No. 20-5068

Li Qin v. Barbara Kong-Brown, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-07-15
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: 14th-amendment ada-protection arbitration arbitration-fraud civil-rights color-of-law constitutional-jurisdiction due-process fraud medical-malpractice rooker-feldman-doctrine
Key Terms:
Arbitration DueProcess FourthAmendment Privacy
Latest Conference: 2020-12-11 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Where is the jurisdiction in U.S.A. over a corruptive arbitration?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Where is the jurisdiction in U.S.A. over a corruptive arbitration? In this most outrageous arbitration, a neutral arbitrator and the defendants’ counsels | dismiss a medical malpractice claim under color of law via their 989 ex parte conspiratorial emails, a fake [Demand for Arbitration], the concealment of the | material medical records, suppression down her expert report, and a torturous deposition against an indigence handicapped victim of their malpractice, plus all tricks compiled in an encyclopedia of frauds. Is it legal for those fraudsters and conspirators to dump their victim to Med-Cal funded by federation to encroach public interest for their personal monetary gain? Shall the [Opinion] of Sixth Court of Appeal of State of California, confirmed by Supreme Court of State of California, “But since an arbitration award is the product of private arrangement, not state action, arbitration proceedings do not implicate the right to due process.” set up a precedent case above 14 Amendment of U.S. constitutional? Shall a corruptive arbitration in undue means under color of law be justified by a private arbitration agreement? Both 9 U.S. Code 10 and CCP 1286.2 have vested the jurisdiction over the corruptive arbitration in U.S. and CA courts. It is deemed all courts evaded their authority and hope that U.S. Supreme Court set up a case law to guide them. Have Federal District Court and Circuit Court of Appeal no constitutional. jurisdiction over those conspiratorial frauds in undue means under “RookerFeldman Doctrine” . ii ) PARTIES TO PROCEEDING Petitioner Li Qin resides at 13437 Kornblum Ave, Apt # A Hawthorne, CA90250. Tel: (310) 531-6426 Email: sunzx_123@yahoo.com Qin is a victim of defendant, The Permanent Medical Group (hereafter as TPMG) medical malpractice and the corruptive arbitration. Qin is a member of . protective group defined by ADA. . ; Respondent (1) Barbara Kong Brown (SBN 53912) P.O. Box 10366 Oakland, CA 94610resides at 831 Longridge Rd, Oakland, CA 94610 Tel: (510) 208-3688 Fax: (510) 208-5188 Email: Bkongbrown@aol.com Barbara Kong Brown is the neutral arbitrator of the conspiratorial arbitration. (2) John Steward Simonson (SBN 58311) is attorney of Hayes Scott Bonino Ellingson & McClay LLP. 203 Redwood Shores Pkwy Suite 480, Redwood City, CA 94065-6100. Tel: (650) 486-2884; (650) 637-9100 Fax: (650) 637-8071 Email: John Steward Simonson was a TPMG?’s counsel in this conspiratorial arbitration. Those above two defendants had been defended for TPMG’s malpractice for more than 20 years. (3) Matthew Allen Bisbee (SBN 194572) is an attorney of Hayes Scott Bonino Ellingson S, 999 Skyway Road, Suite 310, San Carlos, CA 94707 Tel: (650) 486-2898 Fax: (650) 637-9101 Email: Matthew Allen Bisbee is a TPMG’s counsel in the conspiratorial arbitration. (4) Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. , and TPMG are the defendants of their malpractice. Address: Legal Department 1950 Franklin Street, 17th Floor Oakland, CA 94612. Phone (510) 987-2712. iii TABLE OF CONTENT page CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTES PROVISIONS INVOLVED .1 TPMG’s Orthopedic TPMG’S Obstetric Malpractice (1) The C-section was performed without Informed (2) The Incision Hernia Caused by Negligence (3) Qin’s Scheduled Repair Surgery was Cancelled in Retaliation .5 (4) Qin’s Incision Hernia Was Repaired Under Med-Cal Coverage .5 The Corruptive Arbitration in Undue Means 1) The

Docket Entries

2020-12-14
Rehearing DENIED.
2020-11-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.
2020-10-19
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-08-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-28
Waiver of right of respondent Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, et al. to respond filed.
2020-07-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 14, 2020)

Attorneys

Barbara Kong Brown, John Simonson, Matthew Bisbee
Mark Giovanni BoninoHayes, Scott, Bonino, Ellingson, Guslani, Simonson & Clause LLP, Respondent
Li Qin
Li Qin — Petitioner