Injunctive Relief and Agreement

Document Sample
Injunctive Relief and Agreement Powered By Docstoc
					Peter Injured Petitioner
Post Office Box 1234
Your Town, CA 99999
(999) 999-9999
Petitioner in pro per


                       UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                      SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
                             SAN DIEGO DIVISION
Peter Injured Petitioner         )
            )    Case No.:
       Petitioner,     )
            ) PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR
            ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES
                               v. ) FOR INTENT TO CAUSE BODILY HARM
                                 )
            ) [Civ. Code 527.8]
United States Department of      )
Health and Human Services,       ) Judge ___________
            )
       Respondent.     )

     PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF AND DAMAGES
 Petitioner, Peter Injured Petitioner, brings this action pursuant
to Civ. Code 527.8, for wrongful intent to cause bodily harm, against
Respondent, United States Department of Health and Human Services,
and in particular, for intending to administer mandatory vaccinations
for all American citizens, in violation of the First Amendment to the
United States Constitution.
                               RELIEF SOUGHT
 Petitioner seeks an order to enjoin respondent from administering
mandatory vaccinations.
                                JURISDICTION
 Jurisdiction is conferred upon this court pursuant to Title 28
U.S.C.A. § 1331, which authorizes original jurisdiction on the
district court of all civil actions arising under the Constitution,
laws and treaties of the United States.
 Jurisdiction is also conferred upon this court pursuant to Title 28
U.S.C.A. § 1343(c)(4), which grants jurisdiction to the district
court of any action to recover damages or to secure equitable or
other relief under any Act of Congress providing for the protection
of civil rights.
 Jurisdiction also exists pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 1367(a),
which authorizes jurisdiction over state law claims that one so
related to the other claims in this lawsuit that they form part of
the same case and controversy.
                                VENUE
 Venue is proper pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 1391(e), which
authorizes that a civil action may be brought in a judicial district
in which a substantial part of the vents or commissions gives rise to
a civil rights claim.
                               PARTIES
  1. Petitioner, Peter Petitioner, is a natural person, and is, and
     at all times mentioned herein was, a resident of North County,
     San Diego, California. The agency records described herein are
     situation in North County, San Diego, California.
  2. Respondent, United States Department of Health and Human
     Services, (herein described as “Respondent Agency”), is, and at
     all times mentioned herein was, a public health agency of the
     United States federal government.
                         FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
  3. Petitioner has personal knowledge that Respondent Agency has a
     well-formed plan to act in a manner that will surely cause
     Petitioner serious bodily harm.
  4. The planned act complained of is to administer mandatory
     vaccines for all Americans pursuant to clauses in the Model
     State Health Emergency Powers Act PD51, and sections of the
     Patriot Acts, the John Warner Defense Act, and the SPP Agreement
     of 2005 between USA President Bush, Mexican President Vincente
     Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Harper.
 5. The threatened bodily harm is irreversible serious injury or
death.
 6. Respondent Agency alleges, by its own statements, that the
planned vaccination program effectively protects the public-at-large
from infection from the model (A)H1N1 virus.
 7. Genetic and molecular studies reveal that the recombinant
nature of H1N1 to acquire new genes from its hosts through
polymorphisms, combined with the high rate of speed with which H1N1
replicates which is almost three times the replication rate of any
virus in history, means that to create any vaccine against H1N1 or
any recombinant strain, within the timeframe that the current vaccine
manufacturers have prepared vaccines for use by Respondent Agency, is
not possible.
 8. There exists no peer-reviewed factual data that any of
Respondent’s proposed vaccines have any effect in protection against
viral infections, while much factual data exists to show that
historically vaccines have contained known deadly toxins and unknown
untested toxins.
 9. One vaccine manufacturer, Illinois-based Baxter Labs, has been
evidenced to have “accidentally” shipped contaminated samples
containing live H5N1 Avian Bird Flu viral pathogens from its Austrian
branch to 3 neighboring European communities in February 2009,
including the Czech Republic where the contaminated samples were
given to ferrets which died after vaccination. Subsequent charges
have been filed and an investigation is underway.
 10. Respondent Agency has publicly announced that schools, first
responders and military will be among the first to be vaccinated, and
Respondent will be operating as a proxy for US transfer of Pandemic
Preparedness and Medical Martial Law under direction of the WHO
pursuant to the Model State Health Emergency Powers Act, as Pandemic
Level 6 has been declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) as
of 11 June 2009.
 11. Respondent Agency has publicly announced that vaccination
programs are poised to start as soon as contracted vaccine
manufacturers have stocks available to Respondent as early as August
2009.
 12. H1N1 was created in a laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland
beginning in 1997 by Jeffrey Taubenberger and ending in 2004 starting
with samples from carcasses dug up in the permafrost from the 1918
Spanish Flu pandemic and incorporating asian avian genetics as well
as swine genetics.
 13. Mandatory Swine Vaccination from Respondent in the years 1975
and 1976 caused between 30 to 60 human fatalities, and irreversible
Guillaine-Barre ascending paralysis in over 500 US citizens, and
other major and delayed autoimmune disorders. Legal settlement of a
US Class Action suit was successful against Respondent in 1976 for
the US Federal Swine Flu Vaccine Program.
 14. The threat is imminent because of clauses in the Model State
Emergency Powers Act and statements made by the head of the
Respondent Agency, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and United States
President Obama.
 15. An action for money damages alone is insufficient to restore
Petitioner to his status quo ante after the threatened harm because
irreversible serious injury or death cannot be remedied financially.
 16. The threatened harm to Petitioner, Peter Petitioner, outweighs
any substantial harm to the Respondent because to mandate any
vaccinations will cause irreversible injury or death to Petitioner,
whereas to not mandate any vaccinations will cause no physical harm
to Respondent.
 17. There is no substantial public interest that will be
contravened by this Honorable Court issuing an injunction favoring
this particular Petitioner.
 18. There is a substantial likelihood that Petitioner will prevail
in this action, because the facts obtained in the record by discovery
will reveal that Respondent Agency has knowingly conspired, along
with other federal, non-government and foreign agencies, to mandate a
harmful and potentially fatal vaccine program on the American public-
at-large, in violation of Respdent Agency’s own mission statement, in
which HHS “is the United States Government’s principal agency for
protecting the health of all Americans.”
 19. There is a substantial likelihood that Petitioner will prevail
in this action, because the facts obtained in the record by discovery
will reveal that toxic adjuvants and other harmful technologies are
contained in vaccines supplied to Respondent Agency by Respondent
Agency’s vaccine suppliers.
 20. The United States Department of Health and Human Services is a
public health agency of the United States federal government.
    21. A temporary injunction is necessary to protect Petitioner
    and US Citizens and Residents of California from the threatened
    harm.
 REQUEST FOR HONORABLE COURT TO PROVIDE AN INJUNCTIVE ORDER
    WHEREFORE, Petitioner moves this Honorable Court to enter an
    ordering enjoining Respondent HHS Health and Human Services, a
    United States Federal Agency, from executing a Mandatory
    Vaccination Program, and granting such other and further relief
    as circumstances may warrant:
  1. For an injunction ordering Respondent to refrain from
     administering mandatory vaccinations;
  2. That the Court declare the respective rights and duties of the
     petitioner and respondent under the regulation in question and
     that by its declaration and judgment the court declare that the
     regulation has no application to petitioner, Peter Petitioner,
     in this matter; or, that, if it does, it is unconstitutional,
     invalid, and void;
  3. For a permanent injunction, enjoining respondent and their
     agents, servants, and employees, and all persons acting under,
     in concert with, or for them from administering mandatory
     vaccines;
  4. For costs of actual damages sustained by the petitioner,
     including damages for mental suffering [Civ. Code § 1798.48(a)].
  5. For the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney’s
     fees as determined by the court [Civ. Code § 1798.48(b)];
  6. For costs of the suit herein incurred; and,
  7. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.




Signed:_____________________________   Dated:_____________________


                               VERIFICATION
    I, Peter Petitioner, am the petitioner in the above-entitled
    action. I have read the foregoing petition and know the
    contents thereof. The same is true of my own knowledge, except
    as to those matters which are therein alleged on information and
    belief, and as to those matters, I believe it to be true.
     I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State
    of California that, the foregoing is true and correct.
Signed:_____________________________   Dated:_____________________

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: Injunctive Relief and Agreement document sample