--~SDNY

DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICAUY FILED

DOC~vember 21, 2014

DATE FILED: 1(-~1-1y

Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street

New Yori<, New Yock 10007

~~r~;J~
~ {L$.1 ;f/;v-;

/T;

;)c;'lj ~ _bcv'J~O, /VA.

w~,$~~~~~
~ ~~ ~ ~ 01- f7li ~,)

~LXP~A~rm. U.S.
~ ,de- '~.... ~ ptJ- ,,,.,,-f-~c-~1:"" ' '

~ ~(Fl ~ ~ d2 ~~~ C-r-~.

~
,)
'~ AP-L,;~~ ~~

~ ~ ;ij!-~-~ ,.,..,r ~ ~
Loeb LLP's November 17, 2014 Letter Seeking A Protective Order I ~

Re: William Morris and Loeb &

Washington v. William Morris Endeavor Entertainment et al. (10 Civ. 9647) (PKC) (JCF)
Mc Castel

.c-

L .. J

c>

~ 1....-

~~~ S~~A~
Christian~~d ~mtett,

U~ O:J

You, as well as Loeb & Loeb LLP and its attorneys Michael P. Zweig,
are
well aware that "no later than November 2 l, 2014," I would be filing a Motion pursuant to Fed. R App. P. 8, 24
__J
and 46 in the Second Circuit, which ultimately seeks the extraordinary relief of vitiating all decisions rendered by / /
yourself and the American Arbitration Association due to "fraud upon the Court" and "fraud upon the Court, by the
Court," and granting default judgment on all claims in my favor. Due to the fact that you have already violated the
Constitution, the law, numerous Canons under the Judicial Code of Conduct, as well as your Oath of Office over
the last four years of presiding over this case, it wouldn't surpnse me if you decided to continue to abuse your power
and grant the Defendants' new request for a Protective Order agamst me. Although 1 was supposed to spend this
week completing my motion to the appellate court, I have taken the last four days to respond to Zweig's request "to
seek leave to file a motion for a Protective Order" that would prohibit me from engaging in a continuing course of
conduct that threatens to undermine the Order and Judgment of this Court, entered on September 5, 2014,
confirming the arbitration award issued bv Judge (Ret.) Timothy K. Lewis" just so I can ensure that the record
is preserved. (emphasis added) For the following reasons, I ask that William Morris and Loeb & Loeb's request
should be denied:
First and foremost, any legal action that I take to undo the fraudulently procured decisions of yourself, the American
Arbitration Association and Schnader LLP attorney Timothy K. Lewis, will be viewed by yourself, William Morris,
Loeb & Loeb LLP, Michael P Zweig and others involved in this race-based conspiracy to deprive me of my
constitutional and statutory rights under the color of law, as "conduct that threatens to undermine the Order and
Judgment of this Court." Tsn 't that the entire point of an appeal') lf not, then what is? Although you stated that my
October 3, 2014 Fed. R. Civ. P 60 Fraud Upon the Court was "without merit," I, as well as the law, clearly disagree
So now, your predominately all-white comrades in the appellate court have the jurisdiction to review your decisions
de nova and determine the issues you refused to decide and/or chose to decide erroneously.
In my March 17, 2014, April 10, 2014 and October 3, 2014 Motions, I demonstrated a number of reasons why
Arbitrator David L Gregory's December 17, 2013 Partial Final Award was reviewable by the federal court pursuant
to 9-12 of the Federal Arbitration Act. Your sole reliance on Michaels v Mariforurn Shipping, S.A, 624 F.2d
411, 414 (2d Cir. 1980) was erroneous and you know that If Arbitrator Gregory's Award was not "final, for the
sake of judicial review," it was most definitely ripe for judicial review and you allowed my due process to be further
violated by letting the AAA disqualify Arbitrator Gregory without reason after he issued his "final award" on the
issue of arbitrability/jurisdiction, liability and indicated what damages both parties would receive during phase two
of our bifurcated proceeding. Your September 5, 2014 Final Order doesn't acknowledge that I requested a bifurcated
proceeding. Whether or not both parties agreed, Arbitrator Gregory was aware that I asked for a bifurcated
proceeding ifhe decided to exceed his powers by enforcing William Morris' unconscionable mandatory, pre-dispute
arbitration agreements in order to prevent an impartial jury from issuing a "final" verdict on the merits of my claims.
Since you did not confinn and/or vacate Arbitrator Gregory's Partial Final Award and did not disqualify

)- ) '(


Mr. P Kevin Castel
November 21, 2014
Page 2
Arbitrator Gregory, all decisions rendered by Schnader LLP attorney and AAA board of director Timothy K.
Lewis should be vitiated because he had no lawful authority to preside OYer my case against William Morris.
And even if his appointment was lawful, he should have been disqualified by the AAA once I became aware
that he worked closely with Loeb & Loeb LLP attorney Christian Carbone's wife - Sasha Angelique Carbone
- as members of the AAA's Diversity Commjttee.
Secondly, as of today, I have not violated or thought about violating your September 5, 2014 Order and Judgment
Although I have demonstrated throughout my last three Motions 1 the numerous ways in which you have
intentionally deprived me of my full constitutional and statutory rights under the color of law in violation of 28
USC 24 l, 28 U S.C 242, 42 USC 1983 and the Ku Klu.x Klan Act of 1871, I have complied with your
filing injunction by not suing you m your individual capacity, as well as sue the United States of America, for
intentionally conspiring to oppress and interfere with the human rights of people of African descent I also have not
filed a commercial lien against you or anyone else who has engaged fraud, conspiracy, racketeering activity, perjury,
obstruction of justice, violations of New York Judiciary Law 487, crimes against humanity, etc. Although my
due process has been violated, I am still trying to remam respectful of the concept of due process by first submitting
my issues and concerns to the appellate court to see if they agree with the unlawful decisions rendered by the district
court and the American Arbitration Association
Th.ird, you no longer have jurisdiction over this case and by sending you a Q!J2Y of the November 3, 2014 letter
addressed to Christian Carbone, I did not "submit[ ] to the jurisdiction and authority of this Court." I submitted my
final request to Loeb & Loeb LLP attorney Christian Carbone to disclose information about his marriage to AAA
executive Sasha Angelique Carbone on November 3, 2014. In the letter, I asked Christian Carbone to provide ills
response by Affidavit only no later than November 7, 2014. I wanted to give Carbone one last opportunity to disclose
this information before I submitted my Motion to the Second Circuit. Once again, Carbone and Loeb & Loeb LLP
chose to remain silent. On November 12, 2014, I submitted my Notice to Appeal - officially relinquishing the
Southern District of New York's jurisdiction over this case.
Fed. R Civ. P 62.1 (a) explicitly states that "If a timely motion is made for relief that the court lacks authority to grant
because of an appeal that has been docketed and is pending, the court may: (1) defer considering the motion; (2) deny
considering the motion; or (3) state either that it would grant the motion if the court of appeals remands for that purpose
or that the motion raises a substantial issue" Fed. R. Civ. P. 62. l(b) states that "the movant must promptly notify the
circuit clerk under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure l 2. l if the district court states that it would grant the motion or
that the motion raises a substantial issue" and Fed. R. Civ. P. 62. l(c) states that the "district court may decide the motion
if the court of appeals remands for that purpose." Also, in the 2009 Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. App. P 12.1,
it states: "After an appeal has been docketed and while it remains pending, the district court cannot grant relief under a
rule such as Civil Rule 60(b) without a remand. But it can entertain the motion and deny it, defer consideration, state that
it would grant the motion if the court of appeals remands for that purpose, or state that the motion raises a substantial
issue."
Zweig is aware of this fact, because he states in his letter that the filing of a notice of appeal "divests the district court
of control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal." Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopedic
Surgeons, 470 US. 373, 379 (1985) (emphasis added) Based on Zweig acknowledgment and citation of this case,
it is clear that he only submitted this letter to you to be vexatious and to distract me from completing my motion to
the appellate court. 2

1
March 10, 2014 Motion to Disqualify Due to Fraud Upon the Court, April 10, 2014 Motion for Reconsideration and
October 3, 2014 Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 Fraud Upon the Court Motion.
2
Of course Zweig and Loeb & Loeb LLP would try to keep this case going as much as possible since they are
making hundreds of thousands of dollars to obtain favorable verdicts through deception and fraud.

Mr. P Kevin Castel

November 21, 2014
Page3
Fourth, I sent copies of the letter to the three federal judges m the Southern District of New York who are familiar

with this case and my additional claims of "fraud upon the Court," conspiracy, en5a0in0 in attorney misconduct,

etc. that l cannot pursue due to a filmg lDJunctlon that you have placed on me. The Pro Se office uploaded the letter
that I sent to Chief Judge Loretta A. Preska onto the docket sheet and as a result, the document, as well as all
pleadings that will be submitted to the Second Circuit and Supreme Court, is public record. Your Orders create the
impression that since the inception of this case, Loeb & Loeb LLP, Zweig and Carbone's conduct has been both
ethical and lawful and that 1- the victim of William Morris' racially discriminatory employment practices, policies
and procedures according to Arbitrator Gregory's December l 7, 2013 Partial Final Award - am raising "frivolous"
claims that are "without merit" and am engagmg in considerable "bad faith." This is untrue, and you know it This
1s one of the reasons I decided to also forward this letter to many members of the legal community, since pursuant
to Rule 8.3(a) of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, "A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has
committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's
honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer shall report such knowledge to a tribunal or other authority
empowered to investigate or act upon such violation." 3
Fifth, you have somehow been appointed as the Chairman to the Grievance Committee for the Southern District of
New York - the committee specifically created to resolve complaints alleging attorney misconduct. ln your
September 5, 2014 Final Order, you essentially said there was nothing unethical about an attorney's willful failure
to disclose to the opposing party, that his/her significant other was employed by the judicial or quasi-judicial fomm
deciding the case. However, I know that Christian Carbone's refusal to disclose information that his wife was and/or
is General Counsel for the American Arbitration Association to myself or the federal court when he sought to compel
the cause under the jurisdiction of the AAA is extremely deceptive and highly unethical because as stated m my
final letter to Carbone, had I been married to someone who worked for the federal court or arbitral forum deciding
the merits of my case, your reaction would not be the same. For you, news that I failed to disclose that I was married
to someone of influence for the forum deciding my case would have supported your false narrative that I've engaged
in "bad faith" throughout this case, and you would have dismissed my case with prejudice. You also would not
allow me to remain silent about this information for eight months. You would have stayed the arbitration and
resolved those issues, but for me, you gave the AAA permission to continue violating my constitutional right to due
process and equal protection under the law. So I ask this rhetorical question: If you were truly impartial and honestly
believed in your heart that my claims were "without merit," why did you deny my request to have Christian Carbone
confirm or deny his marital starus to Sasha Angelique Carbone by Affidavit only and state that their marriage was
"alleged"? Now or later, disciplinary and monetary sanctions must be imposed against Carbone for intentionally
violating the New York Rules of Profess10nal Conduct, as well as New York Judiciary Law 487 and other statutes.
Lastly, no protective order issued by a federal judge engaging in extreme levels of fraud and corruption will suppress my
First Amendment right to "freedom of speech " No one can stop me from speaking about the fraud that has occurred in
my case since you wouldn't even mention it the phrase "fraud upon the Court" in your Final Order. No one can stop me
from speaking about things that have a negative effect and adverse impact on the African American community and
society as a whole (e,g,, institutionalized racism, corruption in our federal courts, Hollywood's direct role in projecting
and perpetuating the myth of black racial inferiority, etc.). You will never be able to silence me from publicly discussing
how you have violated the Constitution, the law, numerous Canons under the Judicial Code of Conduct, as well as your

Pursuant to Rule 8.4 of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, "a lawyer or law firm shall not: (a) violate or
attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the
acts of another; (b) engage in illegal conduct that adversely reflects on the lav,ryer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as
a lawyer; (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; (d) engage in conduct that is
prejudicial to the administration of justice or (e) state or imply an ability: (1) to influence improperly or upon irrelevant
grounds any tribunal, legislative body or public official; or (2) to achieve results using means that violate these Rules or
other law."

J\tfr. P. Kevin Castel

November 21, 2014
Page4
Oath of Office to deprive me of my constitutional and statutory rights under the color oflaw since these are issues the
Second Circuit must decide. You will never be able to prevent me from tellin8 the world that you are nothing but a racist
"crimmal in a black robe" and that you are unfit to serve a IIfelong term as a federal Judge m the United States of Amenca.
You should be impeached for abusing your power and authority to aid in the evil acts of conspiring to interfere with the
human rights of people of African descent and wasting four years of my life, by issuing deceptively wTitten, one-sided,
predetermine decisions which never discussed the arguments of both parties and never applied antidiscrimination law in
an employment discrimination and human rights case!
If we truly live in a democracy, then let due process run its course. In addition to ignoring antidiscrimination law, your

September 5, 2014 Final Order and October 22, 2014 Order never address my claims and the pyramid of evidence
proving my claims of"fraud upon the Court." This is an issue that must now be decided by the appellate court since
you issued a filing injunction against me. You, an allegedly "impartial" and "'independent" Article Ill federal judge,
cannot silence me from speaking about the issues that you purposefully refused to acknowledge or resolve Thus,
every opportunity I get to communicate to the world about the overall fraud that has been committed upon the Court
by Loeb & Loeb LLP and its attorneys on William Morris' behalf, as well as the unmense fraud being perpetrated
upon the Court, by the Court itself (e.g. Republican appointed federal judges Robert P Patterson, Chief Judge
Loretta A Preska and yourself), I will take the opportunity since it will always be in the public's interest for the
Constitution and out nation's human & civil rights laws to be upheld.
Pursuant to 16 of the FAA, I have a legal nght to an appeal. Since my motion ultimately seeks to have all of your
legally erroneous decisions vitiated due to fraud, it would actually waste more time having you grant the Protective
Order, as opposed to the Second Circuit granting the Defendants' request. If the Second Circuit determines that "fraud
upon the Court" has occurred in this case, then my statements would not be "threatening, denigrating, defamatory or
disparaging." My statements would actually be truthful, honest and factual. Either the Second Circuit will agree with
you, Wilham Morris, Loeb & Loeb LLP, Zweig, Carbone and others who have made a complete mockery out of
nation's judicial system by conspiring to flout the law and intentionally violating my constitutional and statutory
rights under the color of the law in order to prevent the merits of my case from bemg decided by an impartial jmy,
by concluding that my claims are "w1thout merit" or they will agree with me by concluding that my claims are not
"without merit" and that my appeal would be made in extreme "good faith." If the Second Circuit agrees with your
conclusions, then most naturally, the appellate court would grant the additional relief that William Morris & Loeb
LLP are now improperly seeking from you.

In the reviewable December 17, 2013 Partial Final Award of Arbitrator Gregory, he concluded that 1 proved by a
"preponderance of the evidence" that "William Morris Endeavor Entertainment LLC discriminated against [me] in
violation of pertinent federal, state, and local law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of face," and mdicated
during phase two of our bifurcated proceeding that I would be awarded the full gamut of monetary damages,
including back pay, front pay, compensatory & punitive damages, "recompense ... for avoidable delays" and
"reasonable fees and cosK as a pro se non-attorney prevailmg party on statutory claims in a case of
considerable procedural and substantive complexity."4 Until William Morris, as well as Hollywood, is held
fully accountable for conspiring to maintain its discriminatory employment practices, policies and procedures,
I will continue to fight in "good faith" for justice. Until WilJiam Morris, as well as HoJJywood, is held fulJy
accountable for the tremendous role it plays in perpetuating the myth of black racial inferiority throughout
society and the world, I will not stop speaking out against William Morris' overall crimes against humanity.
4

Arbitrator Gregory also granted William Morris and Loeb & Loeb LLP's request for $1,000 for defamation and libel,
although they, nor Arbitrator Gregory, never identified one thing that I said about them that was not true and they failed
to meet their heightened burden of production and persuasion after having four years to refute the pyramid of evidence
which supports my claims and justifies the type of statements that I have about the Defendants and their h.ighly unethical
legal counsel at Loeb & Loeb LLP.

Mr P Kevin Castel
November 21, 2014
Page 5
Until I collect the monetary relief I am owed from William Morris and Loeb & Loeb LLP, and permanent

injunctive an<l affinnarive relief is also imposed to deter future violations of Section 1981 1 Title VU, NYSHRL
and NYCHRL, I will never stop fighting for diversity and equal employment opportunities in the American
workplace.
In conclusion, I ask that Zweig's request to file a Motion for a Protective Order be denied for the following reasons
discussed above and that the Defendants and their counsel seek for the Second Circuit to grant this relief when they
submit their response to my Fed. R App. P 8, 24 and 46 Motion within the next two weeks

Best,

Marcus I. Washington

Enclosure
cc:

Mr Michael P Zweig of Loeb & Loeb LLP (delivered via e-mail)