THIS DOCUMENT IS CONFIDENTIAL AND SUBJECT TO INVESTIGATIVE PRIVILEGES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

JOHN D. LEE II, pro se )

)

TAMI J. LEE, pro se )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) N. 3:05-CV-512

) (VARLAN/SHIRLEY)

GEORGE WALKER BUSH, )

PRESIDENT, )

)

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, )

COMMISSIONERS OF SOCIAL SECURITY, )

)

Defendants, et al. )

AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND RESPONSE TO ANSWER BY DEFENDANTS

WITH MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

STATE OF TENNESSEE

COUNTY OF KNOX

COMES NOW the plaintiffs John Lee, pro se, and spouse Tami Lee, pro se ("Plaintiffs"), and having filed suit against the above-styled defendants (collectively, the "Defendants"), hereby makes this amended complaint ("Amended Complaint") to replace the original complaint ("Complaint") made against the Defendants, pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and responsive to Defendants vague denials or frivolous responses as follows:

OVERVIEW

1. Subject matter jurisdiction for this Court arises from Social Security Act Title II (Title 42, Chapter 7, Subchapter II, Section 423, U.S. Code); Social Security Act Title XVI (Title 42, Chapter 7, Subchapter XVI, U.S. Code); and common law.

2. This Response to Defendants' Answer to Complaint is timely filed. Disabled pro se Plaintiff John Lee objects to being given only 20 days (plus 5 days mail) to respond, when Defendants, and their gigantic team of lawyers, paralegals and assistants with their unlimited budget get 45 days to respond to this Amended Complaint.

3. Plaintiffs constructively complied with proper service of process of original summons and notice of complaint upon Defendants. Plaintiff John Lee is disabled, and any delay in service was excusable mistake due to that disability, and is prima facie evidence of disability. Defendants did stipulate in writing to receipt of the original complaint within 120 days time limit. The Court does have personal jurisdiction over Defendants.

4. Plaintiffs' appeal of Defendants' administrative Final Decision is based upon Defendants' abuse of discretion, Defendants' errors of law, and the fact that the decision was not supported by the substantial evidence. There are broad policy and procedural issues in this case that affect the public interest. Equity requires a remand for adjudication of new evidence filed by expert witness, that has already been submitted as an exhibit in this case.

5. Plaintiff John Lee's treating physician, Dr. Janet McNeil, has testified by signed exhibit regarding Plaintiff's Residual Functional Capacity, filed as "new" evidence in this 10-year-old case. This is material evidence, with good cause for failure to incorporate such evidence into the administrative record in a prior proceeding, due to Plaintiff John Lee's disability and Plaintiffs' lack of funds to pay for this testimony by an expert witness.

6. Plaintiff John Lee is unemployed due to permanent disability, and is incapable of sedentary work or substantial gainful activity in a competitive work environment, and is incapable of commuting to an outside workplace. Plaintiff John Lee is currently unable to drive an automobile on a regular basis, due to extreme pain in his arms, legs or back while driving, in addition to other disabling symptoms, and side effects to prescription drug interactions. Plaintiff routinely experiences extreme back pain, dizziness and vertigo after a mere one hour in a sitting position outside the home. During Plaintiff's ALJ hearing, he had to lie prone on the floor during Plaintiff Tami Lee's tearful testimony, due to John Lee's extreme back pain, as reflected in the official record (PAGE 86 IN DEFENDANT'S CERTIFIED COURT TRANSCRIPT).

7. Plaintiff John Lee is permanently disabled, as described by his treating physicians, Dr. Beth Sherrill and Dr. Janet McNeil. To quote Dr. Sherrill, "You have Irritable Bowel Syndrome. I've never seen a patient recover from Irritable Bowel Syndrome". To quote Dr. McNeil, "You have Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. My daughter is permanently disabled with Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and is paid Social Security Disability". Dr. McNeil prescribes an anti-gout kidney medication, Guifenesin, as treatment for Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue. Plaintiff is also diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder and Depression by treating physician Dr. Rodwell, but Plaintiff discontinued prescription medications for those symptoms due to adverse side effects (inability to urinate while taking antidepressants, and increased insomnia due to ADD medication). Dr. McNeil prescribed Benadryl antihistamine as treatment for insomnia due to Fibromyalgia (encephalitis is swelling of the brain, and Benadryl reduces swelling of the tissues in the skull). All these "diseases" and symptoms had sudden onset at the same month in 1997.

8. "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome" was formerly identified as "myogenic encephalomyolytis", apparently renamed by Defendants in order to falsely downplay is significance in disability cases. "Fibromyalgia" was formerly identified as "infectious rheumatism", apparently renamed by Defendants in order to falsely downplay is significance in disability and death cases. Both diseases are listed as permanent disabilities in Social Security caselaw (PAGES 232-273; PAGE 589-626 IN DEFENDANT'S CERTIFIED COURT TRANSCRIPT).

Chronic Fatigue-Fibromyalgia Syndrome

A syndrome characterized by persistent or recurrent fatigue, diffuse musculoskeletal pain, sleep disturbances, and subjective cognitive impairment of 6 months duration or longer. Symptoms are not caused by ongoing exertion; are not relieved by rest; and result in a substantial reduction of previous levels of occupational, educational, social, or personal activities. Minor alterations of immune, neuroendocrine, and autonomic function may be associated with this syndrome. There is also considerable overlap between this condition and FIBROMYALGIA. (From Semin Neurol 1998;18(2):237-42; Ann Intern Med 1994 Dec 15;121(12): 953-9)

http://www.online-medical-dictionary.org

myogenic

1. pertaining to myogenesis.

2. originating in myocytes or muscle tissue

─Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers

encephalomyelitis

inflammation of the brain and spinal cord.

─Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers

Myelitis, Infectious

Inflammation of the spinal cord. Relatively common etiologies include infections; AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES; SPINAL CORD; and ischemia (see also SPINAL CORD VASCULAR DISEASES). Clinical features generally include weakness, sensory loss, localized pain, incontinence, and other signs of autonomic dysfunction.

http://www.online-medical-dictionary.org

Myalgic encephalomyelitis and muscle fatigue.

J. H. Coakley

Myalgic encephalomyelitis (postviral syndrome, fatigue syndrome, effort syndrome, neurasthenia) has been much discussed in your

journal recently.

─British Medical Journal, 1989 August 12; 299(6696): 460

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), post-viral fatigue syndrome (PVFS), and various other names, is a syndrome (or group of syndromes) of unknown and possibly multiple etiologies, affecting the central nervous system (CNS) and possibly the immune system as well as other organs. CFS is most easily diagnosed when formerly active adults become ill, and is most commonly diagnosed in young to middle aged adults. Patients with this diagnosis may report many other symptoms which are far more wide-ranging than these research diagnostic criteria, including: muscle weakness, loss of brain function, hypersensitivity, orthostatic intolerance, digestive disturbances, depression, immune system weakness, and cardiac and respiratory problems. These symptoms, like the syndrome's hallmark 'fatigue', range from mild to severe. CFS is a working case definition for the immunological neurological disorder known as Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) since 1956^[5]. ME has been included in the classification of the World Health Organization (WHO) as a disease of the central nervous system since 1969. In the ICD-10, ME is the only disorder listed in the tabular classification under G93.3, post-viral fatigue syndrome (PVFS). In 1993 the term "chronic fatigue syndrome" (CFS) was added to the alphabetic list of the classification with the same designation.

Wikipedia.org

9. Dr. Gary Speigelman allegedly performed a colonoscopy of Plaintiff John Lee (PAGE 18 IN DEFENDANT'S FINAL DECISION IN CERTIFIED COURT TRANSCRIPT), however, Speigelman never billed Plaintiff, nor TennCare insurance, for this procedure. Plaintiff John Lee has no memory of this procedure being performed. Dr. Speigelman originally refused to provide any medical records nor photographs from this procedure, which Defendants allege proves that Plaintiff has no disease. Dr. Speigelman made the excited utterance, to his detriment, said in the presence of Plaintiff John Lee, "You are my only TennCare patient. If I do this procedure on you, I will lose money." Plaintiffs move to strike Dr. Speilgelman's testimony.

10. While employed by Defendants in U.S. Air Force, Defendants destroyed Plaintiff Tami Lee's medical records regarding "vaccinations" during Gulf War #1. Plaintiff John Lee may have acquired a contagious disease(s) from his spouse, who was very sick at that time, as reported by many other Gulf War veterans and family members. John Lee may also have been exposed to radioactive toxins during his employment by Defendants, in his job as a nuclear weapons specialist. Defendants never conducted any radiation testing at any time of Plaintiffs nor the nuclear weapons. Plaintiff John Lee's job for Defendants also included sabotage of Defendants' aircraft, USAF airbases and nuclear weapons, using conventional explosive shape charges of C4 explosives, which are also toxic. Plaintiffs' jobs with Defendants required breathing poisonous jet-engine exhaust on a daily basis. Plaintiff John Lee also cannot breathe Defendants' poisoned air in many parts of Knoxville (ranked "F" in air quality by American Lung Association), thanks to Defendants' illegal emissions from coal and nuclear power plants operated by Tennessee Valley Authority and East Tennessee Technology Park in Oak Ridge, among many other polluters, such as government-operated diesel buses, which burn similar fuel to Defendants' military jet aircraft Plaintiffs were overexposed to.

11. Plaintiff John Lee has concurrently filed timely claims, and timely appeals, for both Social Security Disability and Supplemental Security Income, as proven by business records in possession of Defendants, and by the COURT TRANSCRIPT filed by Defendants in U.S. District Court. Defendants have repeatedly conspired to defraud this honorable Court, and conspired to defraud Plaintiffs, by deleting or ignoring Plaintiff John Lee's record of filing claims and appeals for Social Security Disability (including "family benefits" via "fully insured" spouse). Defendant "ERNEST BASKERVILLE" committed perjury by attesting to the certification of the "full and accurate transcript of the entire record relating to this case", dated January 6, 2007 (CERTIFICATION cover page of Defendants' Answer to Complaint), as proven by Plaintiffs' additional exhibits included in this Amended Complaint.

1. Defendant denies that Plaintiff applied for Social Security Disability benefits. The claim before the court is exclusively about Plaintiff's entitlement to SSI benefits.

─JAMES R. DEDRICK, DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO COMPLAINT, LORETTA S. HARBER, JOHN J. LEE, U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE, Paragraph 1, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT, JOHN D. LEE II v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, March 9, 2007

Dear Clerk: The above-styled matter is a Social Security disability case.

─JAMES R. DEDRICK, LORETTA S. HARBER, U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE, Re: John D. Lee II v. SSA, Civ. No. 3:05-CV-512, March 9, 2007

(PAGE 591 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

Claim for Disability plus SSI

This appeal denies the "clerical mistake" of the ALJ's false allegation that my claim only involves SSI. From the beginning of my claim, I have also asserted my claim for Social Security Disability "Insurance", either under my own account number of XXX-XX-XXXX, and/or my spouse's account number of XXX-XX-XXXX. As I testified in my prior Affidavits, one employee of Defendants refused to provide me with a copy of my "account" of money I paid into Social Security, and when I again demanded a copy to present to a lawyer (who had requested it), Defendants' employee refused, and ripped uop my printout and threw it in the trash. This behavior of Defendants is indicative of criminal behavior and fraudulent concealment. I was unable to interest a lawyer in my case as a result of this illegal act by Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT OF John Lee

NOTICE OF APPEAL AND BRIEF

APPEALS COUNCIL, US OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS, FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA

RECEIVED JULY 1, 2004

This is about your request for review of the Administrative Law Judge's decision dated April 29, 2004.

IN THE CASE OF: John D. Lee

CLAIM FOR: Supplemental Security Income

─Social Security Administration, Office of Hearings and Appeals, NOTICE OF APPEALS COUNCIL ACTION - ORDER OF APPEALS COUNCIL, September 5, 2005

Page 16

(PAGE 69 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

ALJ: But I'll be glad to take the specific points as to your claim that you are a disabled individual under the supplemental security income provisions of the Social Security Act.

CLMT: I would like to object.

Page 17

(PAGE 70 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

ALJ: Mr. Lee has filed an application. Actually, this will be your third application.... For disability....

Page 38

(PAGE 90 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

BY ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE:

Q: Is there anything else you'd like to add to our record here today?

A: I would definitely like to state for the record that this appeal hearing is for both SSI and disability.

─SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS, TRANSCRIPT: In the case of: John D. Lee, Claim for Supplemental Security Income Benefits, Social Security Number: XXX-XX-XXXX; November 18, 2003

The claimant named below has an application pending for disability benefits.

Name of Claimant: John D. Lee

SSN: XXX-XX-XXXX

Date and Time: November 18, 2003 at 9:00 a.m.

─Social Security Administration, Office of Hearings and Appeals, NOTICE OF HEARING, October 28, 2003

(PAGE 124 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

Dear J.D. Flynn;

The claimant named below has an application pending for disability benefits. A hearing for the claimant is scheduled, date and time shown below.

Name of Claimant: John D. Lee

SSN: XXX-XX-XXXX

Date and Time: November 18, 2003 at 9:00 a.m.

Your testimony will primarily cover the following period:

December 15, 1997 through present.

-Wm Davis, Administrative Law Judge, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Office of Hearings and Appeals, October 28, 2003

Dear Ms. Hall,

The claimant named below has an application pending for disability benefits. A hearing for the claimant is scheduled, date and time shown below.

Name of Claimant: John D. Lee

SSN: XXX-XX-XXXX

Date and Time: August 5, 2003 at 11:00 a.m.

You are requested to appear and give testimony as a vocational expert in the above hearing. Your testimony will primarily cover the following period:

December 15, 1997 through the Present.

W. Davis, Administrative Law Judge, July 15, 2003

(PAGE 115 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS

The application you filed for SSI was also a claim for Social Security benefits. We looked into this, and decided you can't get Social Security Benefits. In the future, if you think you may be entitled you will need to apply again. If you disagree with this decision, you have the right to appeal.

-Social Security Administration, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, Notice of Disapproved Claim, October 25, 2001

We are writing to tell you that you do not qualify for disability benefits. You do not qualify for disability benefits because you have not worked long enough under Social Security. Since you do not have enough work credits to qualify for benefits, we did not make a decision about whether you are disabled under our rules. You are not entitled to other Social Security benefits based on the application you filed. If you think we are wrong, you have the right to appeal.

─W. Burnell Hurt, Social Security Administration

RETIREMENT, SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY INSURANCE

Office of Central Operations

Baltimore, Maryland

Date: January 30, 2000,

Claim Number: XXX-XX-XXXXHA

APPLICATION FOR DISABILITY INSURANCE BENEFITS

MY NAME IS JOHN DAVIS LEE

MY SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER IS XXX-XX-XXXX

I BECAME UNABLE TO WORK BECAUSE OF MY DISABLING CONDITION ON DECEMBER 15, 1997. I AM STILL DISABLED. MY ACTIVE U.S. MILITARY SERVICE IS AS FOLLOWS:

START DATE: JULY 1, 1983

END DATE: MARCH 31, 1987

I AM MARRIED TO TAMMI [SIC] CROUGH [SIC]. WE WERE MARRIED ON JUNE 30, 1984. MY SPOUSE'S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER IS XXX-XX-XXXX.

CIPCMAC PCAC

SG-SSA-16

January 4, 2000

Signed: John Lee, 5 January 2000

You need 13 credits to qualify for disability insurance benefits. You had to earn 20 of the credits in the 10 year period which ended when you became disabled. Your record shows you have only 12 credits in that 10 year period.

CIPCMAC PCAC

FACTS ABOUT YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY

THE FACTS WE USED FOR YOUR CLAIM

Your Name: JOHN D. LEE

Your Social Security Number: XXX-XX-XXXX

January 4, 2000

Type of Claim: DISABILITY, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME

─Social Security Administration

TELEPHONE APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION

June 9, 1998

12. Plaintiffs, collectively, have paid into this "Social Security Insurance Trust Fund" for over 42 years, according to business records in possession of Defendants. Plaintiff Tami Lee has been "fully insured" since John Lee's first claim for disability. Plaintiff John Lee has paid Social Security "taxes" (involuntary "withholdings" from "income") since 1978. Plaintiff John Lee was employed by United State Air Force and U.S. Census Dept., in addition to numerous civilian employments, none of which were counted by Defendants. Plaintiff Tami Lee is retired from U.S. Air Force and was employed by Tennessee Army National Guard, in addition to civilian employments. Tami Lee was retired by USAF with a "10% disability" as determined by U.S. Veterans Adminstration, as result of "medical malpractice" in freakish "medical school experiments", making childbirth virtually impossible. Tami Lee's retirement pension (or V.A. disability pension) was fraudulently stolen by Defendants, as perpetrated against approximately 95% of all retired disabled veterans.

13. Defendants falsely claim that Plaintiffs have failed to qualify for "Social Security Disability Insurance", "because you have not worked long enough under Social Security."

14. Defendants consider TAMI JEAN LEE to be a plaintiff in this case:

(PAGE 129-131 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

My name is JOHN DAVIS LEE. My social security number is XXX-XX- XXXX.

I am married to TAMI JEAN LEE.

INFORMATION ABOUT TAMI JEAN LEE

Her birthdate is October 20, 1960. Her social security number is XXX- XX-XXXX.

-APPLICATION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, July 11, 2001

(PAGE 205 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

CLAIMANT'S NAME: John Davis Lee II

SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER: XXX-XX-XXXX

WAGE EARNER'S NAME: Tami Jean Lee

SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER: XXX-XX-XXXX

CLAIMANT'S STATEMENT WHEN REQUEST FOR HEARING IS FILED AND THE ISSUE OF DISABILITY

15. Defendants consider Husband and Wife to be one person, and include other family members in that "one person" unit, for purposes of collecting on Social Security benefits, including Disability benefits and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits.

Application for Wife's or Husband's Insurance Benefits (SSA-2-F6)

http://www.lexisone.com/store/catalog?action=product&id=46

http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/store/catalog?action=category&id=53

SSA uses the information collected on Form SSA-2-F6 to determine whether applicants (including those who are divorced) can be entitled to wife's or husband's insurance benefits.

Form #: SSA 2 BK

Agency: Social Security Administration

http://forms.gov/bgfPortal/citizen.portal

Can my family get benefits? Certain members of your family may qualify for benefits based on your work. They include:

Your spouse, if he or she is 62 or older;

Your spouse, at any age if he or she is caring for a child of yours who is younger than age 16 or disabled;

Your unmarried child, including an adopted child, or, in some cases, a stepchild or grandchild. The child must be under age 18 or under age 19 if in elementary or secondary school full time; and

Your unmarried child, age 18 or older, if he or she has a disability that started before age 22. (The child’s disability also must meet the definition of disability for adults.)

NOTE:

In some situations, a divorced spouse may qualify for benefits based on your earnings if he or she was married to you for at least 10 years, is not currently married and is at least age 62. The money paid to a divorced spouse does not reduce your benefit or any benefits due to your current spouse or children.

http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10029.html#part7

16. Defendants never completed a Social Security Administration Form SSA-2-F6 for Plaintiffs. This form is not available to the public in Social Security Administration offices, nor anywhere of Defendants' website at www.ssa.gov. This form was only made available to the public by persons other than Social Security Administration, usually for a payment of money. This form was apparently only made available from private persons on Google.com search engine after January 1, 2007.

17. At the same time that Defendants illegally deny "transfer of Social Security credits" from Plaintiff spouse Tami Lee to Plaintiff John Lee, Defendants falsely claim that Tami Lee's employment renders John Lee ineligible for "Social Security Supplemental Security Income". Either John Lee and Tami Lee are considered "one person" under the Social Security Disability Insurance" contract, with transfer of credits, or they are not, and thus Tami Lee's employment "income" cannot be considered as John Lee's income for purposes of SSI. An unconscionable contract is a void contract.

18. Defendants allege that "Social Security Disability" is an "insurance program" on its public website, and in printed materials supplied to "beneficiary" contractees (i.e., "policy holders"):

Social Security disability insurance program pays benefits to you and certain family members if you worked long enough and paid Social Security taxes. Qualify and Apply; Updated: March 2007

http://ssa.gov/d&s1.htm

We pay disability benefits through two programs: the Social Security disability insurance program and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. Disability benefits

http://ssa.gov/pubs/10029.pdf

SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, TITLE II, SEC. 201. [42 U.S.C. 401] (a) There is hereby created on the books of the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the “Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund”.... [T]he amounts appropriated by clauses (1) and (2) of subsection (b) shall be transferred from time to time from the general fund in the Treasury to the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund. TITLE II—FEDERAL OLD-AGE, SURVIVORS, AND DISABILITY INSURANCE BENEFITS

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title02/0201.htm

SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, TITLE II, SEC. 223. [42 U.S.C. 423] (a)(1) Every individual who—

(A) is insured for disability insurance benefits (as determined under subsection (c)(1)),

(B) has not attained retirement age (as defined in section216(1)),

(D) has filed application for disability insurance benefits, and

(E) is under a disability (as defined in subsection (d))

shall be entitled to a disability insurance benefit.

DISABILITY INSURANCE BENEFIT PAYMENTS

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title02/0223.htm

However, if Social Security is neither an "insurance program" nor a "trust fund", but is in fact a mandatory tax, then this is a fraud perpetrated by Defendants. Social Security Act of 1965 allegedly allowed Defendants to withdraw funds from the independent "Trust" and put it into the General fund for additional Congressional "tax" revenue. A fraudulent contract is a void contract.

19. It is an unconscionable for Defendants to sell Plaintiffs an "insurance" contract for "disability insurance", that does not pay benefits when a beneficiary becomes disabled, after 42 years of paying insurance premiums on that insurance policy. An unconscionable contract is a void contract.

20. Plaintiffs were fraudulently induced to enter into "voluntary" civil contracts with Defendants ("Social Security Insurance"), as extortionist condition for employment, in both U.S. government jobs (United States Air Force and Tennessee Army National Guard), and numerous civilian jobs for nearly 30 years. Defendants, and other federal and state governmental agencies, such as Tennessee Department of Safety, to fraudulently require Plaintiffs to "volunteer" for a Social Security contract as extortionist condition for obtaining a "driver license" contract to travel without arrest, and Internal Revenue Service, to obtain a job that "requires" withholding of "income tax" from paychecks.

21. Defendants' contract for "Social Security Insurance" is so voluminous (over 10,000 pages that change every year), that this renders the contract void for vagueness. There was never a "meeting of the minds" between the parties to this contract, thus the Social Security contract was void from its inception.

22. Defendants falsely claim that Plaintiff John Lee only filed for Supplemental Security Income, yet the record clearly proves that Plaintiff filed claims for both SSI and Social Security Disability, as proven by Defendants' certified COURT TRANSCRIPT.

23. Defendants have exhibited a continual conspiracy to defraud Plaintiffs, from refusal to provide printed statements of "Social Security credits" paid by John Lee, to Defendants' refusal to allow Plaintiffs to combine their Social Security credits as family members, to Defendants' censorship of the official record to reflect Plaintiff John Lee's actual claims.

24. Defendants' demand that all employees must pay a "withholding tax" into Defendants' "Social Security Trust Fund", as condition for employment in both governmental and civilian jobs, is a de facto "slave tax", making all such employees virtual slaves owned by Defendants, in violation of the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against involuntary servitude without criminal conviction. The Constitution's Contract Clause can never waive an inalienable right to freedom.

25. During Defendants' ALJ Hearing, ALJ abused his discretion by denying Plaintiff John Lee the right to cross-examine Defendants' "expert witnesses", including Defendants' "vocational expert" and Defendants' "medical examiner". In fact, ALJ abused his discretion by failing to ask the "vocational expert" any "hypothetical question", nor any other relevant question, during the ALJ hearing.

(PAGE 93 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

Page 41

CLMT: I have a question, Your Honor. Is this the vocational expert who will be -

ALJ: That's correct.

CLMT: Am I allowed to hear his testimony?

ALJ: Well, at this point I don't intend to call him. You can call him if you wish. He's an independent witness. But given the fact I'm holding the record for additional material, I don't have a record on which I feel that I could adequately question the individual at this point.

(PAGE 94 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

Page 42

ALJ: You've never written any reports about this case. Is that correct?

VE: I have not, Your Honor.

(PAGE 95 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT)

Page 43

CLMT: Will this witness be submitting anything written to the court, or only oral testimony?

ALJ: I don't anticipate at this time.

26. Defendants' "medical expert" failed to conduct a medical examination of Plaintiff John Lee, and failed to read any medical records from John Lee's treating physicians. Defendants' "medical expert" did not appear at the hearing. Plaintiffs move to strike testimony of Defendants' ME witness.

27. ALJ William Davis, and ALJ's clerk "Martha Ward", abused their discretion by denying Plaintiff's demand for subpoenas decus tecum for Defendants' "medical experts" ("ME") and "vocational expert" (VE) to appear in the ALJ hearing (PAGE 234 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT), and bring their documentation to decode their coded reports (PAGES 133-139 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT). ALJ did write a letter to the VE to requesting he "appear" at the ALJ hearing (PAGE 124 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT).

28. ALJ abused his discretion by denying Plaintiff the right to cross examine Defendants' "expert witnesses", both medical and vocational, after the ALJ hearing, regarding any supplemental reports.

29. ALJ abused his discretion by denying Plaintiff John Lee the right to hear testimony of the VE witness, which is denial of due process.

30. Plaintiff John Lee filed a Motion to Strike testimony of Defendants' VE and ME witnesses. (PAGE 593 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT, APPEAL OF ALJ DECISION, OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS)

The testimony of the non-examining advisor could not provide a sufficient basis for rejecting the opinions of the claimant's treating physicians since a non-examining physician's opinion is entitled to little weight if it is contrary to the claimant's treating physician's opinion. Shelman v. Heckler, 821 F.2d 316 (6th Cir. 1987); Tuohy v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 34 F.3d 1068 (Table), No. 93-1814 (6th Cir. Aug. 22, 1994), citing Shelman v. Heckler.

The medical evidence of record was inadequate to form a basis for the ALJ's finding regarding the claimant's residual functional capacity. Pozondek v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, No. 92-1333 (6th Cir. Jan. 23, 1993). The record did not expressly describe the claimant's residual functional capacity, nor did it provide any significant direct evidence regarding his flexibility or strength. Id. The commissioner's failure to order a consultative examination or to seek the advice of a medical examiner resulted in failure to meet his burden of proof. Id.

The opinions of physicians who never examine the claimant "deserve little weight in the overall evaluation of liability." Allen v. Weinberger, 552 F.2d 781, 786 (7th Cir. 1977).

31. Defendants denied Plaintiffs the right to due process during the ALJ hearing, by ALJ refusing to allow Plaintiff John Lee to read a short statement of facts into the record (PAGE 67, PAGE 77-78 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT), by refusing to allow Plaintiff Tami Lee to read a short statement of facts into the record (PAGE 87 OF COURT TRANSCRIPT), and by shortening the hearing to an absurd 30 minute time limit, after Defendants delayed the ALJ hearing date for 7 years.

32. Defendants illegally pay full "Social Security Insurance" benefits to "illegal alien felons" after only one year (6 quarters or 18 months) of working illegally inside the "United States". Defendants will even mail "Social Security Insurance" benefits to illegal aliens living in Mexico or other nations, including "Social Security Disability" payments. Constitutional Equal Protection doctrine under the 14th Amendment to U.S. Constitution requires equal protection for Plaintiffs to be covered by Social Security disability insurance after 6 quarters.

LOU DOBBS TONIGHT, CNN

February 26, 2007

KITTY PILGRIM - "You want to physically secure our borders and coastlines, enforce visa rules. No amnesty. No welfare for illegal aliens. You want to end the birthright citizenship and pass true immigration reform. Would true immigration reform include a guest worker program, in your judgment?"

CONGRESSMAN DR RON PAUL MD (R-TX, candidate for president): "Well, you know, those words are tricky, because some times if you say you're for a guest worker program, all of a sudden they construe that now, the conventional wisdom is that there will be amnesty. And we have to deal with the welfare state. We can't allow the illegal immigrants to qualify for Social Security after working here for 18 MONTHS." http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0702/26/ldt.01.html

SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, TITLE II, SECTION 223. INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

Crediting Periods of Coverage; Conditions of Payment of Benefits

(c)(1) Any agreement establishing a totalization arrangement pursuant to this section shall provide—

(A) that in the case of an individual who has at least 6 quarters of coverage as defined in section 213 of this Act and periods of coverage under the social security system of a foreign country which is a party to such agreement, periods of coverage of such individual under such social security system of such foreign country may be combined with periods of coverage under this title and otherwise considered for the purposes of establishing entitlement to and the amount of old-age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits under this title;

(2) Any such agreement may provide that an individual who is entitled to cash benefits under this title shall, notwithstanding the provisions of section 202(t), receive such benefits while he resides in a foreign country which is a party to such agreement.

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title02/0233.htm

33. This is the crime of treason, 18 U.S. Code § 2381, to reward and invite invasion by tens of millions of illegal aliens from a foreign nation(s), via the Social Security Act. Over 20,000 U.S. citizens have been murdered in USA by illegal aliens, since September 11, 2001.

While the military "quagmire" in Iraq was said to tip the scales of power in the U.S. midterm elections, most Americans have no idea more of their fellow citizens – men, women and children – were murdered this year by illegal aliens than the combined death toll of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan since those military campaigns began. Twelve Americans are murdered every day by illegal aliens, according to statistics released by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. If those numbers are correct, it translates to 4,380 Americans murdered annually by illegal aliens. That's 21,900 since Sept. 11, 2001. While King reports 12 Americans are murdered daily by illegal aliens, he says 13 are killed by drunk illegal alien drivers – for another annual death toll of 4,745. That's 23,725 since Sept. 11, 2001. King also reports eight American children are victims of sexual abuse by illegal aliens every day – a total of 2,920 annually. Based on a one-year in-depth study, Deborah Schurman-Kauflin of the Violent Crimes Institute of Atlanta estimates there are about 240,000 illegal immigrant sex offenders in the United States who have had an average of four victims each. As the number of illegal aliens in the U.S. increases, so does the number of American victims. 267,000 illegal aliens were incarcerated in all U.S. jails and prisons. The 55,322 illegal aliens studied represented a total of 459,614 arrests – some eight arrests per illegal alien; Their arrests represented a total of about 700,000 criminal offenses – some 13 offenses per illegal alien; 36 percent had been arrested at least five times before. -Joseph Farah, World Net Daily, "INVASION USA - Illegal aliens murder
12 Americans daily - Death toll in 2006 far overshadows total
U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq, Afghanistan," November 28, 2006 http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53103

34. Defendants have illegally overthrown the United States of America, via Defendants' "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" contract (www.SPP.gov) to merge USA with Mexico and Canada (a member of the 53-nation British Commonwealth headed by the Queen of England). SPPNA presumably includes promotion of Section 223 of the Social Security Act. Defendants have illegally replaced the U.S. government with the de facto "North American Union". Defendant George Walker Bush admittedly signed this contract in 2005. This is the crime of treason, 18 U.S. Code § 2381.

"The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing. Looking forward, President Bush, Prime Minister Harper and President Fox have identified emergency management; influenza pandemics, including avian influenza; energy security; and safe and secure gateways (border security and facilitation) as key priorities for the SPP. The Leaders also announced the creation of North American Competitiveness Council to fully incorporate the private sector into the SPP process."

http://spp.gov/

"We, the elected leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, gather in Texas to announce the establishment of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. As part of our efforts, we will: Implement a border facilitation strategy to build capacity and improve the legitimate flow of people and cargo at our shared borders."

-Office of the Press Secretary, "Joint Statement by President Bush, President Fox, and Prime Minister Martin", March 23, 2005

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050323-2.html

35. Any legal arguments omitted or not objected to by Plaintiff John Lee, pro se, at the ALJ Hearings or Appeal Council, as published in Plaintiff's briefs included in Defendants' certified COURT TRANSCRIPT, are not waived by Plaintiff at the district court level. (PAGES 232-273; PAGES 589-626 IN DEFENDANT'S CERTIFIED COURT TRANSCRIPT)

36. Any factual testimony omitted or not objected to by Plaintiff John Lee, pro se, at the ALJ Hearings or Appeal Council, as published in Plaintiff's briefs included in Defendants' certified COURT TRANSCRIPT, are not waived by Plaintiff at the district court level. (PAGES 232-273; PAGES 589-626 IN DEFENDANT'S CERTIFIED COURT TRANSCRIPT)

37. All other factual statements and arguments made by Plaintiff John Lee and Plaintiff Tami Lee in the appeals to ALJ, Appeals Council, as published in Plaintiff's briefs included in Defendants' certified COURT TRANSCRIPT, and original complaint(s) to U.S. District Court are hereby incorporated in this Amended Complaint and Response to Defendants' Answer. Defendant does not waiver any such argument, objection, testimony or exhibit. (PAGES 232-273; PAGES 589-626 IN DEFENDANT'S CERTIFIED COURT TRANSCRIPT)

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

38. Plaintiffs request the Court to waive any limitation on the number of pages for Plaintiffs' complaints and other documentation.

39. Plaintiffs seek remedy from this court for:

a. Award of summary judgment for Social Security Disability benefits for Plaintiff John Lee (based on total credits accumulated by both Plaintiffs); or

b. Reverse and/or remand to Social Security Administration for determination of disability (including any new medical evidence, such as the Residual Functional Capacity questionaire by Plaintiff's treating physician Dr. Janet McNeil), and award of Social Security Disability benefits to Plaintiff John Lee (based on total credits accumulated by both Plaintiffs);

c. Reversal and/or remand to Social Security Administration for determination of disability (including any new medical evidence, such as the Residual Functional Capacity questionaire by Plaintiff's treating physician Dr. Janet McNeil), and award for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits for Plaintiff John Lee (based on his non-income, without considering spouse's income); or

d. Court order to terminate Plaintiffs' contracts for Social Security Insurance, retroactive to inception, with award of all withholdings held by Plaintiffs in its "Social Security Insurance Trust Fund", plus interest, plus injunctive relief barring any future employer(s) from discriminating or denying employment to Plaintiff(s) for refusal to sign a "Social Security Withholding" contract, or failure to provide a "Social Security Number", as equity demands it.

e. That Plaintiffs be granted such further and general relief to which they are entitled.

40. Plaintiffs seek temporary and permanent injunctions against Defendants' Section 223 of the Social Security Act, as it conspires to reward felonies, it conspires to reward invasion by over 40-million illegal alien felons so far (200-million illegal aliens on the way within 20 years), it rewards over 20,000 murders of U.S. citizens so far, and it requires Plaintiffs to literally pay for these crimes, yet Plaintiffs are barred from collecting benefits.

41. Plaintiffs seek award of all legal expenses, including court costs and expert witness fees.

42. Plaintiffs request that District Court retain jurisdiction over any remand(s) to Social Security Administration.

43. Plaintiffs do not consent to jurisdiction by magistrate, for fear that Defendants can unfairly extort an unconfirmed magistrate in this potentially precedent-setting case. Defendants were caught perpetrating extortion and illegal firings against U.S. attorneys at U.S. Department of Justice, as confessed under oath during congressional hearings in 2007.

44. Plaintiffs request oral argument in this case.

Plaintiffs declare under penalty of perjury that the facts stated in this document are true to the best of their recollections or knowledge and belief.

Respectfully submitted, April ______ , 2007

____________________________

John Lee, pro se

7486 Chapman Hwy #104

Knoxville, Tennessee 37920

____________________________

Tami Jean Lee, pro se

7486 Chapman Hwy #104

Knoxville, Tennessee 37920

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading was served on the following persons:

United States Attorney, counsel for Defendants

Eastern District of Tennessee

800 Market St. Suite 211

Knoxville, TN 37902

865-545-4167

Attorney General of U.S.

Washington DC 20530

General Counsel

Social Security Administration

Room 617 Altemeyer Bldg

6401 Security Blvd

Baltimore MD 21235

by depositing same in the United States mail, or by personal service, this _____ day of __________________ 2007.

____________________________

John Lee, pro se

7486 Chapman Hwy #104

Knoxville, Tennessee 37920

EPILOG: VICTORY!

THIS APPEAL WAS REMANDED TO SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION FOR A NEW HEARING BY ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE TO HEAR NEW EVIDENCE OF RESIDUAL FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY QUESTIONAIRE SIGNED BY THE PLAINTIFF'S TREATING PHYSICIAN.