Issuu on Google+

Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2012 Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO URT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLO RID A CASE NO.:II-ZOIZO-CIV-SEITZ/SIM ONTON

*

FILED by

D.C. '

(

TRM AN BUJDUVEAN U,

'

Atlo 2 2012

# 5-

Plaintiftl

i : 7

1 j t k STEVENMsUIRIMORE j. z

1 t kC1L EjO. Ktju ojS VTjC gTj.u, i 1q .

VS.

,.,,.:-..-.--

DISM AS CHARITIES,lNC.,ANA GISPERT, DEREK THOM AS and ADAM S LESHOTA Defendants. /

PLM NTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS'M OTION TO STRIK E

PLAIN TIFF'S PO CK ET :NTRIES 114 AND 115

COM ES NOW TR AIAN BUJDUVEANU , Pro Se,and filethisM otion in response

to Defendants'M otion To StrikePlaintiffsDocketEntries 1l4 and 1l5 asfollows: IN TR OD UC TIO N

1. Defendants have filed a M otion in an attem ptto convince this Courtto strike

Plaintic sdocum entsDE# 114 and DE# 115, alleging non-complianceofthePlaintiff w ith LocalRulesofthis Court.

Defendants contends thatttln conkavention ofthe RulesofCivilProcedtlre and LocalRules,Plaintiffimproperly filed a Response briefto Defendants'Reply Brief

,

(DE# 114)and a SupplementalM otion in Response (DE# 115) These briefs do not .

raiseany new issueforthisCourtto consider.

In facttheDefendantsare asking thisCourtto strikePlaintiff'sM otion DE# 114


Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2012 Page 2 of 7

and DE# 115,simply becauseitseemsinconvenientand itbringssom e ofthe truth of

this case to the surface,this time by docum ents issued by the United States Federal Govem ment,and itisno longer a secretthatthe Defendantsmade severalfalse and misleading statementsto thisCourt.Ifthosebriefsraiseanynew issue forthiscourtis forthe Cottrtto considerand notthe D efendants.

FACTS OF THIS CASE

4.0n March 15,2012,United StatesDistrictJudge PatriciaA.SeitzhasOrderas follow s;'fl'he partiesshallconferand notify theCourtno laterthan M arch 21,2012, whetherthey consentto fm aldisposition ofthism atterby M agistrateJudge Sim onton.

Attachedheretoistheform thepartiesshouldexecuteandfilebythatdate.''(DE#98)

By signing thisform ,the partieshave agreed in factthatfrom thattim e on, the M agistrate Judge Andrea M .Sim onton willpreside overthis Case,and that

she would be in the position to m ake any decisionsregarding thiscase.

6. 0n M ay 21,2012 United States m agistrate Judge Andrea M .Sim onton ruled as

follows:tA RDER ED A N p A DJU PG ED thatPlaintiffs Motion forLeave to Extend Time to Respond to Defendants'Supplem entalM otion for Sum mary

Judgment (DE # 104) is GOANTED. Plaintiff shallfile his response to

Defendants'SupplementalMotion forSummary Judgment(DE # 103)on or before July 2,2012.ltis further ORDERED thatthe OrderSetting TrialDate,

PretrialDeadlinesand Referralto Magistrate (DE # 44)isVACATED.'')

2


Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2012 Page 3 of 7

On or about July 15, 2012, ms a last resortto achieve som e form of Justice,

Plaintiff filed a Subpoena with the United States DistrictCourq FederalBureau of Prisons Central Oftke,W ashington DC,United States FederalBureau of Prisons, Regional O ftk e, G eorgia, FD C M iam i, United States Probation O ffice, M iami,

United States M arshalServices,M iam i,CCM M iam i,and Dism as Charities,lnc to Comm and them to Produce Docum ents copies of a11 Entry Forms,Reports and

Documents9om theSentrySystem.(DE# 110,Exhibits1,2,3,4 ,5,6)

On or about August 07,2012,in response to the Subpoena filed by the Plaintiff, United States Assistant Attorney,Anthony Pogorzelski has sent the Plaintiff a report printed from the Sentry System revealing w hat in fact the Plaintiffw asalw ayssaying,thathe neverhad ahearingheld by theUnited States FederalBureau ofPrison,USPO,Com m unity Service Center,inside oroutside the

prison,asrequired bytheUnitedStatesDepartmentofJustice,FederalBureau of

Prisons.(DE# 115,ExhibitaandB)

9. Thisreportalso indicatesthatDefendantshavem adeFalseand M isleading sm tem entto thisCourk and thefactthattheUnited StatesProbation Office

Statem entregarding the factthatthey w ere notaw are ofthisincident.In factthe

USPO foundoutaboutthisincident,from thePlaintiff,inJanuary,2011,afterthe Plaintiffw asreleased from FDC Miam i.Thisissue also can beclearby an investigation,ifthisCourtisconcerned w ith theTRUTH in thiscase.


Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2012 Page 4 of 7

ARGUM ENT

ltisnotclearisifthe Defendantsare concern with the LocalRulesofthis Court

or if they are afraid that a11 the false and misleading statem ents as well as the des% ction ofevidence and fabrication ofnew evidence in this case willcom e into lightas shown by the Governm entDocum ents attached previously,tDE# 1ls,Exhibit

A andB)andotherexistingdocuments.

10. Every tim e thatPlaintiffbringsargum entsin thisCase, thatseem sinconvenient to the Defendants,theDefendsntsask thisCourtto Strike the PlaintiffsM otion as if the D efendants would be in com m and at this Court. This is another tactic of the

Defendants to im ped the Justice Process, and this Courtshould be attentive to this strategy.

11.

The Evidence is clear in this case. It was D erek Thom as and the rest of the

Defendants thatcaused the Plaintiff to be sentto the FederalPrison and N OT the FederalGovem mentand now thefearofthetnzth com ing to the surfacewillmakethe Defendants to look for m istakes in Local Rules Filing in a hope that Plaintifrs M otionswillbestrikeby thisCourtand therewillbe no furtherappealsofthiscase.

12. UnitedStatesMarshalServiceswerecalledtoarrestTraian Bujduveanuas hewasdeclared a fugitiveby the Defendants. Subsequently,the Plaintiffw as rem oved from the premisesofDism asCharities,lnc.,and transported to FDC M iam i. 13. Aftertheadm ission ofthe PlaintiffatFDC M iam ihewasplaced in General Population Unit7 East. 4


Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2012 Page 5 of 7

14. Seen thatthe Plaitiffw as placed atFD C M iam iillegal,Unitm anager M s.Price

began calling CCM M iam i,asking forthe DirectorCarlosRodriguez,and Dism as Charities,Inc.,asking forthe DirectorAna Gispert.Despite severalcalls,those people neveransw erthe phone,having otherpeople answ erthephoneand invokingvariousreasons.Thisissuescan be cleared up sim ply by thisCourt issuingand Orderforan investigation ofthoseaffairs.

As with any serious sanction,the sending ofthe Plaintiffback to the Federal Phson should have been approved by CCA4, USPO and Commtmity Sanctions Representatives as dictated by the rules ofthe FederalBureau ofPrisons.ln addition,

nohearing ofany kind wereeverheld in thepresence ofthePlaintiffby CCM ,USPO, Dism as Charities,lnc., or Com m tm ity Sanctions Representatives as required by the regulations of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Those hearings for V iolations of

Program Rules should be handled to meet the ççdue process''criteria of W olff v. M cDonald.No kace ofsuch approvalexistsin theSentry System orany United States Govem m ent docum ent or any trace of any type of legal hearing conducted by the

FederalBureau ofPrisons,insideoroutsidetheprison.

13. Plaintiffisasking thisCourtto look atthe Rules ofthe FederalBtlreau ofPrisons

and ifthey seem sinconvenientto any party attism om ent,to issue Ordersto modify these rtzles as the Federal Courthas the power to do so.Prisoners should not be

obligated to stand between those who m ake the rules,to have itboth ways,orto be tortured m entally and physically by private instim tions in the nam e of the United StatesFederalGovernm ent,withoutany hope forJustice.

5


Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2012 Page 6 of 7

D efendants have violated every Rule In The book,yetthey seem to w in a11the tim e.Plaintiffhopes thatG od willsaveus9om tbose thatare hiding behind religion.

15. Atpresenttime,CounselorLashondaYvetteAdams,andCounselorJerryare no longerem ployed by DismasCharities,Inc.They havebeen fired alongw ith otherem ployeesby DirectorAna Gispert,in an attem pttocover-up m uch ofthe truth in this case.

CONCLUSIO N For the reasons setforth above,the Plaintiffw ould m ove this Courtfor an Order to

held Defendane responsibleforimpeding the Justice Processin thisCourt,appoint an independent com m ission to investigate all crim inal acts conducted at Dism as

Charities,Inc.,and forany furtherrelieftheCour'tdeemsjustand proper.

D ate:A ugust 16,2012

Respectfully submitted,

>

,

/

v , UAPROvmSE LIs/ / TIG AN T

RA IAN BU JD U VE

5601W .Broward Blvd., Plantation,FL 33317

(954)316-3828

6


Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2012 Page 7 of 7

CERTIFICATE O F SERVICE lhereby certify thaton oraboutA U GU ST 16,2012 a true and correctcopy ofthe foregoing docum entwasserved upon thefollowing viathe United StatesPostal Service,FirstClassM ail:

DismasCharities,Inc., 141 N.W .1 St.Avenue Dania,FL 33004-2835 Ana Gispert Dism as Charities,lnc. 141 N.W .1 St.Avenue Dania,FL 33004-2835 Derek Thom as Dism as Charities,lnc. 141 N.W .1 St.Avenue Dania,FL 33004-2835

LashandaAdam s Dism asCharities,lnc. 141 N.W .1 St.Avenue Dania ,FL 33004-2835 David S.ChaietEsquire Attorney forDefendants 4000 Hollyw ood Boulevard Suite 265-South Hollywood,FL 33021

EXECUTED ON THIS 16th DAY OF AUGUST,2012

M

.

/Q

/

zz

zzw/m / /,/

TRAIAN BUJDUVE NU,PR0 SE 5601W .BROW ARD BLVD., PIA NTATION,FL 33317

(954)316-3828


Document 118