people/tomiwa-
aina.html?tab=overview).
13. DEREK J. HAYNES, SBN 264621, has been a Porter Scott attorney since August
2009 and is a shareholder. Haynes was added to my wrongful case on 11/12/2019,
together with Amanda I. Iler.

On July 26, 2021, three weeks after my wife was ambushed by Goulding and had to
pay her a ransom of $22,284, Haynes was removed from my wrongful termination
case by a Notice of Change in Handling Attorney, which was filed by Goulding on
that day. The notice stated:

TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that effective immediately Lindsay A.
Goulding will become the handling attorney of this matter and David
P.E. Burkett, Esq., Michael W. Pott, Esq. and Derek J. Haynes, Esq.,
are to be removed from this matter.
Please update your service lists accordingly and direct all further pleadings,
correspondence and any inquiries regarding defendant REGENTS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA to Lindsay A. Goulding as follows:
Lindsay A. Goulding
14. The notice was signed by Goulding on July 15, 2021 and the proof of service was
sent to the court on July 15, 2021 via fax.

I do not yet know what Goulding’s reasoning was behind the issuance of such a
notification, by which she appointed herself solely to my wrongful termination case two
weeks after stealing $22,284 from my wife on July 2, 2021 with the assistance and

- 12 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 approval of Sacramento County Superior Thadd Blizzard and his clerk from Department 4

Golding and her assistant, Olatomiwa T. Aina, surfaced in my wrongful termination case
on April 12, 2021 by attacking my wife with a subpoena and order for examination, in an
attempt to frame her for criminal prosecution and break into her bank and 401(K)
retirement accounts by colluding with Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Thadd
Blizzard and his clerk from Department 43.

On May 14, 2021, Goulding filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in the Sacramento
Superior Court Wrongful Termination Case No. 34-2013-00155479, Jaroslaw Waszczuk
v. The Regents of the University of California, stating in the notice that she would become
the handling attorney of this matter. This was quite confusing.

At this point, I do not know who Goulding was representing on July 2, 2021 in
Department 43 if she was not the attorney of record in the case, per her July 26, 2021 filed
Change in Handling Attorney notice, which removed from the case Hayes and two former
Porter Scott attorneys, Pott and Burkett.

Whether Goulding, on July 2, 2021, was representing the Regents of the University of
California or Hayes, Pott, and Burkett were must be determined by the State Bar of
California and the CJP. The question is why Pott was listed as the attorney of record in
my wrongful termination case. The same question applies to Burkett, who replaced Pott
January 23, 2015 and resigned from Porter Scott in October 2019. Burkett and his
assistant, Daniel Bardzell, in 2018 colluded with Judge Christopher Kreuger from
Department 54; Judge Jennifer K. Rockwell, from Department 37; and Court Clerk
Erica Medina. The question has to be raised whether Medina is a friend or relative of
former Porter Scott attorney George Acero (both are from West Sacramento, see link and
Attachment #1,
https://www.scribd.com/document/505146196/202210427-Meet-and-Confer-Ex-Parte-l-
Goulding-Porter-Scott).
- 13 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 I noticed that Medina was unusually active in my case since June 2014.
Former Porter Scott attorneys Burkett and Bardzell, with their criminal activities,
attempted to end my wrongful termination lawsuit via termination sanctions by employing
Kreuger and Medina to frame me for a bench warrant by employing Judge Jennifer K.
Rockwell in an attempt to obtain information about my wife’s bank and retirement 401(K)
accounts. Goulding repeated in 2021 their criminal activities in the court of law by
colluding with Judge Blizzard and his clerk from Department 43.

I am assuming that Goulding’s Notice of Change in Handling Attorney pointed the finger
at Haynes, Pott, and Burkett to blame them entirely for her criminal conduct. Goulding
is one of the many soulless Porter Scott attorneys educated at the McGeorge School of
Law, which is an incubator for attorneys who lack professionalism, ethics, and civility and
who handle cases like a game to see if they can bury others with black fluff, deception,
and collusion with judges, justices, and staff in Sacramento’s two courts.
14. THOMAS L. RIORDAN, SBN 104827, information is unavailable for how long Riordan was
employed by Porter Scott. He is the 14th listed attorney from Porter Scott to be involved my
wrongful termination case against the Regents of the University of California. In addition to
Porter Scott, Riordan worked for three years as a research attorney with 3DCA in Sacramento
and was employed by the Sacramento law firm of Hansen, Boyd, Culhane, and Watson
(Hansen). Kevin Culhane, a partner in this firm, was elected to the Sacramento Superior
Court bench in 2008 and became the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court in
October 2015. A September 29, 2017 Courthouse News Services article entitled “Outgoing
Presiding Judge Praised for Sacramento Court Turnaround” (see
https://www.courthousenews.com/outgoing-presiding-judge-praised-sacramento-court-
turnaround/) reads:

Sacramento Superior Court Judge David Brown praised Culhane’s

“judicial temperament” and called his resources “presidential.”
“He must have a contacts list that rivals Bill Clinton’s,” Brown told the
crowd.

- 14 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 Along with Brown, other speakers included U.S. District Judge
Morrison England of the Eastern District of California and Vance
Raye, presiding justice of California’s Third Appellate District. Raye
said Culhane’s judicial esteem is at a high point and called him a
“capable and accomplished jurist.” California Gov. Jerry Brown also
congratulated Culhane on the award in a letter.
On August 30, 2016, with the advice of the California CJP, I sent a complaint to Culhane
(enclosed on the flash drive, see https://www.scribd.com/document/402166562/20160830-
Judge- Culhane-Senator-Galgiani-Evil-of-Corruption). This was in response to the deliberate
withholding the by Sacramento County Superior Court staff of my records on appeal in my
cases, especially Case No. 34-2013-80001699 Jaroslaw Waszczuk v. California
Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which should not have been continued in any court
after my unemployment insurance benefits were restored on May 14, 2014 and subsequently
vanished. I had to file two Motions to Compel to get my record on appeal in 3DCA. Today,
we know why.

Judge Brown resigned from the bench in December 2020, and Culhane retired from
Sacramento County Superior Court in March 2022. Both Brown and Culhane are now
employed by Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, (JAMS) Inc., in Sacramento.
The 3DCA Presiding Justice, Vance Raye, was removed in May 2022 by the CJP, as noted
above. In 2018, the newest Porter Scott attorneys, Lauren Bakke, Sarah Oh, and April
Perkins, were officially sworn into the State Bar of CA by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. at
the Porter Scott offices.

Porter Scott Attorney Thomas Riordan caught my attention for the first time in January 15,
2019, after I received via e-mail an unsigned Meet and Confer letter from the Porter Scott
Law Firm. It was supposedly authored by Bardzell; however, the letter was not sent by
Wendy Strasser, Bardzell’s legal assistant, but rather by Riordan’s legal assistant, with whom
I have never previously dealt.

- 15 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
Riordan resurfaced in my wrongful termination case on September 1, 2021 at the court hearing
before Judge Krueger from Dept. 54, who granted a Motion for Summary Judgement to the
Regents of the University of California, legitimizing the uncontrolled corruption in his court
Depart. Riordan appeared in lieu of Goulding, as Judge Kreuger’s friend. Kreuger ended the
hearing after 10 minutes by cutting me off, despite the case having been pending for eight years
in the totally corrupt legal process. Looking at Riordan’s record before the State Bar (see
https://www.porterscott.com/person/thomas-l-riordan/ and
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Licensee/Detail/104827), he has quite a history of professional
misconduct, including multiple acts of violating court orders, findings of contempt, and
harming the administration of justice. As you can imagine, it was much to my surprise that he
appeared at the September 1, 2021 court hearing to show his solidarity with Judge Krueger,
given his credentials.

CONCLUSION
It has been almost 12 years since my employment with the University of California was
terminated by corrupt white collar criminals from the UCOP on August 31, 2011. I was 60
years old at the time. Today, I am a 72-year-old man devastated by the predators and
criminals who have infiltrated and totally corrupted the justice system in California. As you
read my letter, you most likely noticed that quite a few people involved in this case have died
since my wrongful termination in 2011. I am not a litigator, I am survivor. Perhaps if you
continue to drag out the case, I will die and you will prevail. It must be very important for two
big law firms defending the UCOP’s white collar criminals to kill me, if you did not hesitate
to use your own mother’s death and your own sickness to deceive the Court and me to drag
this process further.

I do not know whether you will file your Respondent Brief that is due March 9, 2023. I am
guessing that that you will not, based on my reading of Horiike v. Coldwell Banker
Residential Brokerage Co., 1 Cal.5th 1024 (Cal. 2016) and other similar cases.

- 16 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
Due to my newest discovery in this case, I have come to the conclusion that my former
attorney, Douglas Stein, together with Porter Scott attorneys, especially Michael Pott, and
Judge David I. Brown and two 2014 settlements , one with the California EDD and one
with Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston have turned justice upside down for
nine years in three California Courts — the County of Sacramento Superior Court,
3DCA, and the California Supreme Court.

Stein was disbarred in January 2020 (see

https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/131248); his friend, Superior Court
Judge Brown, who presided over my case for six years, resigned from the bench in
December 2020; 3DCA’s Presiding Justice Vance Raye, was removed from 3DCA in
May 2022 by the California CJP; and Supreme Court of California Chief Justice Tani
Cantil-Sakauye announced her resignation two months after Raye’s removal. My
wrongful termination case, Jaroslaw Waszczuk v. The Regents of the University of
California Case No. 34-2013- 00155479, is still pending as the 3DCA appeal Waszczuk v.
the Regents of the University of California et al., Case No. C079524.

For the closing words of this letter, I will paste for you the May 8, 2014 emailed Meet
and Confer letter my former attorney Douglas Stein wrote to California Deputy Attorney
General, Ashante Norton, who represented the California Unemployment Insurance Appeal
Board (CUIAB) in the Writ of Mandamus, Case No. 34-2013-80001699, Jaroslaw Waszczuk
v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board (CUIAB) and Real Party of Interest the
Regents of the University of California (UC Regents),filed on December 2, 2013. Stein wrote
this letter to Norton six days before my unemployment insurance benefits, which had been
denied by the California Employment Development Department (EDD), were reinstated on
May 14, 2014 and then vanished.
From: Douglas Stein [mailto : desquire 1962 @hotmail. corn]
Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2014 11:02 PM
To: 'Ashante Norton'; 'Ashante Norton'; 'Ashante Norton'
Cc: 'Jaroslaw Waszczuk'; 'Jaroslaw Waszczuk'; 'Jaroslaw Waszczuk'
Subject: RE: Frivolous Demurrer

- 17 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 MS Norton:
Forgive my seeming ignorance. I did not mean to sound threatening
with sanctions and a state bar referral. Let me back up. Both of us are
officers of the court. We took an oath to uphold the law. I assume you
take that awesome responsibility as serious as anyone else, including
the attorneys and judges from the turn of the century who settled and
founded Northern California. I have always believed that as attorneys
we must adhere to those rules and even report attorneys or people we
see violating the rules. It's kind of like golfers who call penalties n
themselves or other players As State Bar Members we are obligated, at
the risk of serious consequences imposed by the State Bar, to protect
and preserve the courtrooms and the validity of any matter filed with
the clerk.
Now, if I am wrong about the civility, professionalism, ethics, and
respect that underlie the Code of Ethics rules that clearly, simply, and
historically demand and forbid any attorney from filing and/or
pursuing a motion or argument of law the attorney knows is without
merit or frivolous, We learned this in first year of law school.

So, I am giving you one more chance to take the demurrer off calendar
because, as of my first letter, either you knew the demurrer was
frivolous based on CCP Section 10 13 or, forgive me, you are not
smart enough or experienced enough to read and apply the law in the
most simple of events. You have no in-between. Thank God your
intelligence seems intact and impressive.
So. I assume you either found a statute or rule of court that excepts the
Writ from the 5-day extension set forth in Section 1013 or you know
your demurrer is against the law. To meet and confer, you really need
to let me know which one so I can plan accordingly. It would make a
difference,
Our mutual obligation to meet and confer to clear clutter or frivolous
matters off the courts' docket demand that you provide me with the
exception to 1013, especially since I have looked but could not find the
law, I believe it does not exist.

Our job is also to protect the integrity of the system. If you were faced
with a pleading by opposing counsel that was frivolous, or without any
reasonable belief the pleading is supported by the law, I would hope,
expect, and support your actions immediately reporting the violation of
our own rules.

- 18 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief
 If you do not believe I am trying to protect you from having to
experience punishment by the Bar for filing and pursuing a demurrer
knowing the Writ was timely filed, please do yourself a favor and
immediately seek and get the sage advice given by the elder attorneys.
The Bar and the Courts usually are not very understanding when an
attorney files and pursues a motion she knows is not consistent with
established law, IT IS SERIOUS.
Now, knowing our duties, please reconsider your unsupported position
to pursue the
demurrer, and instead, respect and follow our rules as officers of the
court. I look forward to confirmation from a senior supervising
attorney with the state, that the state professionally and justly took the
demurrer off calendar, or in the alternative, somehow produces statute
or rule of court that magically appeared in the past hour or so.
Thank you Douglas Stein
Sincerely,

Jaroslaw Waszczuk

CC :
State Bar of California Executives
State of California Commission on Judicial Performance
Katherine Mola -Senior Staff Counsel with the California State Auditor
Hon. Maria Lucy Armendariz- California Judicial Counsel Member

- 19 -
Karen Bray -Respondent’s Brief