Whether the attorney's use of fraudulent means to obtain the plaintiff's personal employment records without consent violated the plaintiff's due process rights

QUESTION PRESENTED Briefly, the case originates from a case of Ezeani V Anderson V CFG health system (case . No:23-1187) because the attorney of CFG health system (Mr. Jeffrey McClains) engaged into falsification of subpoena using the act of impersonation as an officer of the New Jersey I District court to serve subpoena to Union County college and Essex County college | requesting all employment record of the pro sé without pro se consent. The Essex County college refused to send out all employment documents because they identify that pro se never consents to the request. Union county college humah resources out of wickedness and | racial discrimination forwarded all employment record of the pro sé to the defendant attorney (Mr Jeffrey McClains) without the pro se cotisent which is federal privacy right violation. The human resources department of union county college provide the attorney with the pro se masters academic transcripts from different university which contain the pro social security numbers, date of birth, Pro se certificates, Pro se resume, marital status, pay stub etc. at the request of fraudulent subpoena which is privacy right violation because this is not medical record. The attorney went on to use the pro se employment document received unlawfully to file a request to obtain a third deposition in a pro se medical case of Ezeani V. Anderson v CFG health (case No:23-1187). The defendant used the information to define the basis of the third deposition asking the pro se to provide school fees receipt on how he paid for those university master studies in united states, pro se IRS record, marital . status etc. The Pro se filed a federal privacy lawsuit at New Jersey district court against the _ ’ t | Attorney of CFGH (Mr. Jeffrey McClain). The attorney used an act of falsification and impersonation to unlawfully obtain pro se personal information from union county college human resources. Moreover, the same information was used to secure a third deposition | because he was not able to file tirne extension to state why he wanted to depose the plaintiff for the third time. The attorney used an act of fraud to obtain the plaintiff” S personal document which violates the due process right of the plaintiff. The use of fraud by CFGH attorney to obtain plaintiff personal document in other to secure an unlawful third deposition in a case of Ezeani V Anderson V CFG health system from a magistrate judge who __ refuse to recuse himself from a case that he acts as the lawyer of the defendant violates due process right of the pro se. | The FOLLOWING QUESTION ARE PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. The Pro se presents that the third circuit court decision requires review for due process . right violation because the court failed to recognize that the attorney of CFG health system (Mr. Jeffrey McClain) used act of unlawful stealing using the name of New Jersey United District court to command the Human resources of union county college who is the former employer of the pro se to produce all employment records of the pro sé . without pro se consent which is due process right. The attorney used the name of United state district court of New Jersey to issue a subpoena commanding a document that he intentionally know that it is personal document of the pro se which has nothing to do with medical lawsuit filed and no consent form was signed by the pro se for the release of all employment document which is due process violation (Exhibit 1B shows unlawful falsified subpoena document presented to union county college 3 ' requesting employee employment document; Exhibit 2B showing email from the attorney to the pro se of receival of all his employment document from union county college; See Exhibit 3B showing medical consent form signed by the plaintiff during the case which has nothing to do with employment). The use of acts of fraud violates Rule 60 and Rule 59 of federal civil procedure. The third circuit H court hold that the release of plain