Amended Opening Brief NINTH CIRCUIT
Amended Opening Brief NINTH CIRCUIT
Amended Opening Brief NINTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-35794
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATED COAST
GUARD, [DOE-1 PROVIDENCE ST. PETER HOSPITAL],
[DOE-2 STATE OF WASHINGTON], DOES 1–155, ET AL.
Appellees-Defendants
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………….….…..1
///
///
i
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 3 of 84
///
ii
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 4 of 84
CONCLUSION …………………………………………………….…….66
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
Addington v. Texas
441 U.S. 418, 426 (1979) ...........................................................54, 55
Bentzen v. Demmons,
842 P.2d 1015, 349 n.8 (Wash. App. 1993) .....................................22
Boyce v. West, 862 P.2d 592, 665
(Wash. App. 1993) ......................................................................22, 23
Boyd v. DSHS (2015),
Court of Appeals Division–II No. 45174-3-II...................................64
Carlson v. Green, 1980,
446, U.S. 14, 19 ...............................................................................17
Carolyn Becker v. U.S. Coast Guard, et al.................................................61
City of Vancouver v. Wash. Pub. Emp 't Relations Comm 'n,
180 Wn. App. 333, 356, 325 P.3d 213 (2014) ……………….…....64
Comdyne I, Inc. v. Corbin,
908 F. 2d 1142, 1149 (3d Cir. 1990) ..........................................38, 45
Davis v. FEC(2008),
554 U.S. 724, 734 ............................................................................16
Davis v. Fendler,
650 F.2d 1154, 1161 (9th Cir. 1981) ...............................................39
Davis v. Passman,
442 U.S. 228, 248–49 (1979) .........................................................22
DeSantis v. Fla. Educ. Ass’n, (2020),
306 So. 3d 1202, 1213 (Fla. 1st DCA) ……..………….…...........14
iii
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 5 of 84
v
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 7 of 84
vi
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 8 of 84
Rules
Civ. R. 3(g) ..............................................................................................45
Civ. R. 6 .............................................................................................35, 40
Civ. R. 55 Default; Default Judgment ...................................35, 38, 39, 45
Civ. R. 102 Complex, Multiple and Multidistrict Litigation ...................45
Rule 4 .................................................................................................35, 40
Rule 19(1)(2) Joinder by Court Order ......................................................35
Rule 20(2) Permissive Joinder...................................................................35
Rule 21 Misjoinder and Nonjoinder .........................................................35
Rule 27 ................................................................................................35, 40
Rule 60 ......................................................................................................42
Rule 73 ......................................................................................................37
vii
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 9 of 84
Other Authorities
Cat’s Paw ………………………………………………….…64, 65
Behaviour of Wolves ……………………………………………55
Feres Doctrine ……………………………………………57, 58, 62
Feres Doctrine Spletstoser v. Hyten (2020) …………………...…60
Protect Our Defenders: …………………………………………..60
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) …………...54
The War Horse ………………………………………………...…59
Vanessa Guillen …………………………………………………..60
1) Causation: https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/causation/
2) Standing: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-
2/clause-1/standing-requirement-overview 01/07/2023 csx.
3) Standing: C. Wright, Handbook of the Law of Federal Courts 60 (4th ed.
1983).
4) Standing: https://americasvoice.org/blog/standing-what-it-is-and-why-it-
matters-to-the-supreme-court-and-to-us/ 01/07/2023 csx.
5) Behavior of Wolves; Livingwithwolves.org.
6) The War Horse. Sonner Kehrt @etskehrt, 10/06/22.
7). https://www.panoramas.pitt.edu/news-and-politics/case-vanessa-
guill%C3%A9n-military-crimes-united-states.
8). https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/05/25/i-am-vanessa-guillen-
act-praised-calls-removing-cos-sexual-assault-prosecutions-mount.html.
9) https://www.protectourdefenders.com/history/.
10). https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/03/05/veterans-affairs-
wait-time-medical-appointment-trump-mcdonough-column/6820715002/.
11). https://www.defense.gov/News/News-
Stories/Article/Article/3167285/dod-services-moving-ahead-on-
recommendations-to-combat-sexual-assault/.
12). https://timesupfoundation.org/sexual-harassment-assault-in-the-
military/.
13). Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Medical Marketing in the United States,
1997-2016.JAMA. 2019;321(1):80–96. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.19320
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2720029 (accessed February
18, 2019).
viii
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 10 of 84
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
ix
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 11 of 84
I. INTRODUCTION
precedent and justice. Carolyn Sioux Green v. United States of America, et al.,
presents a pivotal challenge that not only impacts the rights and interests of the
parties involved but also carries broader implications for the legal landscape
beyond the Ninth Circuit. As we delve into the intricacies of this appeal, it
becomes evident the issues at hand demand careful consideration and thoughtful
amateur athlete and even qualified as a contender for American Gladiators. In the
years in accounts payable and data entry, responsible for paying hundreds of
gained experience managing silent bid sales that were paid in large sums of cash,
as well as managed car titles and vehicle transfers. For auction days, most times I
was the runner for the auction block. As a graduate from John Robert Modeling
and Self Development School, where I later worked part-time as an instructor, with
1
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 12 of 84
waiver a couple of years before I turned 30 y/o. During active-duty while aboard a
ship, I sustained a catastrophic physical injury to my right buttocks, right hip, right
shoulder and neck. There are witness affidavits. The Military masked my well-
documented physical injury with drugs instead of trying to put me back together.
My injury was treated with inappropriate drugs. The USCG attempted to call my
effective medical procedural care while active-duty. In fact, after being injured for
instead of medical treatment for the injury. The first reprimand was about
complaints I made about the medical provider not being qualified to treat my injury
after being 464 days injured. The second reprimand was for seeking to talk to a
medical provider after hours about my now 653 days physical injury
After I was honorably discharged, 23 days later (now 690 days injured
without medical treatment), I entered the Dept of Veterans for medical care.
2
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 13 of 84
Instead, drugs were prescribed with counseling for a “mild” case of post-
traumatic stress. No treatment or medical care for the injury. For years. Even
though my injury was reported and documented in the medical records over and
to be masked with excessive inappropriate drugs.To make matters worse, the Dept
THERAPY instead of and with procedural medical treatment. (5-ER 1066), (2-ER
Throughout this process, I have done my best to abide by the Court Rules
under U.S.C. § 1331 to related cases, and have requested oral arguments and ADA
The district court had jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (civil action for
under 18 USC § 922 to restore CSX’s firearm rights in the remaining 49 states.
Washington State restored her Second Amendment rights for the state of
3
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 14 of 84
This appeal presents a series of pressing issues. Drug violations against the
Constitutional Rights and violations of Federal and State laws, including violations
Fourteenth Amendment, and the Due Process Clause. Notably, it underscores the
physical injury treating it as a mental illness and by force. Dept of Veterans and the
inappropriate prescribed drugs, leading to severe injuries and more than two-
it scrutinizes the U.S. Coast Guard's use of inappropriate drugs rather than proper
effective adequate medical care for a physical injury and their attempt to label her
Then too, the appeal violations of Federal and State laws, including perjury,
fraud, no legal counsel, denied her right to hire her own attorney, no right to refuse
sold to the courts under the guise of civil commitment, the absence of
4
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 15 of 84
unchallenged Motion to Joinder. Doe-2 State, Doe-3 Pierce County, and also
2:21-cv-01276-RAJ. Doe-2, Doe-3, Doe-4 have perfected service that belong in the
This appeal seeks to address the review de novo for these critical issues and
V. BRIEF SUMMARY
To facilitate clarity for the Court, CSX has incorporated specific years and
22 years
5 months
12 days
of psychotropic masking drugs for physical injuries is substandard care.
5
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 16 of 84
to Carolyn Green for (21 years 4 mo 28 days) Jan. 12, 1996 – June 9, 2017 for a
morphine on June 9, 2017. The USCG prescribed inappropriate drugs for her
physical injury from May 02, 1994 – Oct 5, 1995 (1 year 5 mo 3 days+).
reported “Carolyn’s Brain Health” as: “The energetic pattern represented is one
“that [drugs] must have been a huge assault to the system to still be resonating
CSX sincerely apologizes to the Court for the duplicates in the excerpts of
record. On the lighter side, finding the matching documents is a good cognitive
process to overcome the excessive and enormous amount of forced drugging then
the years upon years of excessive prescribed drugs by the Dept of Veterans, and
6
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 17 of 84
case instead of only in writing due to she is challenged with overcoming Aphasia.
7
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 18 of 84
o 2020 September: Lawsuits Filed (2019 Aug 14 initial legal proceeding began).
County Superior Court and that included evidence in the lawsuits filed in 2020.
o 2018 October: Dates perfected service for federal and state drug violations
o 2017 August 30: The first medical treatment for the bodily damage caused by
the causation of this great bodily damage created May 31, 2001 that was
o 2017 June 09: First day off ALL prescribed drugs. Last day she ingested drugs
injuries, and drug damage. The medical bills and supplements for the ongoing
effective treatment and care to recovery from being maimed has cost more than
8
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 19 of 84
$50,000. CSX recently filed for bankruptcy. Effective medical treatment, that
includes having two internally broken lower molars extracted that Dept of
recover from complex trauma that included violence. College helped her
cognitively from being poisoned with the abuse of chemical restraints. She was
chemically lobotomized. College helped put her gather the fragments to assist
past violent trauma in attempts to move forward with her life. Still walking
around injured due to the bad substandard of medical care by Dept of Veterans,
on drugs. Defendants like to use that she went to college against her. By the
grace of God and the American Disabilities Act (ADA) assisting, she was able
o 2009: Medical treatment continued for the lower initial extremity injury.
o 2002 Apr 10: Medical treatment started for the initial lower extremity injury.
o 2002 Apr 07: Walked out of her entire life to receive medical care to so she
9
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 20 of 84
o 2001 May 31: INJURED, Still walking around on her physical injury sustained
prescribed drugs for care. Since 1994. Initially by the USCG. Excessive drugs
continued with the Dept of Veterans. I had an isolated incident of erratic driving
Then for the isolated incident of erratic driving on private property she was
rights. She had no due process. There was no legal counsel. She was denied her
legal right to hire her own attorney. She was forced to endure harsh criminal
o 2001 May 21: Dept of Veterans cancelled her Rheumatology appointment with
o 2000 June 28: Her FIRST Doctor, Dr. Charles “Charlie” Paxon. Injured 1629
Puget Sound. (5-ER 1067-1069), (4-ER 500), 6-ER 1609-1611), (5-ER 1066).
10
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 21 of 84
were masked with drugs and the poisoning that occurred abusing chemical
who “RECOPIED” their illegal mandatory forced drugging that bypassed all
o 1996 Jan 12: Entered the U.S. Dept of Veterans Administration who treated her
o 1995 Dec 20: U.S. Coast Guard Honorably retired her medically without
medical care.
o 1995 Oct 26: Letter from Yvonne Fee to LCDR Henry Reed, Supervisor (D13)
Regarding the local Medical Officer, Dr. Castro and Mr. Tate. In-part; “She
[Carolyn] also stated her Neurologist and had finally been diagnosed. It appears
she has a very serious injury....neglected.....by Dr. Castro... Dr. Castro was
really upset, stated he was going to enter an AMA [against medical advice], and
told her to see Mr. Tate. ....and he proceeded to chastise her for something. He
told her he would have to go speak with the XO, Commander Breckinridge, and
blamed from something they have no control over, (our local medical officer,
Dr. Castro and Mr. Tate) who shot themselves in the foot yesterday. Not
everyone who see Dr. Castro is a malingerer or whiner when they see him....
11
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 22 of 84
o Not everyone who seeks medical care will recover on Motrin/Valium/or pain
o 1995: Active-duty, she was paying out of pocket seeking adequate medical care
o 1994 Feb 21: INJURED slipped on a stainless-steel ladder on a ship after the
traumatic experiences and hostile work environment at her first unit (5-ER
1050). While stationed at her second unit aboard the UCSCG Mellon (WHEC
717), CSX slipped on a stainless-steel ladder as her boot caught the edge of the
step, resulting in her landing on her right buttocks in a series of five consecutive
The standards of review for the multifaceted issues presented in this appeal
vary depending on the nature of each issue. From the timeliness of drug violations
filed that include the persistent repetitive illegal refilling and distribution of liquid-
thorough and searching review of the record and a rigorous examination of the
12
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 23 of 84
facts and legal principles involved. The Court will review the trial court’s
factual findings for clear error and legal conclusions de novo. Equitable tolling
may be a factor in achieving justice with the military. Carolyn Green’s objective
and aim is to ensure the application of the correct legal standards and principles to
1. INJURY: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury.
The injury must not be abstract and must be within the zone of interests meant
question. (1-ER 154-167), (5-ER 1050), (3-ER 511), (1-ER 154-167), (6-ER
1562), (6-ER 1640, 1645), (3-ER 553-554), (4-ER 892), (3-ER 629, 637, 638-
13
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 24 of 84
Causation Law & Legal Definition: “Causation is the relationship of cause and
effect of an act or omission and damages alleged in a tort or personal injury action.
breach of that duty. It should also be established that the loss was caused by the
defendant. Causation factor can be decided by the ‘but for’ test. Causation can be
established if the damages or injury would not have caused but for the conduct of
To satisfy the ‘but for’ test: The Action Occurred, Harm and Injury Occurred,
Causation Link: the ‘but for’ test; injuries (6-ER 1562), (6-ER 1559-1561), (6-ER
1637), (5-ER 1067-1069), (6-ER 1591), (1-ER 72-77, 67-71), (6-ER 1578-1583,
interest at stake in the controversy that will be affected by the outcome of the
litigation.” DeSantis v. Fla. Educ. Ass’n, 306 So. 3d 1202, 1213 (Fla. 1st DCA
14
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 25 of 84
2020) (quoting Equity Res. v. Cty. of Leon, 643 So. 2d 1112, 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA
“distinct and palpable,” and “actual or imminent.” See Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495
U.S. 149, 155 (1990). Second, a plaintiff must establish “a causal connection
between the injury and the conduct complained of.” See Lujan v. Defenders of
Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). Third, a plaintiff must show “a ‘substantial
likelihood’ that the requested relief will remedy the alleged injury in fact.” See
Vermont Agency of Natural Res. v. Stevens, 529 U.S. 765, 771 (2000). See
“Carolyn’s Brain Health November 2021”, and maiming her lower extremities.
“Any litigant must demonstrate that he or she has standing to invoke the power of
the court to determine the merits of an issue.” Vaughan v. First Union Nat’l Bank,
“at an irreducible minimum,” the constitutional requisites under Article III for the
existence of standing are that the plaintiff must personally have: 1) suffered some
actual or threatened injury; 2) that injury can fairly be traced to the challenged
favorable decision.
Puget Sound (1983) Supreme Court of Washington State, whereas, this case
15
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 26 of 84
proven that the negligence directly caused the harm. See Summers v. Tice (1948),
liability." Under this doctrine, when multiple defendants are negligent, and it's
unclear which one specifically caused the harm, each defendant may be held liable
See Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560–61 (1992). Importantly,
standing for each claim “he seeks to press and for each form of relief that is
sought.” See Davis v. FEC, 554 U.S. 724, 734 (2008). See Town of Chester v.
Laroe Estates, Inc., 581 U.S.___, No. 16–605, slip op. at 6 (2017).
Hollingsworth v. Perry, 570 U.S. 693, 705 (2013) ; see also, e.g., Seila Law LLC v.
Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, 140 S. Ct. 2183, 219 (2020) (stating that a petitioner
had “appellate standing” where the petitioner suffered a “concrete injury” that was
get [her] complaint before a federal court and not on the issues he wishes to have
adjudicated.” “gist of the question of standing” is whether the party seeking relief
has “alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure
16
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 27 of 84
that concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the
governmental action.3
In 1993, before he became a judge, John G. Roberts Jr. expressed this view
in an article published in the Duke Law Journal. “By properly contenting itself
suffering distinct and palpable injury,” the future chief justice wrote, “the judiciary
leaves for the political branches the generalized grievances that are their
expense of the other branches.” (Justice Antonin Scalia, then a federal appeals
court judge, wrote a law review article in 1983 titled “The Doctrine of Standing as
treatment. See Davis v. Passman, 442 U.S. 228, 248–49 (1979), permitting
damages remedy for gender discrimination under the Fifth Amendment Due
Process Clause. Gutierrez v. Peters, 111 F.3d. 1364, 1366 (1997), intentionally
17
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 28 of 84
delaying medical care for a known injury (i.e. broken wrist) has been held to
The issue is whether the lower court's improper handling of timely filed
drug violations against the U.S. Department of Veterans, including the
repetitive illegal refilling and distribution of liquid-morphine, coupled with an
obvious lack of accountability in the pharmaceutical record, necessitates a
comprehensive review to rectify concerns surrounding excessive drug
prescriptions with bad standard of practices for substandard care in the
treatment of a “mild” case of post-traumatic stress with severe physical injuries
within the Dept of Veterans.
18
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 29 of 84
severe physical injuries that were grossly neglected. In late 2023, Carolyn
Green has recovered mostly from her honorable active-duty service of 1991-
Doe-1 Providence. Her brain and physical structure are still in the mending
Veterans Patient Rights: (2). “You will receive to the extent that you are
eligible, prompt and appropriate treatment for physical or emotional
disorders or disabilities in the least restrictive environment necessary for that
treatment free from unnecessary or excessive medication.” (6-ER 1568-
1577). (emphasis added).
20
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 31 of 84
21
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 32 of 84
physical injury with sedation and benzodiazepines and tranquilizers and “mood
(6-ER 1568-1577).
842 P.2d 1015, 349 n.8 (Wash. App. 1993), see also Spencer v. King County, 692
P.2d 874, 1 208 (Wash. App. 1984) (bad faith implies acting with tainted,
fraudulent or ill will motives. (3-ER Drugs Binder pt1, 4-ER Drugs Binder pt2).
slight care does not mean the total absence of care but care substantially less than
Supreme Court defines gross negligence as “gross or great negligence, that is,
correlative, failure to exercise slight care, means not the total absence of care but
care substantially or appreciably less than the quantum of care inherent in ordinary
negligence.” Nist v. Tudor, 407 P.2d 798, 331 (Wash. 1965), see Boyce v. West,
22
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 33 of 84
862 P.2d 592, 665 (Wash. App. 1993) (gross negligence is “...negligent acts [that
fall] greatly below the standard established by law for the protection of others
against unreasonable risk of harm...”). Bad faith, and gross negligence, legal
then proven with substantial evidence standards throughout the matter before the
Court. Excessive drug prescriptions used to mask and treat my physical injury. She
only had a “mild” case of post-traumatic stress, that became complex trauma due
(13) years of Chronic Opioid Therapy along with other inappropriate off-label
A. CSX without seeing a Primary Care Provider for seven (7) months CSX
was able to refill liquid-Morphine month after month. Dept of Veterans refilled and
23
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 34 of 84
against the Dept of Veterans are; 18 U.S.C. 1962 (RICO), 18 U.S.C. 1031- Major
fraud against the United States, 18 U.S.C. 286 - Conspiracy to defraud the
Government with respect to claims, 221 U.S.C. 846- Attempt and conspiracy, 18
Aspartame in the drug effects literature nor is Aspartame listed on the bottle as
an ingredient which is a violation under the Title. Accordingly, who gave the
Director in the Pain Clinic how care works, Dr. Mariano replied, “There is only
so much care to dispense to each veteran so we don’t run out of peanut butter;
this way everyone gets a little something”. She refers to his explanation as
24
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 35 of 84
D. It took the Dept of Veterans 4.6 years plus the 690 days from the initial
injury while on active-duty totaling 2370 days (6.49 years;78 mo) to start
“I would note in this connection that the stresses associated with her workplace
harassment [when she was stationed at Chetco River] when she was aboard ship
probably did relate indirectly to the occurrence of the injury in that she was
extremely distracted and, although she describes herself as quite athletic and not
prone to accidents, the fall from the ladder was in the context of a period of
extreme stress and distraction,” 07/07/95 Dr. Louis Saeger, a gold standard
doctor.
G. 2000 June 28; Dr. Charles Paxon, a gold standard doctor stated, “This has
never been treated directly except by massage and physical therapy.” “Low
back pain is constantly present but not major issue until she feels the hip is out.
25
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 36 of 84
H. 2001 May 31–July 27: The Avalanche created by Doe-1 Providence through
perjury and proven fraud. See In-a-nutshell-(7-ER).
2001 June 12 “Injured her R buttock, hips, neck and back. Patient will be put on
///
26
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 37 of 84
This photo is from years after her first official medical treatment started
“begin sacroiliac prolotherapy treatments for iliac upslip.” April 10, 2002.
Effective treatments into 2023 due to drugs masking the injuries.
Thankful to be here in one piece. (3-ER 547).
27
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 38 of 84
J. 2002 March 05 “She has a positive Gilet test on the right side. She has a
short right lower extremity by about half-inch. Her ischial tuberosity is actually
high by more likely an inch. The iliac crest on the right is high by about an inch
K. 2003 Jan. 08 “... last time I had a brisk walk around the (apartment)
compound without the sense that I am dragging my right leg–the first time since
L. 2004 May 17–Oct. 23 1995:. Dr. Mark A. Tomski, a gold standard doctor, in
Dr. Tomski out of pocket for years starting in 1995 while active-duty.
M. Dept of Veterans delayed cervical spine treatment to 2017 Jan 04 from the
first notation of 1992 July 22. The first procedure for my cervical spine (neck)
and also facet changes at C3-4.” Id. p. 299 at lines 6-13. The Dept of Veterans
Pain Clinic was the worst with delays, and with no notice of appointment
N. From 2015 through 2023, CSX has had numerous effective and appropriate
28
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 39 of 84
maiming, and drug damage. CSX has paid out of pocket for years. Her injuries
wasn’t until she had completely self-discontinued the daily anesthetizing drugs
December 20, 2016, then especially the morphine June 9, 2017 that her injuries
expensive. (see treatments Dkt. # # 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, +).
Veterans denied help as they bleed out their ears.” In 2019, by Defendants own
P. DRUG INTERACTIONS
///
29
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 40 of 84
30
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 41 of 84
username “984980”. Then click on “My Interactions List”. There you will
find her mostly verified drug interactions, as well as those of other Veterans.
1) Many drugs are missing on the pharmaceutical record with the Dept of
patches, Citalopram, Paxil. Numerous prescription refills are not listed. This is
In violation pursuant to: see RCW 18.64.245 Prescription records, see RCW
18.71.800, see RCW 69.41.042, see RCW 69.41.042 Record requirements, see
31
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 42 of 84
A few examples,
sparce. Id. p. 397-399. #84 p. 131 Oct. 11, 2011 “...she is already taking full
dose of Celecoxib.” “... she would like to gradually wean away from
c) Gabapentin. She was on the maximum dose for 10+ years. The
pharmaceutical record does not reflect this. The medical records show the
pp. 400-401.
d) Artificial tears, eye drops. She has more eye drops accounted for in
two-years than Dept of Veterans has in the 16 years prescribed, dispensed, and
court filing is a small portion to a larger problem. This case matter has a
32
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 43 of 84
rate in veteran suicide. (4-ER 854, 804-884), (2-ER 262, 265), (6-ER 1592).
and produced sworn affidavits on the harmful effects of these drugs. Brain function
These drugs create dysfunctions affecting the frontal lobe, temporal lobe, parietal
Medical Expert Affidavits: Dr. Peter C. Gøtzsche, Dr. Grace E. Jackson, Dr.
Robert Whitaker, and Dr. Peter Breggin expert testimony affidavit See Dr. David
Healy, Mad in America, Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, Ann Blake-Tracy, and investigative
journalist Rob Wipond.14 (3-ER 618-747), (3-ER 619-628), (3-ER 629-647), (3-ER
T. Online groups and pages offer assisting people damaged by these drugs help
to recover. Medical experts refute the Recommendation and Report (R&R). The
book, “The Body Keeps Score” by Bessel Van Der Kolk, M.D. refutes the
R&R. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) refutes R&R. (2-ER 370-
U. To address the Prayer for Relief Sought. There is no monetary amount that
can replace the years wrongly taken from my life from my physical injuries not
being treated for my injuries, to then be maimed. Then discarded in a psy ward
To then have to ask for a walking cane, after she was honorably discharged
from the United States Military, Life is a gift given by Our Creator. The Court
requires the filer state an amount for damages. The amount Carolyn Green
stated could be considered extravagant. The point is, Life is priceless. Solutions
were offered, then listed in the Injunctive and Declaratory Relief, to include
V. In 2018 CSX discovered her Second Amendment rights were infringed. This
was from the illegal infringement in 2001. She has been in contempt of Court
more than once not knowing her right to bear arms were infringed. There was
no notice no proper service. Initial legal actions began August 14, 2019 for the
34
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 45 of 84
ISSUE-2
MOTION FOR DEFAULT - JOINDER
Presented for Review with Argument & Case Law
A. Did Doe-1 Providence file a response or file an opposition to the Motion for
Joinder filed March 16, 2022 as required in Civil Rules LCR 6, Rule 27?
B. Did CSX serve Doe-1 Providence with perfected service for the Motion to
C. Does Carolyn Green as a matter of right to file a Motion for Default; default
D. Did the district court improperly deny the Motion to Joinder without
explanation?
RULE 19(1)(2): Joinder by Court Order: If a person has not been joined as
required, the court must order that the person be made a party. A person who
refuses to join as a plaintiff may be made either a defendant or, in a proper
case, an involuntary [defendant].
RULE 20(2)(A)(B): Permissive Joinder of Parties: (A) any right to relief is
asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to
or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or
occurrences; and (B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants
will arise in the action.
35
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 46 of 84
recent aka COA-II 574292-II. It is procedurally improper for proceeding for Doe-1
thirty-day extension to file a response brief due October 27, 2023. Default
Ninth Circuit. As a matter of right, Carolyn Green is entitled Motion for Default;
default judgment.
The ruling under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 contradicts prior decisions by this court
case using 28 U.S.C. § 1331 but denied the same right to the plaintiff.
Superior Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 by defendant Doe-3 Pierce County. The
36
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 47 of 84
County Superior Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 by plaintiff CSX, therefore it was
remanded to Thurston County Superior Court. This case is improperly in the Court
of Appeals. Division-II.
filed March 16, 2022 (1-ER 72-77). Unopposed and unchallenged by Doe-1
c) 2022 March 16: CSX filed Motion to Joinder Doe-1 Providence to 2:21-01276-
d) 2022 April 14: CSX filed Notice of Removal to WAWD be coming case 3:22-
05258-JCC pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. See conflicting court ruling from this
e) 2022 May 18: CSX did not consent and filed an objection to a Magistrate Judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C 636(c), Rule 73, and Amended General Rule 02-19. No
///
37
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 48 of 84
hearing. TCSC Judge Carol Murphy ruled ex parte, not notifying CSX of the
ruling. Doe-1 Providence initiated this case by an illegal ex parte creating the
h) 2022 October 07: Judge Jones-(RAJ) denied the motion to joinder without
i) 2023 September 11: CSX filed Motion for Default. LCR 55.
j) 2023 September 14: In a minute order by Judge Jones denied the motions for
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) directs the clerk to enter
default against that defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Once the clerk enters default,
the Court must take as true the factual allegations in the complaint, except
otherwise defend an action, Teamsters Health & Welfare Fund v. Dubin Paper
Co., Case No. 11-CV-7137, 2012 WL 3018062, (D.N.J. July 24, 2012) (citing
DIRECTV, Inc. v. Pepe, 431 F.3d 162, 165 n. 6 (3d Cir. 2005)); see also
38
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 49 of 84
First, because the Defaulted Defendant Doe-1 Providence have not answered
or otherwise defended this action, CSX cannot obtain a final outcome against them
ability to obtain a ruling on its claims against the Defaulted Defendants. See
have not responded in any way, they have presented no defense at all. Third,
Defaulted Defendant was properly served through a licensed process server Melvin
Cahoon with Rock Solid Legal Support, Inc., in accordance to the Rules. In fact,
Defaulted Defendant had perfected service by three-different services who did not
answer or otherwise defend this action, failed to state if it was improper, have not
Under Rule 55(b), the Court may hold a hearing to determine the appropriate
amount of monetary relief. However, a hearing is not necessary if detailed
affidavits or record evidence make it possible to compute the amount of relief.
Summit Trust, 2013 WL 3967602; accord Davis v. Fendler, 650 F.2d 1154, 1161
(9th Cir. 1981).
39
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 50 of 84
ISSUE-3
MOTION FOR DEFAULT – RE-OPEN 3:20-06112-BHS
MOTION FOR DEFAULT – CONSOLIDATE to 01276-RAJ
Presented for Review with Argument & Case Law
The issue presented is whether Doe-2 State, Doe-3 Pierce County, Doe-4 U.S.
Dept of Veterans complied with Civil Rules LCR 6; Rule 27 by responding to the
Motion to Re-Open & Motion to Consolidate and if proper service and with Color
of Law violations as required by Rule 4: Summons, was effectuated. Furthermore,
it involves determining whether CSX has an automatic right and is entitled to a
Motion for Default; default judgment under Civil Rule LCR 55.
A Did Doe-2 State, Doe-3 Pierce County, Doe-4 Dept of Veterans file a
response or an opposition to the Motion to Re-Open & Motion to Consolidate
filed March 16, 2022 as required in Civil Rules LCR 6; Rule 27?
B Did CSX properly serve Doe-2, State, Doe-3 Pierce County, Doe-4 U.S.
Dept of Veterans with perfected service for the Motion to Re-Open & Motion to
Consolidate, and served with Color of Law violations as required by Rule 4:
Summons?
C Does CSX as a matter of right entitled a Motion for Default; default
judgment pursuant to Civil Rule LCR 55: Default; Default Judgment?
D Did the district court improperly deny the Motion to Re-Open and Motion
to Consolidation without explanation?
RULE 42: CONSOLIDATE CASES: "If actions before the court involve a
common question of law or fact, the court may:(1) join for hearing or trial
any or all matters at issue in the actions; (2) consolidate the actions; or (3)
issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay." FRCP 42(a).
The threshold issue is whether the cases involve common questions of law
or fact. “The party moving for consolidation bears the burden of
demonstrating the commonality of law, facts or both in cases sought to be
combined, Young v. Hamric, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43634, 2008 WL
2338606 at *4 (E.D. Mich. 2008).
40
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 51 of 84
considered “Case Splitting” with the other portion of the splitting side in the
claims. That includes that parties with perfected service are included in
06112-BHS that were not included in SCOTUS yet belong in SCOTUS for
41
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 52 of 84
01276-RAJ was filed March 16, 2022. (1-ER 67-71)The Motion was
Order (1) Timing. A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a
reasonable time—and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year
after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding. The
filing was within 184 days. (09/13/2021 to 03/16/2022 = 184 days). The
Court’s process was 696 days which is no fault of CSX. Due process
licensed process server Melvin Cahoon with Rock Solid Legal Support,
42
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 53 of 84
COA-II 557908-II.
g) 2022 October 07: Judge Jones-(RAJ) denied the motion to re-open and
motion to consolidate.
h) 2022 November 15 –April 12, 2023 this case was in the Washington
(considered “case splitting”: DOE-3 Pierce County was filed March 16,
43
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 54 of 84
09/11/2023. (7-ER).
l) 2023 September 11: CSX filed Motion for Default. LCR 55.
m) 2023 September 14: In a minute order by Judge Jones denied the motions
economic resources, serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses, would
promote the just and efficient conduct of such actions to provide for a fair review
Related offenses are similar in nature based on the “same conduct.” State v.
Lee 132 Wn.2d 498, 939 P.2d 1223 (9th Cir. 1997) (footnote-two). Any question
of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action. See Scott v.
1377, 1378 (9th Cir.1984), and once the court assesses whether the complaint is
duplicative it must decide on an appropriate remedy. See Adams, 487 F.3d 684,
688-93, (citing Western Sys Inc. v. Ulloa, 958 F.2d 864, 871 (9th Cir. 1992). At its
44
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 55 of 84
discretion, the Court may then dismiss the duplicative lawsuit with or without
prejudice, stay or enjoin the proceedings, or consolidate the two actions. See Id. at
692-93 (holding that in the circumstances of the case the district court did not
abuse its discretion in dismissing the later-filed complaint with prejudice) (with
emphasis).. "[T]he claim splitting rule exists to allow district courts to manage
their docket and dispense with duplicative litigation." Katz v. Gerardi, 655 F.3d
1212, 1218-19 (10th Cir. 2011). (emphasis supplied). The substantial evidence
See Civil Rules LCR 102: Complex, Multiple and Multidistrict Litigation
First, because the Defaulted Defendants Doe-2, Doe-3, Doe-4 have not
answered or otherwise defended this action, Carolyn Green cannot obtain a final
prejudiced if it is denied the ability to obtain a ruling on its claims against the
45
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 56 of 84
Second, because the Defaulted Defendant have not responded in any way,
they have presented no defense at all. Third, Defaulted Defendant was properly
served through a licensed process server Melvin Cahoon with Rock Solid Legal
service did not answer or otherwise defend this action, failed to state if it was
improper, have not responded in any way. Defaulted Defendants Doe-2, Doe-3,
against Defaulted Defendants Doe-2 State, Doe-3 Pierce County, Doe-4 Dept of
Veterans.
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
46
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 57 of 84
ISSUE-4(a)
DENIED DUE PROCESS COUPLED WITH SHE WAS DENIED HER
RIGHT TO HIRE COUNSEL, SIGNATURE OBTAINED BY DECEPTION
Presented for Review with Argument & Case Law
The issue at hand is whether Carolyn Green was denied her right to an effective
public defender, who also made a secret agreement through an ex parte, if CSX
was denied her right to hire her own attorney, if proper service as required by LCR
5, Rule 4 was effectuated. Furthermore, whether Doe-1 Providence committed
perjury with the intention of fraud in the Thurston County Superior Court (TCSC).
premeditated 14-day of (1) on the same day filing an ex parte for a one-minute
then was not found gravely disabled which is a prerequisite in RCW 71.05.
where my rights were removed to be heard by a neutral party throughout. She was
denied her right to hire her own attorney. 300-Days. Doe-1 Providence was
intentional to commit perjury in the Thurston County Superior Court with the
her. Illegal confined with illegal extensions of confinement. Violent and abusive.
courts will use the test established by the Supreme Court in Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). The right to counsel serves no purpose unless it
is the right to effective counsel. See McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759 (1970).
48
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 59 of 84
No effective legal counsel, in fact, Carolyn Green was denied her right to hire
her own counsel evidenced. Both prongs of the Strickland Test were satisfied by
Test satisfying 1) Deficient Performance, and 2). Prejudice. The right to effective
assistance of counsel is the right “to require the prosecution’s case to survive the
crucible of meaningful adversarial testing.” United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648,
When such a true adversarial processing has been conducted, even if defense
between defense and prosecution that the trial was rendered unfair and the verdict
rendered suspect.” Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365, 374, 106 S. Ct. 2574,
ineffective assistance of counsel must show: (1) that his or her attorney' s
performance was deficient, and 2) that he or she was prejudiced by the deficiency.
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674
(1984); State v. Hendrickson, 129 Wn.2d 61, 77- 78, 917 P.2d 563 (1996). Under
the first prong, deficient performance is not shown by matters that go to trial
49
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 60 of 84
strategy or tactics. State v. Garrett, 124 Wn.2d 504, 520, 881 P. 2d 185 (1994).
Under the second prong, the respondent must show that there is a reasonable
probability that, but for counsel' s errors, the result of the trial would have been
different. State v. Thomas, 109 Wn.2d 222, 226, 743 P. 2d 816 (1987).
examining the whole record, the court can conclude that respondent received
effective representation and a fair trial. State v. Ciskie, 110 Wn.2d 263, 284, 751 P.
“serious instances of attorney misconduct.” Holland, 560 U.S. at 652. Under the
Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit authority have stressed that equitable tolling can
counsel, free of conflict of interest, during a trial, and process, in violation of the
The two prong Strickland Test application was met proving legal malpractice. I
had no legal counsel at any time, with the attorney’s intention and pre-existing
knowledge of what the lawyers were doing was illegal. (6-ER 1490-1561).
50
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 61 of 84
It would be unreasonable for the Court to entertain the lies proposed by the
Green (formerly Becker) to willingly sign documents endorsing the ongoing use of
Becker) refrained from signing two documents during her active-duty service in
Luna v. Kernan, 784 F.3d 640, 648 (9th Cir. 2015). Without a doubt, Plaintiff
///
///
51
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 62 of 84
ISSUE-4(b)
INVOLUNTARY TREATMENT v. KIDNAPPING
Presented for Review with Argument & Case Law
The issue at hand is whether the lower court applied improper application of the
law, appellees-defendants complied with RCW 71.05 as required by the ITA, does
immunity exist for appellees-defendants, and was perjury was committed in both
the Thurston County and Pierce County Superior Courts.
A. Did CSX meet the statutory criteria of being gravely disabled as required by
B. Was it legal for Doe-1 Providence to file an ex parte for 14-day the same day
C. Did the lower court improperly find this was a civil commitment case?
The ex parte filing was illegal for a 14-day when Doe-1 Providence already had
a signed seventy-two-hour, filed in the Court the same day less than nine-hours
///
//
52
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 63 of 84
were performed in good faith and without gross negligence.’ There is no-immunity
from ordinary medical tort liability when the provider’s conduct in gross
laws were followed. No danger to myself or others. Dangerous standard not met.
No justification for forced treatment under 71.05 RCW’s. (6-ER 1503), (6-ER
1378-1381, 1384).
Doe-1 Providence required her to ingest psychotropic drugs and she was
forcibly injected Haldol +42 (forty-two) times and prior to court. Doses were
53
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 64 of 84
during the “Thrashing” portion. She had several deep bruises five-days later. Doe-1
help by two staff members to walk after the hours that included “Thrashing” which
[Mason General Hospital] one forced injection., [Central Fire Medic] one forced
and forcibly injected psychotropic drugs 22 times (twenty-two) times, even prior to
court against my written request. Dept of Veterans2 forced me to ingest 332 (three-
double and tripled as a form of punishment for her non-compliance. See Religious
the Courts for fraudulent purposes at the expense of Carolyn Sioux Green’s life.
commitment processing is of such weight and gravity that due process requires the
54
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 65 of 84
be both mentally ill and dangerous for civil commitment to satisfy due process”.
Driving fails to meet the dangerous standard. 557 S.W. 2d 511 (1977), vacated,
441 US 418, 426 (1979). Addington requires “clear and convincing evidence” as a
In Rennie v. Klein, 462 F. Supp. 1131 (D.N.J. 1978) “To go from a state of
change in the conditions of confinement, so that Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215,
422 U.S. 573-576 (1975), the U.S. Supreme Court decided that "A State cannot
safely in freedom by himself or with the help of willing and responsible family
harm to himself or others (494 US 210, 244) and/or is gravely disabled” Lodging,
55
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 66 of 84
The U.S. constitute Supreme Court has repeatedly held that “[a]mong the
historic liberties protected by the Due Process Clause is the ‘right to be free from ..
///
///
///
///
///
56
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 67 of 84
ISSUE-5
ARMED FORCES JURISDICTION
Presented for Review with Argument & Case Law
The issues surrounding this issue for review are fundamental legal questions:
Can Carolyn Green establish equitable tolling? Additionally, the case delves into
issues surrounding misconduct, intentional concealment, and jurisdiction by the
Armed Forces, as well as the applicability of the Feres doctrine in cases involving
acts of violence and misconduct.
b) Are the Armed Forces entitled to deny medical care to a physically injured
c) Do the Armed Forces have the authority and jurisdiction to knowingly prevent
and deny access to the Civil Rights Officer aka Civil Enlisted Advisor (CEA)?
This was while during and after retaliation, abusive mis-treatment, sexual
d) Did the USCG intentionally conceal, with deception, the menacing the
e) Are there genuine issues of material fact surrounding the allegations of bad
57
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 68 of 84
g) Is the Feres doctrine due for Review by the higher Courts? Is the Feres doctrine
At my first unit, Station Chetco River (Chetco), in writing for a long period
of time I was prevented access to the Civil Enlisted Advisor (CEA). For more than
a year. The CEA is considered a Civil Rights Officer in the Military. The
Examples Carolyn was expected to “adjust” to; being referred to as a "cunt", “the
new wench on board", a "douche bag". I was subjected to an illegal car prowl, men
felony in the civilian work force. CSX was ordered to paint using lead death paint.
This was after wiping the surface down with Toluene in the enclosed area, a void
of a boat. Toluene is a toxic solvent. (4-ER 885). I was denied a respirator. I was
then blocked from exiting the enclosed area to breathe in the midst of suffocating
from toxic fumes. I was forced to breath intoxicating fumes without a respirator.
Egregious and physically threatening in nature. These are some of the examples of
58
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 69 of 84
the hostile abusive work environment and treatment during of which time I was
The Record is Clear: “The United States Coast Guard has the worst record
for sexual harassment of any federal agency.” The Executive Officer (XO) was the
second in command. “When interview groups were asked if the chain of command
worked in redress of grievances, a frequent reply was “the chain of command is the
problem.” The new XO due to a tour of duty rotation, said regarding the sexual
harassment, “It’s the worst I’ve seen in thirteen years. They’re like a pack of
and weapons it makes up for with collaboration and intelligence.” The wolves’
advantages is in collaborating with their pack. Wolves are predators. Wolves are
known to be very loyal, willing to sacrifice oneself for the “team”. Wolves are
territorial. The second in command replacing the first described the actions of the
chain of command as “They’re like a pack of wolves, three or four.” This was the
worse this seasoned active-duty member had seen in 13 years regarding sexual
harassment. Is this a place you would choose to have your daughter, mother, wife,
59
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 70 of 84
moving ahead with recommendations to combat sexual assault that has continued
Military.7 Namely due to Vanessa Guillen’s murder. Ms. Guillen suffered blows to
the head with a hammer. Then she was dismembered after she was assaulted and
burned. After her corpse was burned, she was buried in three different places, in
2020.7,8 Her murder was after she reported sexual harassment problems to her
Command.
of abuse and criminal mistreatment have continued. Commands and the “chain of
command” should not have the authority to prevent, prohibit, interfere, create
2022: See Spletstoser v. Hyten United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
60
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 71 of 84
Previous to 1991, there are numerous active-duty female service members who
have experience similar or the same mistreatment for going to work. To serve their
country. To feed their children. To put a roof over their head.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a dissent arguing it was time for the
highest court to revisit Feres. “Under our precedent, if two Pentagon
employees–one civilian and one a servicemen–are hit by a bus in the
Pentagon parking lot and sue, it may be that only the civilian would
have a chance to litigate his claim on the merits,” Justice Thomas
wrote. “Feres was wrongly decided.”6
In the Swackhammer v. Widnall No. 96-35587 (1997, 9th Cir.) the record
establishes the United States Air Force failed to post notice of the right to equal
employment opportunity and the deadlines for filing claims in the Renton
recruiting office in 1985 and 1986. Ms. Swackhammer had no notice of such filing
deadlines. Lynne Swackhammer was also unaware she was the object of
discriminatory conduct and that such conduct caused her current emotional and
physical damages. Thus, she asserted additional equitable grounds for tolling based
on her disassociative memory syndrome and the delayed onset of her damages. See
also Douchette v. Bothell School District, 117 Wn.2d 805, 812 fn.6, 818 P.2d 1362
(1991) ("We do not rule out the possibility for future cases that equitable grounds
case.").
///
62
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 73 of 84
medical environment against the severely physically injured service member that
was further forced up the chain of command to reinforce their personal attacks that
were then approved by the Command. I was honorably discharged with a severe
physical injury, on purpose. I was denied adequate medical care. I was prescribed
inappropriate drugs for my physical injury. Five Military Officers (Tate, Castro,
Fritz, Breckinridge, Peck) were derelict in their duty and failed to perform their
assigned to the land unit due to her physical injury. As seen in the brief timeline
above, the USCG’s District Supervisor of the Command for District 13, LCDR
Henry Reed, was notified on Oct. 26, 1995 via a letter by Yvonne Fee, FPA, about
Under the “Cat’s Paw” theory, the animus of a non-decision-maker who has
Hosp. 562 U.S. 411, 131 S Ct. 1186,179 L.Ed 144 (2011). The Supreme Court
writes a fracture fable of the cat’s paw theory. “In the workplace, the cat represents
63
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 74 of 84
The USCG is under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The
employment action, and if that act is relied on by the employer and is a substantial
factor in the ultimate employment action, then the employer is liable for retaliation.
This instruction is consistent with the law on subordinate bias liability. "[I]f a
cause of the ultimate employment action, then the employer is liable." Staub, 131
S. Ct. at 1194 (footnotes omitted). Under Washington law, in order for the act to be
Emp 't Relations Comm 'n, 180 Wn. App. 333, 356, 325 P.3d 213 (2014) ("a
complainant seeking to use the subordinate bias theory of liability must show that
the subordinate's animus was a substantial factor in the decision"). The trial court's
instruction properly informed the jury of the law. It required the plaintiff to prove
that the supervisor's animus was a substantial factor in the decision. The trial court
The cat’s paw applies to USCG Station Chetco River. The second in
command (XO/ XPO) committed an act of illegal menacing toward CSX. XO/XPO
64
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 75 of 84
…., picked up a screwdriver from the boatswain hole, and in front of complainant
repeatedly stabbed the screwdriver into a counter top while screaming at her. He
yelled, "You're not helping. You're hindering. This is the straw that broke the
As of late 2023, I am now mostly recovered, my brain and body are still
and other bodily injuries in 2001. Yes, it has taken that long to recover to be here
today. Especially with the excessive poly drugging by the Dept of Veterans while
left injured, for years. Then add the excessive forced and poly drugging that
poisoned her.
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
65
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 76 of 84
X. CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth in the preceding arguments, Carolyn Green
granted.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the forgoing statement is made under
the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct, and I am
competent to testify to the matters set forth herein.
66
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 77 of 84
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 78 of 84
No. 22-35794
Appellant-Plaintiff
v.
EXCERPTS OF RECORD
Volume 7 of 7
VOLUME 7
Please see the ADA requests filed for 1-ER 56-66, 6-ER 1578-1587
1
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 80 of 84
2
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 81 of 84
Conflicting Rulings
See SCOTUS ref: 23M1 Appendix-O
3
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 82 of 84
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 83 of 84
I, Carolyn Sioux Green, state and declare as follows: I am over the age of 18 years and I
am competent to testify to the matters set forth herein. On September 29 or 30, 2023, I served a
true and correct copy of the REPLACEMENT OPENING BRIEF IN THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CASE No. 22-35794 with the Excerpts of Record Volume-7 and this CERTIFICATE OF
SERVICE on the following parties to this action, as indicated below:
Counsel: Default Defendant Doe-1 Providence St. Peter Hospital
c/o FAVROS
3131 Elliott Ave., Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98121
[email protected], [email protected],[email protected], [email protected]
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington and Arizona
that the foregoing is true and correct.
DATED this this 29th day of September 2023, in Maricopa County, Arizona.
s/Carolyn Sioux Green
CAROLYN SIOUX GREEN
PO Box 38097, Phoenix, Arizona 85069
(253) 588-8100. [email protected]
Retained Counsel
Case: 22-35794, 09/29/2023, ID: 12801939, DktEntry: 30-2, Page 84 of 84
CAROLYN GREEN - FILING PRO SE
Transmittal Information
574292_Other_20230929232212D2556799_0636.pdf
This File Contains:
Other - witn Excerpts of Record VOL-7
The Original File Name was 7-ER_INDEX-22-35794csx.pdf
574292_Other_Filings_20230929232212D2556799_9726.pdf
This File Contains:
Other Filings - Other
The Original File Name was CSX_AmendedOpeningBRIEF22-35794.pdf
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Comments:
Appellants AMENDED OPENING BRIEF. NINTH CIRCUIT CASE NO. 22-35794 with Excerpts of Records VOL-7.
Process of Service. 09/29/2023 @ 2330p. CSX