Dear Director Comey;
I am writing to report corrupt and criminal activities by state and federal government officials within the District of Kansas and the Western District of Missouri. The continuing nature of this enterprise, and the severity in which it violates the public interest of the nation, requires your immediate action.
As an attorney, I represented the Missouri corporate client Medical Supply Chain, Inc. (MSC) in a hospital supply antitrust matter from 2002-2005. The defendant cartel of dominant manufacturers, distributors, and their investment bank US Bancorp Piper Jaffray (all members and partners in the group purchasing organization Novation, LLC) had identified Internet electronic marketplaces including my client as capable of saving 20 Billion Dollars a year in what was in 2002, a 1.2 Trillion Dollar marketplace.
Today, the total of hospital supply spending by health systems nationally is well over 2 Trillion dollars and rising due to unsustainable artificial inflation of hospital supply costs. In industries that are not monopolized, many of these same items produced by the same manufactures substantially decreased in price. Government subsidies and private insurers have not been able to cover the monopoly costs with premiums their insured customers can afford.
This same scheme has destroyed the Veteran's Administration ability to meet thedemands of returning soldiers and their war related injuries. But the technology to provide competition in hospital supplies has been kept off the market by the Novation LLC cartel.
A Novation, LLC cartel member, GE Medical and its president Jeffrey Immelt came up with a plan at the direction of General Electric's CEO Jack Welch to obstruct Internet hospital supply marketplaces from entering the nationwide market for hospital supplies by organizing the other members of the Novation, LLC cartel in an agreement to block new entrants through per se restraints of trade including refusal to deal, market share allocation, interlocking directors, and multi year exclusive supply contracts procured with bribes paid to hospital administrators and a scheme to give rebates without reporting the savings to Medicare. The Sherman Act scheme expanded to include extortion of medical supply manufacturers, including shares in supplier corporations and kickbacks to the cartel in order to be permitted to sell supplies to the 65,000 members in hospitals and
other health systems nationwide.
Unknown to me at the time I researched and filed the central antitrust complaint (attached to this letter as ATCH 1) in 2005 identifying over $80 Billion dollars lost to Medicare, Medicaid, CHAMPUS, and private healthcare insurers from the Sherman Act prohibited restrain of trade, the USDOJ Ft. Worth, Texas office had received a sealed False Claims Act complaint (ATCH 9) from a Novation, LLC executive identifying conduct to rig market process to hospitals nationwide through unlawful policies in the purchase of supplies that she had personally witnessed.
The relator, Cynthia Fitzgerald in her complaint US ex rel Cynthia I. Fitzgerald v. Novation LLC, et al, N. Dist. Of TX Case 03-01589 (ATCH 9) said that she sought money from companies that were competing for a contract for intravenous catheters, then awarded the contract to the one that gave her a check for $100,000, Becton Dickinson:
"Ms. Fitzgerald said that she never told the companies they could win the contract by making a big payment - the message was implicit. She said Novation was collecting donations then to finance an internal communication system for its hospitals, but it channeled many other cash and in-kind payments to the hospitals for other purposes.
In her lawsuit, she argues that the hospitals would not be able to accurately account for these payments when reporting their supply costs to the government. That meant they would claim bigger reimbursements from Medicare than they were entitled to."
M. Williams Walsh, "Senators to Investigate Hospital Purchasing," New York Times, Aug. 14, 2009.
In the District Court for the District of Kansas, Medical Supply Chain, Inc.'s complaints were repeatedly dismissed for alleged failures to plead elements of Sherman I and Sherman II violations and finally for failing to plead predicate acts of Hobbs Act extortion as a private cause of action under RICO. This was despite the profound simplicity of a per se Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 claim like a concerted refusal to deal (group boycott) which only requires two elements: that Novation LLC members and their associates including US Bancorp NA Piper Jaffray expressly agreed to exclude business with Internet marketplaces for hospital supplies and restrain health systems doing business with the cartel to the two Internet marketplaces which would protect the fixed supply prices and market shares of the Novation LLC cartel members Global Health.
Exchange (GHX) started by Jeffrey Immelt at Jack Welch's direction and Neoforma,Inc. See U.S. v. Realty Multi-List, Inc., 629 F.2d 1351 at 1366-76 (C.A.5 (Ga.), 1980) The record, including the complaints found to be deficient and answer memorandums in opposition to dismissal, demonstrates that each element to state a claim under the controlling case law for each jurisdiction, along with supporting averments of facts and circumstances for each element was present in the face of the complaints and amended complaints, arranged in order to support and make plausible each element of the claim.
Each complaint alleged that US Bancorp Piper Jaffray conspired with the non-defendants Novation LLC and Novation LLC's members including Neoforma, Inc. an Internet based electronic marketplace competing directly with MSC to supply hospitals to first breach a promise to supply MSC escrow accounts after US Bank first approving the accounts for each of the new MSC supplier representatives the company had recruited from 2000
applicants out of a concerted refusal to deal when the parent company US Bancorp NA suddenly recognized the threat to their Piper Jaffray investment syndicate's interests in underwriting new entrants to the hospital supply market that could be extorted by the Novation LLC cartel as US Bancorp NA had done to the other Internet marketplace Neoforma, Inc. to defraud its investors out of the $900 Million dollar capitalization of
Neoforma, Inc. raised by a prospectus to provide cost cutting competition to existing bricks and mortar based hospital suppliers.
The existence of a monopoly and unlawful restraint of trade was further made plausible in the complaints by citations to SEC registered press releases by CEO's of publicly traded corporations announcing the potential success of their ventures by obtaining exclusive supply agreements with Novation LLC (ATCH 1).
I believed at first that the court was in error due to misrepresentations of the defendants intheir motions for dismissal. My client and I went repeatedly to the appellate court seekingto correct what were clear errors in facts and the applicable law including the pleading standard. This resulted in orders by KS Dist. Judge Carlos Murguia, W.D. of MO Judge Ortrie D. Smith and Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Judges that vilified MSC, its founder Samuel K. Lipari and myself for briefing issues where the court ruled contrary to the controlling law and the expressly stated facts of the complaints, including appealing dismissed complaints that addressed subsequent conduct of the cartel members that injured MSC and restrained trade in furtherance of the ongoing criminal antitrust conspiracy.
When MSC's supply chain expert Lynn Everard was scheduled to testify before the US Senate for the second time in the September 14, 2004 "Hospital Group Purchasing: How to Maintain Innovation and Cost Savings" hearing by the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, the defendants undertook extrajudicial efforts to prevent the racketeering enterprise from losing the Sherman Act prohibited antitrust franchise that was skimming over $80 Billion dollars annually from hospital supplies in America. US Bancorp NA CEO John (Jack) Grundhofer did not believe the bank could contain the SEC prosecution of its investment banking subsidiary Piper Jaffray for fraud and conflict of interest in its published evaluations of new company stock offerings in a documented "pay to play" scheme when US Bancorp Piper Jaffray had a member on the board of Novation LLC to control entrants to the hospital supply marketplace and concentrated on healthcare I.P.O.'s. Elizabeth Weatherman, Vice Chair National Venture Capital Association had testified before the same Senate Subcommittee in 2003 that the new entrants to the hospital supply marketplace were being deprived of venture capital due to the open restraint of trade in the hospital supply marketplace resulting from the
anticompetitive conduct of the Novation LLC cartel.
Grundhofer, still fearing the Kansas District court's exposure of the bank's role in the criminal antitrust and Medicare fraud franchise from the MSC litigation, first attempted to have the Royal Bank of Canada purchase the US Bancorp investment bank subsidiary for approximately $600 million unsuccessfully, then jettisoned Piper Jaffray by spinning it off to US Bancorp NA shareholders at a loss.
The shareholders of Neoforma, Inc. prevailed in the preliminary rounds of a class action securities fraud case against the Internet hospital supply marketplace and its underwriting syndicate which included US Bancorp Piper Jaffray for what they alleged was a "pump and dump scheme." Not realizing how Neoforma, Inc.'s CEO Robert J. Zollars recruited from Novation LLC cartel member Cardinal Health, Inc. after Cardinal had obtained
through fraud Samuel K. Lipari's MSC business model for a cost savings neutral Internet electronic marketplace to radically cut hospital costs through enterprise resource technology.
Neither the Neoforma, Inc. shareholders or their Milberg Weiss class action counsel that took control of the Neoforma board during the litigation were aware of Robert J. Zollars' role as an agent of Novation LLC when the company was re-tasked to protect the Novation LLC artificially inflated hospital supply costs, despite the absence of any return from these non cost saving operations instead of competing with the cartel in a profitable
business reducing hospital costs that would have realized the stock investment returns described in the Neoforma, Inc. prospectus.
General Electric (GE), was a defendant along with Jeffrey Immelt, then president of GE Medical and Jack Welch, the CEO of GE, charged with conspiring with the nondefendants the Novation LLC cartel, and the two Internet hospital supply marketplaces Neoforma, Inc., and GHX in the second and third MSC cases against the cartel, and with taking independent subsequent action against MSC to prevent MSC's entry into the
nationwide hospital supply market or to establish the functioning independent Internet hospital supply marketplace Welch had instructed Immelt to prevent.
The complaint (ATCH 1) alleged Immelt at Welch's direction created the captive GHX with existing Novation LLC cartel members and represented the exchange as independent. MSC had obtained and filed as an exhibit to its 2003 complaint the standard contract whereby each member of Novation LLC was required to enroll in GHX and Neoforma, Inc., facilitating the direct per se antitrust prohibited conduct of allocating market share.
USA Thelma Louise Quince Colbert, the head of FCA Act investigations in the Ft. Worth Office of the US Attorney for the Northern District of Texas who had initiated the False Claims Act prosecution of Cynthia Fitzgerald's charges against Novation LLC was found dead in her swimming pool by her daughter on July 20, 2004.
The Criminal Chief of the Dallas U.S. Attorney's office Shannon K. Ross who signed the subpoenas against Novation LLC, General Electric, and Cardinal Health in the government case against the hospital supply cartel was found dead September 11, 2004.
Based on the federal codes cited in a copy of one of the subpoenas, the investigators were seeking evidence of health care fraud, conspiracy to defraud the United States, theft or bribery involving programs receiving federal funds, obstruction of investigations and other possible violations.
Jeffrey Immelt, now CEO of GE as a result of his maintaining the monopoly artificial inflation of hospital scanning machine lease costs through the Novation LLC cartel protection of market share, feared that the MSC litigation would reveal GE had violated an antitrust consent decree obtained by the Department of Justice against GE. To prevent discovery of the crime and to exploit time gained by the suspicious deaths of Assistant US Attorneys Thelma Quince Colbert and Shannon K. Ross, Jeffrey Immelt sought to eliminate other loose ends.
Two ethics complaints were initiated against me by the State of Kansas Attorney Discipline Administrator Stanton Hazlett for my representation of the African American James L. Bolden and his witness of American Indian descent David M. Price. The complaints and the subsequent two year prosecution of myself was expressly for seeking to vindicate the federal race based statutory civil rights of Bolden under 42 USC §§ 1981 and 1982 and the right of Price's infant son to be with his parent under the Indian Child Welfare Act ("ICWA") 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901–1963 which prohibited the taking and placement of the child without notice to the natural father.
The unusual conduct of Kansas Attorney Discipline Administrator Stanton Hazlett of prosecuting me for advocacy protected under 42 USC §1981, §1983 from state retaliation and the conduct of the Kansas District Court judge who was hearing both the Bolden case and the 2005 MSC case links the prosecution to what it clearly was, a pretext to deprive MSC of counsel and to obstruct justice in the antitrust litigation:
"23. The Hon. Judge Kathryn H. Vratil made no rulings in Medical Supply Chain, Inc. v. Novation, et al, KS Dist. Court case no.:05-2299 delaying the opportunity to obtain discovery on the defendants' participation in the wrongful disbarment of Medical Supply's counsel for almost a year.
24. Kansas District Court Judge Kathryn H. Vratil then participated in an ex parte discussion on the day of the disbarment oral argument with personnel and justices of the Kansas Supreme Court, disparaging Medical Supply's counsel without his knowledge or opportunity to question Kansas District Court Judge Kathryn H. Vratil's testimony in conduct designed to cause Medical Supply's counsel to be disbarred without due process.
25. Kansas District Court Judge Kathryn H. Vratil then removed herself from the case on October 20, 2005 minutes before the Kansas Supreme Court justices heard Medical Supply's counsel's oral argument. A transcript of the hearing which was resultantly delayed will give light to these unusual events."
Lipari v. Novation, LLC et al Jackson County Missouri Case No. 0816-CV04217 Appendix One, pg. 3 Procedural History. See also Lipari v. General Electric, US District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Case No. 07-0849-CV-W-FJG Proposed Amended Complaint. (Doc. 27 PL. MOT. FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e) at pg. 7, ¶ 10 ).
An associate of Kansas Attorney Discipline Administrator Stanton Hazlett, an attorney named Gene Schroer (that I believe investigated for Hazlett my representation of Bolden) arranged a meeting with Lipari and myself through the attorney Dennis Hawver.
I, Lipari and Dennis Hawver witnessed Gene Schroer trying to broker a surrendering of the MSC litigation to unnamed Chicago attorneys for a repayment of the $300,000.00 the corruption cost MSC while relaying the extortion Lipari would suffer from Hazlett if he did not comply. It was only Lipari's fear of being killed in Illinois that kept him from going taking the offer:
"One such person who had a conversation with Stanton Hazlett has made it clear that Mr. Landrith will be disbarred regardless of the law or evidence in the record. While this threat imperils Medical Supply's chance for justice in this litigation, the threat accompanied offers to "save" Medical Supply.
This involves replacing Medical Supply's counsel with a Kansas attorney as lead counsel I feel Stanton Hazlett believes he and Magistrate O'Hara can control. I was offered the $300,000.00 US Bancorp deprived Medical Supply of to capitalize my company's entry to market if I would agree to this arrangement. While this is being suggested to me repeatedly to the point that it is becoming a pressure, the suggested attorneys have no antitrust experience or familiarity with the present actions. 30. I believe Stanton Hazlett and Magistrate O'Hara are acting in the interests of the defendant
Shughart Thomson & Kilroy to use their control over the enforcement of Kansas Attorney Ethics rules to change counsel so that evidence of Shughart Thomson & Kilroy's actions in furtherance of the defendant's conspiracy will not be subjected to discovery, accomplishing the conspiracy's short term objective of concealingw hat was done to influence the Kansas District Court and the defendant conspiracy's long term objective of eliminating liability for their conduct. Because the conspiracy so overtly seeks to control and prevent the presentation of evidence regarding the occurrences in Kansas District court and the motivations for what was done to Mr. Landrith while suppressing evidence of misconduct including felony obstruction of justice, witness intimidation and harassment related to Mr. Bolden and Mr. Price's entirely unrelated cases."
Affidavit of Samuel Lipari (ATCH 2), Case 2:05-cv-02299-KHV-GLR Document 30-2 Filed 07/20/2005* Filings by MSC founder Samuel K. Lipari, proceeding pro se in Jackson County, Missouri state court revealed that he sought the help of the trusted mortgage broker Donna L. Huffman who was completing law school to continue the complex antitrust litigation against the Novation LLC cartel:
"563. The petitioner sought out the real estate financial help of Donna Huffman, a mortgage broker licensed by the states of Kansas and Missouri and by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (H.U.D.) in January 2007 while considering a sale or purchase of his father's Lee's Summit town home to continue the stability of his father's trucking business while his father made arrangements to undergo extensive chemotherapy in treatment of bone cancer.
564. The defendants caused Donna Huffman to be retaliated against for her association with the petitioner and his witness Bret D. Landrith.
565. Two investigators from the Kansas Attorney Disciplinary Administrator Stanton Hazlett's office came to the petitioner' s attorney Dennis Hawver's Ozawkie Kansas office around 8:30 am, Tuesday morning, November 27, 2007.
566. While there, the investigators and Dennis Hawver telephoned the petitioner's witness Bret D. Landrith in Lee's Summit, Missouri and revealed to Landrith that the Kansas Attorney Disciplinary Administrator was investigating Donna Huffman for fitness to be admitted to the Kansas Bar.
567. An investigator questioned Landrith about the Western District of Missouri case Huffman v. ADP, Fidelity et al, Case No. 05-CV-01205.
568. The Kansas Attorney Disciplinary Administrator investigators from Stanton Hazlett's office wanted to know if Landrith had represented Donna Huffman and if he had been paid by her.
569. The Huffman v. ADP, Fidelity action is available on Stanford Law School's class action website at 404
570. Landrith informed the two investigators that he had represented Donna Huffman on the Western District of Missouri case and that he never received a fee or payment for the case because he was disbarred and no longer was entitled to the property right of contingent fees for his representation but that he thought it had settled because Huffman later gave him gratuitously $2,000.00.
571. Landrith also informed the investigators that 100,000 to 300,000 members of the prospective class had been screwed out of their retirement because Donna Huffman could not find a replacement attorney after he had been disbarred.
572. Landrith reminded Kansas Attorney Disciplinary Administrator Stanton Hazlett's investigators that their office had disbarred him for bringing the Civil Rights claims of the African American James Bolden against the city of Topeka to federal court which Landrith had prevailed on in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals following disbarment and for representing James Bolden's witness against the City of Topeka theft of H.U.D. funds in an adoption appeal where David Price's infant son had been kidnapped.
573. The F.B.I. raided the City of Topeka front company Topeka City Homes which had been set up and controlled by the city after the Kansas District court erroneously dismissed Bolden's case and seized the records for violation of H.U.D. financial requirements.
574. As a result of Bret D. Landrith notifying the petitioner on November 27, 2007 of this meeting, the petitioner learned that his business associate Donna Huffman, an intelligent, capable woman who he trusts had been prevented from taking the July 2007 bar examination and was in danger of being found unfit by the influence of Kansas Attorney Disciplinary Administrator Stanton Hazlett's office over whether she is admitted in her home state and likely any other state to practice law on the false probable cause of being a plaintiff in the Western District of Missouri case Huffman v. ADP, Fidelity et al, Case No. 05-CV-01205 which was not frivolous and where the defendant Fidelity admitted to the claim impermissible fees on some of the subject Simple IRA mutual funds in a mailing to the prospective ADP class members after the complaint was filed.
575. The defendant Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP represented the wrong doers in ADP, Fidelity et al and attempted to exploit both the disbarment of Huffman's counsel Bret D. Landrith by extrinsic fraud perpetrated by the defendant Shughart, Thompson & Kilroy PC.
576. While Huffman was unrepresented by counsel, Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP misrepresented to Huffman the current state of federal antitrust statutes to securities dealers and threatened Huffman with sanctions disparaging Landrith's representation of the petitioner and the antitrust outcomes obtained by the defendant Shughart, Thompson & Kilroy PC solely through extrinsic fraud on the Kansas District Court.
577. In a direct response to the above averment stated in the petitioner's action against GE, The defendants Lathrop & Gage L.C., Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP, and Shughart, Thompson & Kilroy PC through their networking with State of Kansas officials willing to disregard their oaths of office and violate federal law, caused Donna Huffman to be again denied the opportunity to take the Kansas Bar Exam.
578. Donna Huffman was prevented from representing the petitioner with the false assertion that she is mentally unfit based merely on the unconstitutional pretext that she asserted her individual legal rights pro se in protecting her child and won Director James B. Comey against the State of Kansas that was found to be abusing Huffman's rights in Huffman v. State of Kansas Social & Rehabilitation Services, Shawnee County Kansas District Court case.
579. The Kansas SRS had failed to protect Donna Huffman's child from documented physical abuse and continuing endangerment by Huffman's exhusband, Chris W. Huffman a State Corridor Engineer for the Kansas Department of Transportation who's connections to the US Department of Transportation make him an important source and facilitator of million of dollars in federal highway funds for Governor Kathleen Sebelius."
Lipari v. Novation, LLC et al Jackson County Missouri Case No. 0816-CV04217 Initial Petition at 89-91 (ATCH 3).
Donna L. Huffman was kept from taking the bar in Kansas for three years after her graduation based on repeated extrinsic fraud committed against her by employees Kansas Attorney Discipline Administrator Stanton A. Hazlett. Hazlett's employees also used extrinsic fraud to keep her from being admitted to take the bar in the neighboring state of Nebraska.
Samuel K. Lipari also revealed that he had sought the help of attorney David Sperry of Independence, Missouri (ATCH 3) who had both experience in complex commercial litigation and the discovery disputes Lipari anticipated would be the deciding issue in his claims. Sperry feared the defendants manipulation of the venue and suddenly died of cancer.
Shortly after being disbarred, my brief prevailed in an appeal of Judge Kathryn H. Vratil's order dismissing Bolden's §§1981 and 1982 claims. When Bolden was unable to obtain replacement counsel, the misconduct by state and federal court officials forced the appeals court to dismiss oral argument. See Bolden v. City of Topeka. 441 F.3d 1129 (10th Cir. 2006). The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision reinvigorated 42 USC
Sec. 1981 as a cause of action against government discrimination and real estate takings in Bolden v. City of Topeka. 441 F.3d 1129 (10th Cir. 2006).
The decision has been favorably cited by the Sixth Circuit in Coles v. Granville Case No. 05-3342 (6th Cir. May 22, 2006).
The Kansas Supreme Court later adopted my argument (for which I was expressly disbarred for making) that the Indian Child Welfare Act applied to American Indians living off the reservation in its decision on In The Matter Of A.J.S., Kansas Supreme Court Case No. 99,130 (2009) and that it deprived a state court of jurisdiction to terminate parental rights without observing the requirements under the statute. The Kansas Supreme Court has also adopted my argument (for which I was expressly disbarred for making) that misrepresentations by a natural mother to conceal the existence of a child from a father could not disqualify a father's reasonable efforts to parent his child. In The Matter Of The Adoption Of Baby Girl P. Case No. No. 102, 287 at 13-16 (Kan., Oct. 2010). The state judgment of disbarment on its face expressly finds that I am disbarred because I made these arguments supported by the factual record of the case, yet has not reversed the taking of my constitutional property interest for my federally protected advocacy.
The prosecution of a white attorney for bringing an African American's colorable race based civil rights claims to federal court and for good faith appellate advocacy on the Indian Child Welfare Act is unlawful, void, and criminal under 18 USC §§ 241, 242, and 245. The statutes enhance the gravamen of the crime when the deprivation of rights was for the purpose of kidnapping a child through fraud. Evidence that I was wrongfully
disbarred to effect the taking of Baby C is found in Webb v. Hon. Judge Vratil et al, KDC Case # :2-09-cv-02063-FJG Memorandum for Summary Judgment ( evidence proving extrinsic fraud to procure my disbarment and the transcript of the tribunal's prevention of testimony and evidence regarding the adoption of Baby C, then recommending disbarment based on the Baby C case).
The Novation LLC cartel had extorted large interests in Neoforma, Inc. though their agent Robert J. Zollars, the CEO of Neoforma, Inc. against the interests of the Neoforma shareholders. The unlawful practices of Novation LLC had been repeatedly exposed in a series by the New York Times, and the two entities that had formed Novation as a super group purchasing organization to corruptly circumvent the Medicare anti-kickback statute, University Health Consortium (UHC) and Volunteer Hospital Association (VHA) also had to distance themselves from the SEC criminal investigation US Bancorp Piper Jaffray by divesting themselves of Neoforma, Inc.
When the investment banking and merger syndicate of Merrill Lynch & Company, Inc., Fenwick & West LLP., Innisfree Limited, Lazard, McDermott Will & Emery LLP., Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP., Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP., and William Blair & Company (formed by Novation LLC for the purpose of solving the cartel's exposure to the petitioner through Neoforma, Inc. ) discovered MSC's claims in November 2005 that had not been disclosed in Securities and Exchange Commission required filings and began to fear the liability of taking
Neoforma, Inc. private to obstruct justice in MSC's antitrust civil litigation and the government False Claims Act Medicare fraud investigation that were both seeking the records of where the Novation LLC member hospitals' laundered funds went; Jeffrey R. Immelt caused GE Capital (also a MSC defendant) to underwrite the loan giving the money to Novation LLC for merging Neoforma, Inc. with GHX, LLC the sole remaining competitor electronic marketplace for hospital supplies.
GE Capital funded the purchase of Neoforma, Inc. from VHA and UHC in March 2006. Neoforma was never profitable: "Neoforma's balance sheet shows a cumulative loss of nearly $739 million dollars as of Sept. 30, 2004." Healthcare Purchasing News March 2005. In 2005, in accordance with GAAP, Neoforma's net loss and net loss per share were $35.9 million dollars and $1.81 per share respectively, an improvement from the $61.2 million dollar net loss and $3.17 net loss per share recorded in the prior year." Neoforma, Inc. press release San Jose, CA USA 02/26/2003.
VHA and Novation's sale of Neoforma was also required because Novation was having to support Neoforma losses with $61 million dollars a year and the defendants no longer needed the fraud of second Internet hospital supply marketplace after procuring the dismissal of MSC's antitrust case in Judge Carlos Murguia's District of Kansas court and the reciprocal disbarment of myself in both the District of Kansas and the Western District of Missouri without hearings.
After being disbarred, I made myself available to testify in Lipari's pro se litigation in the State of Missouri (ATCH 3), believing that gave myself a chance to present my evidence to a jury and provide the evidentiary hearing that the State of Kansas Attorney Disciplinary Administrator and the District of Kansas was determined I would not have. However, the cartel continued its extrinsic frauds against Lipari in state court, repeatedly removing Lipari's cases to the Western District of Missouri District Court where the Chief Judge Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr. was on the board of directors of the Novation LLC cartel hospital chain Saint Lukes Health System, Inc. where the hospital's own documents revealed it was a director of Novation LLC and did over 90 Million dollars a year in purchasing exclusively through long term Novation LLC contracts. The claims would then be
dismissed contrary to the controlling law for each jurisdiction and the opinions would vilify Lipari for bringing the evidence of the ongoing Sherman Act 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2 and RICO 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961et seq. felonies in his cases.
After the disbarment I also was prevented from working even in out of state and in non law related jobs to support my four children due to reports to databases made by State of Kansas officials for having represented Bolden and Price further depriving me of my constitutional property rights for having advocated on behalf of these two minority citizens to vindicate their federal statutory rights to be free from discrimination.
This retaliation and foreseeable violation of my civil rights increased when my former client David M. Price had his 16 year old daughter taken by different state officials years later in furtherance of the growing and widespread practice in Kansas to take children through fraud and bad faith state child protective services actions violating 42 U.S.C. § 671 to further False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729, et seq., prohibited taking of US Treasury funds.
Price brought an action to seek to have me reinstated in Kansas District Court to represent him and a class of similarly situated parents in a class action against the state social services. The case was styled Price v. Hon. Judge Vratil et al, Kansas District Court ("KDC") Case # 2:09-cv-02198. Price was prosecuted for the second time a week after filing the action on a contempt charge brought by the Kansas Attorney General that had been dismissed by the Kansas Supreme Court. Then, Price and I were subpoenaed to testify in a federal criminal case USA v. Carrie Neighbors and Guy Neighbors, KS Dist. Ct. Case No. 07-20124, 08-20105, 07-20073 before Judge Carlos Murguia in the belief that I would be discredited with a perjury charge. David M. Priced served over 6 months of the jail sentence for contempt while the case was on removal to federal court even though the Tenth Circuit had exclusive jurisdiction from an appeal of the remand.
When the retaliation for my testimony in the federal criminal case USA v. Carrie Neighbors and Guy Neighbors did not succeed, I was charged with contempt of court in my 2004 divorce case where I was never personally served and subject to only in rem jurisdiction and could not support my family because of the continuing unlawful conduct of state officials including social services officials that kept me from being employable in even warehouse or McDonald's food preparation jobs.
I contacted the state officials by letter explaining the lack of jurisdiction to enforce money judgments (I had also sent them registered letters in 2007) and why their continued conduct was unlawful and provided them case law that clearly established their violation of my rights for having represented Price's American Indian infant son and the African American James Bolden's civil rights claims was unlawful. In retaliation they cut off my food stamps and threatened to jail me.
I was forced to bring causes of action to enjoin the state officials and seek damages in the Shawnee County, State of Kansas court (ATCH 17). However the court ruled that 42 USC § 1981 does not cover white attorneys being retaliated against for their advocacy on behalf of African Americans or the American Indian infant Baby C. This ruling was due to repeated misrepresentations to the court of the controlling federal law by state officials
and misrepresentations of the facts.
I also experienced the same de facto denial of property rights in the Johnson County, Kansas court regarding a house I had title to but could not live in or sell (ATCH 14). Both of these matters ended up in federal court where Judge Carlos Murguia and Judge Eric Melgren summarily dismissed my claims contrary to All established and controlling precedent for the court as informal sanctions prior to a show cause order. I sought appellate review in each case, but the Tenth Circuit did not hear the issues I raised and issued an injunction against further filings.
Before the appeal mandates were issued and before the injunction against further filings was ordered, I filed a request for presentation to the federal Grand Jury of the facts in each complaint that documented continuing specific RICO 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961et seq. felonies (ATCH 13-19). The US Attorney for the District of Kansas, Barry Grissom who had initiated the filing sanctions against me in Judge Carlos Murguia's court refused tosubmit the evidence to a grand jury.
It is my informed belief that the Tenth Circuit panel in opinions authored by Senior Judge John C. Porfilio took the extraordinary measures to not hear my two appeals because of an action for prospective injunctive relief in the District of Columbia, Landrith et al v. John G. Roberts 1:12-cv-01916-ABJ that Samuel Lipari and I have brought to seek redress from the ineffectiveness of judicial ethics complaints, citing the complaints brought in Medical Supply Chain, Inc. v. Novation, et al, KS Dist. Court case no.:05- 2299. And, that the unusual and severe conduct of the panel led by Senior Judge John C. Porfilio of not reviewing the issues I had appealed was a direct effort to interfere with the District of Columbia case that had the foreseeable effect of depriving me of ownership of the $750,00.00 Leawood, Kansas house and of my constitutional and statutory rights in the State of Kansas.
A temporal relationship supporting my belief that the Tenth Circuit panel judges and the Administrator of the Courts had eliminated the judicial independence of the Tenth Circuit required under Judicial Canon 1 in an effort to present the District of Columbia judge the case on 10/18/2013 after an almost one year delay on the Friday after the Tenth Circuit issued the filing injunction order against me. The appearance docket shows a flurry of
text only orders on that Friday and the following Monday showing that the official court record had been tampered with and that the judge could not make the dismissal order expected by the conspirators.
In August of this year, I approached different healthcare systems as a sales representative of Medical Supply Chain (now a sole proprietorship operated by Samuel Lipari) and discovered that the Novation LLC restraint of trade through long term anticompetitive contracts still exists. The scheme is also operated by Novation LLC through the Veterans' Administration despite statutory provisions intended to make bidding open for minority and small business contractors.
I am therefore forwarding to you Samuel Lipari's antitrust complaint against the Novation cartel members and a RICO complaint he brought against the cartel members that used state officials in Missouri and Kansas to keep him out of even the home health market, a market they do not monopolize in order to keep him from having resources to enter the nationwide hospital supply market and compete against them with his technology to lower healthcare costs.
I am also forwarding my two grand jury requests to you in a demand that you investigate and present this evidence to a grand jury and stop the foreseeable violations to the rights of citizens in the State of Kansas from the unchecked racketeering that deprives them of access to the courts in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961et seq.
Bret D. Landrith
1. MSC v. Novation Complaint 05-0210
2. Attachment 2 Affidavit of Samuel Lipari 05-0210
3. Lipari v. VHA – Novation et al. Complaint 08-04217
4. Appendix 1. Procedural History
5. Appendix 2. Table of Cases Complaint
6. Appendix 3. State Role in Disbarment
7. Appendix 4. US Bank Relationship
8. Appendix 5. GE Relationships
9. Appendix 6. (Cynthia Fitzgerald) Ex rel Complaint
10. Lipari v. GE, Wells Fargo, Regus International, Chapel Ridge (RICO) Petition 0916-38273
S/Bret D. Landrith
Director James B. Comey
November 6, 2013
Attachments will be in part 2