29 May 2020

A group of lawyers has published a complaint form to denounce the U.S. authorities based on all the inconsistencies and errors of the World Health Organization and other institutions

A group of U.S. lawyers has published on the SSBAmerica.com website a complaint form to denounce the U.S. authorities based on all the inconsistencies and errors of the World Health Organization and the health team advising the president of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Anthony Fauci.

“According to the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses’ (ICTV) Coronaviridae Study Group (CSG) publication on March 2, 2020, the preliminary data suggesting that there was sufficient variation to determine this to be a novel virus vs. a mutation of known coronaviruses, was not based on established scientific principles but was responsive to the World Health Organization’s prior unfounded declaration of the novelty of both the virus and a new disease”, is described in the first point of the legal document.

Nor has a causal link been established between SARS CoV-2 and the symptoms of COVID-19, the document says and reports other circumstances such as “the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and their subordinate organizations – the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) – maintained a patent preventing any independent organization from testing for the presence of coronavirus transmissible to humans through 2018 resulting in a complete lack of testing technologies”.

The document also attacks the State of Emergency imposed by the US Government: “No State official reviewed for accuracy or veracity any of the causal statements made in the Declaration of Emergency which contain false, misleading, and terror inducing statements”.

In this legal document, the lawyers' organization describes the facts regarding the patent filed by the Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in April 2003 entitled “A method of detecting a severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in a sample… and, Claim 4 – A kit for detecting a severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in a sample…” provided the CDC with a statutory market exclusion right for the detection of and sampling for severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV).

“From April 2003 until September 2018, the CDC owned SARS-CoV, its ability to be detected and the ability to manufacture kits for its assessment. During these 15 years, the effect of the grant of this right — ruled unconstitutional in 2013 by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics – meant that the commercial exploitation of any research or commercial activity in the United States involving SARS-CoV would constitute an infringement of the CDC’s illegal patent”.

After the Supreme Court declared that patents on genetic material were illegal, the CDC and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, led by Antony Fauci established commercial contracts with several States and with entities from foreign countries (specifically, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Chinese Academy of Sciences) to exploit their patent rights.

Presumably, the CDC and associated entities were:

a) Fully aware of the work being performed using their patented technology;

b) Entered into explicit or implicit agreements including licensing, or other consideration; and,

c) Willfully engaged one or more foreign interests to carry forward the exploitation of their proprietary technology when the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that such patents were illegal and when the National Institutes of Health issued a moratorium on such research.

During January 2018, the U.S. Embassy based in China sent investigators to Wuhan Institute of Virology and found that “During interactions with scientists at the WIV laboratory, they noted the new lab has a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate this high-containment laboratory”.

After the CDC warned of the first case of SARS-CoV in the United States in January 2020, and with the collaboration of CDC's Epidemic Intelligence Service reported 650 clinical cases and 210 tests. Since the pathogen was first detected in the December 31, 2019 reports, the legal document concludes that CDC:

a) had the mechanism and wherewithal to conduct tests to confirm the existence of a “novel coronavirus”; or,

b) did not have said mechanism and falsely reported the information in January. It tests credulity to suggest that the WHO or the CDC could manufacture and distribute tests for a “novel” pathogen when their own subsequent record on development and deployment of tests is without reliability.

“Around March 12, 2020, in an effort to enrich their own economic interests by way of securing additional funding from both Federal and Foundation actors, the CDC and NIAID’s Dr Fauci elected to suspend testing and classify COVID-19 by capricious symptom presentation alone”, determined the group of lawyers who published the legal document.

Copyright © The Impact Lawyers. All rights reserved. This information or any part of it may not be copied or disseminated in any way or by any means or downloaded or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of The Impact Lawyers. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of The Impact Lawyers.

Would you like to read more?

The Impact Lawyers offers a FREE newsletter that keeps you up to date on news and analysis about the international latest legal news.
Please complete the form below and click on subscribe to receive The Impact Lawyers Newsletter subscription

Subscribe for free

The Impact Lawyers Newsletter

  • Practical templates and guides for lawyers and law firms
  • Podcasts, videos and webinars explaining how to be sucessful
  • Tips made by lawyers and other practitioners