To National Sports Associations and Concerned Persons

Dear Sports Friends:

Please be informed of the latest major developments related to this lawsuit case.

A response letter - an encouraging and appropriate one - was recently received by Mr. Pinkhasov Pinchas from Mr. Kelly Fairweather, the new IOC Sports Director regarding Mr. Pinkhasov Pinchas' September 15, 2003 letter to Dr. Jacques Rogge, the President of the IOC

 Click here: http://www.deafsportlawsuit.com/update37.html

The two defendants - Mr. Jordan and  Dr. Ammons - as the deaf sports leaders-anarchists - are continuing to behave above the law.

They are acting above the law because they are still steadfastly refusing to submit to the full jurisdiction of the IOC-created and blessed TAS/CAS judicial organization in order to arbitrate in good faith Mr. Pinkhasov Pinchas' meritorious Statement of Claim before that Lausanne, Switzerland-based international sports dispute Court

 Click here: http://www.deafsportlawsuit.com/update36.html

Furthermore, the two defendants are acting above the law by abusing the judicial system of the USA, which is widely known as the world's Number One land of freedom and democracy. That is,  the two defendants have failed to submit their Answer to Mr. Pinkhasov Pinchas' September 17, 2003 Complaint
( see EXHIBIT A below )  before the USA District Court for the District of Maryland by the deadline date of October 27, 2003.

As a result of the above irresponsible and disrespectful acts by the two defendants, Mr. Pinkhasov Pinchas as a plaintiff has on November 6, 2003 filed his Motion for Default Judgment against  Mr. Jordan and Dr. Ammons before the Court ( see EXHIBIT B below ).

On November 13, 2003, an Order of Default  against Mr. Jordan and Dr. Ammons was issued by the Clerk of the Court in Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

www.deafsportlawsuit.com.
**********************************************************

EXHIBIT A

            IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                  FOR DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
*******************************
RAFAEL I. PINKHASOV PINCHAS,
            Plaintiff,
                                    COMPLAINT
vs.                            CIVIL ACTION NUMBER:
                                  WMN-03-2690
JERALD M. JORDAN,
DONALDA K. AMMONS,
JOHN M. LOVETT,
            Defendants.
*******************************

    Plaintiff Mr. Rafael I. Pinkhasov Pinchas ( herein, "plaintiff ") , for his Complaint against defendants Mr. Jerald M. Jordan ( "Jordan" ), Dr. Donalda K. Ammons ( "Ammons" ) and Mr. John M. Lovett ( " Lovett" ), alleges as follows:

    1. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action under Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 1332 in that it is a civil action between citizens of different states ( as alleged specifically below ) in which  the amount in controversy exceeds for each cause of action, exclusive of costs and interest, seventy-five thousand dollars ( $75,000.00 ). Venue is proper in this district pursuant to Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 1391 ( a ).

    2. Plaintiff is  residing at 76-54 168 Street Hillcrest New York 11366.

    3. Jordan is residing at  826 Locust Drive West River Maryland 20878.

    4. Ammons is residing at 11617 Orchard Grove Road North Potomac Maryland 20878.

    5. Lovett is residing at 5/42 Wright Street McKinnon Victoria 3204 Australia.

    6. Plaintiff, Jordan, Ammons and Lovett are profoundly deaf persons and they know each other through their long time association with the International Sports Committee of the Deaf
( "CISS" ) and Deaflympic Games activities.

    7. Between September 17, 2001 and April 7, 2003 plaintiff, and Jordan, Ammons and Lovett  as defendants were engaged in their lawsuit and countersuit actions titled WMN-01-2758 before this Court. This lawsuit action  was closed in which no one emerged victorious.

    8. Between March  24 and August 8, 2003 plaintiff,  and Ammons and Jordan as defendants were engaged in another lawsuit action titled WMN-03-857 before this Court. This  lawsuit action  was dismissed.

    9. Since September, 2001 and to now, plaintiff has made unsuccessful attempts to have Jordan, Ammons and Lovett to voluntarily  agree to submit to the full jurisdiction of the specialized international  sports law dispute court called Tribunal Arbitral du Sport ( in French ) or Court of Arbitration for Sport   ( in English ), which is based in Lausanne, Switzerland,  

    www.tas-cas.org

    10. Because Jordan, Ammons and Lovett had been unresponsive to plaintiff's requests on whether they three would  voluntarily agree to submit to the full jurisdiction of Court of Arbitration for Sport, plaintiff, instead,  was compelled to file his two previous lawsuit actions - WMN-01-2758 and WMN-03-857 -  before this Court, which is located at the "home state" of  Jordan and Ammons.

    11. On August 11, 2003 plaintiff again sent a communication, including Uniform Submission Agreement forms, to Mr. Kelby Brick, the attorney of Jordan, Ammons and Lovett ( see Exhibit A ).

    12. Through that communication , plaintiff  requested Mr. Brick  to provide  his timely  response on whether his three clients - Jordan, Ammons and Lovett - would  voluntarily agree to submit to the full jurisdiction of  Court of Arbitration for Sport in order to arbitrate plaintiff's Statement of Claim ( see Exhibit B ). To date, plaintiff has not received any reply from the attorney of Jordan, Ammons and Lovett at all.

    13. Because of the facts mentioned on Paragraphs 11 and 12, plaintiff is again forced to file this new lawsuit action against Jordan, Ammons and Lovett before this Court primarily because this Court  has personal jurisdiction over its state's citizens/residents Jordan and Ammons.

    14. Even though Lovett is a citizen/resident of another state - Australia, it is plaintiff's belief that Lovett, a long time colleague and collaborator of Jordan and Ammons, will also agree to submit to the jurisdiction of this Court as was the case with this Court's lawsuit matter titled WMN-01-2758.

    15. The main  and sole count of this lawsuit action is defamation of character, which also deals with its core and crux issue, namely, "Who is the CISS persona non-grata?"

    16. Plaintiff invested considerable amount of his time, money and energy by obtaining his advanced university degree in the specialized field of international service.

    17. Plaintiff, unlike Jordan, Ammons and Lovett, possesses a M.A.. degree in International Affairs, which he earned from the School of International Service at the American University in Washington, D. C., USA.

    18. Since the end of July, 2001, Jordan, Ammons and Lovett have denied plaintiff the opportunity to work for the international service organization such as the CISS.

    19. During 2002 and 2003, by undermining plaintiff's  previous and long time voluntary international service work on behalf of the CISS, Jordan, Ammons and Lovett made their numerous defamatory statements about plaintiff publicly.

    20. These defamatory statements about plaintiff by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett included, among the other things, their labeling of plaintiff as the "CISS persona-non-grata."

    21. Statement by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett such as, "Mr. Pinchas has blatantly, deliberately and intentionally violated  Section 15 of the CISS Constitution" was false, misleading and defamatory.

    22. Statement by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett such as, "...he
( plaintiff ) dependent on welfare" was false, misleading and defamatory.

    23. Statement by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett such as, "...Pinchas asked the court to allow him to subpoena numerous documents and correspondences from CISS, USA Deaf Sports Federation and its President Dr. Bobbie Beth Scoggins,"  was false, misleading and defamatory.

    24. Statement by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett such as, "...Pinchas also asked the Court to authorize him to be a delegate to the CISS Congress in Sweden," was false, misleading and defamatory.

    25. Statements by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett such as, " The court stated that Pinchas "has offered no evidence beyond his own unsupported allegations," and that  plaintiff's descriptions of incidents were "extremely vague and indefinite,"  were false, misleading and defamatory.

    26. Ammons and Lovett as persons in charge of supervising the CISS e-News Magazine publication were the ones to intentionally, deliberately and in their and Jordan's self-interest allowed to publish  a material headlined  RUSSIAN COMMITTEE OF DEAF SPORT  FULLY  SUPPORTS CISS BOARD IN PINCHAS CASE  in the CISS e-News Magazine, which had false, misleading and defamatory  statements about plaintiff such as,

a. "During Banquet in Rome, representative of Pinchas asked our delegates to sign a letter supported  the conferment of Olympic status to CISS."

b. "Because our delegates agreed with this idea and found under this letter signatures of delegates from English-speaking countries ( USA and South Africa ), they also decided to undersign the document."

c. "So, Pinchas and his assistant misinformed our delegates about the contents of this letter, and their signatures cant be considered as valid."

    27. Statements contained in Paragraph  20  through 26 with their false, misleading and defamatory contents against plaintiff have continuously been published over the worldwide internet - the CISS e-News Magazine, Number  206, June, 2002 ( Paragraph  26 )  and Number 213, May  2003 ( paragraph 20 through  25 ) - twenty four hours a day, seven days a week and are continuing unabated to this day.

    28. By labeling plaintiff  "a CISS persona-non-grata" Jordan, Ammons and Lovett have ruined plaintiff's reputation as well as destroyed plaintiff's job prospects, including getting nominated for an elective or appointed position, in the deaf world community.

    29. Thus, because of satements contained in Paragraph 20 through 26,  plaintiff met the requirements of prima facie case of defamation since a defamatory statement is one which tends to expose a person to public scorn, hatred, contempt or ridicule, thereby discouraging others in the community from having a good opinion of, or from associating  or dealing with, that person.

See Batson v. Shiflett, 325 Md. 684, 722-23 ( 1992 ) ( citing  Bowie v. Evening News, 148 Md. 569, 574 ( 1923 ).

    30. In addition, under the state of Maryland law,  to prove defamation, plaintiff must show that:

a ) defendants made a defamatory communication, i.e., that defendants communicated a statement tending to expose plaintiff to public scorn, hatred, contempt, or ridicule to a third person who reasonably recognized the statement to be defamatory;

b) the statement was false;

c) defendants were at fault in communicating the statement; and

d) plaintiff suffered harm.

See Agora, Inc.  v. Axxess, Inc., 90 F.Supp. 2nd 697, 701 ( D. Md. 2000 ).

    31. Because Jordan as Member of the CISS Legal Commission, Ammons as CISS Secretary General and Member of the CISS Legal Commission, and Lovett as CISS President and Member of the CISS Legal Commission have been elected and/or appointed to these respective CISS positions illegally and unconstitutionally, and  because Jordan, Ammons and Lovett have rampantly, anarchically, blatantly and irresponsibly committed breaches of  three hundred forty three ( 343 ) rules of the CISS Constitution, Deaflympic Games Regulations and Deaf World Championship Regulations in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, it will be the position, argument and justification by plaintiff to demonstrate at  trial that Jordan, Ammons and Lovett are themselves the ones ( not plaintiff ) who are the "CISS personas-non-grata."

    32. Plaintiff repeats and realleges all of the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 through 31, inclusive, as if set forth at length.

    33. Plaintiff suffered aggravation, distress, humiliation, bad image and negative reputation caused by the aforementioned acts of Jordan, Ammons and Lovett.

    34. As a direct and proximate result of various acts by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett against plaintiff, plaintiff suffered actual and consequential damages, including but not limited to damages to his reputation, the amount of such damages are currently unknown but will be proven at trial.

    35. The acts of defamation of character by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett against plaintiff were intentional and were committed willfully, maliciously and in their self-interest.

    36. As a result, in addition to actual damages, plaintiff is entitled to exemplary damages in an amount as the Court may find necessary to punish Jordan, Ammons and Lovett for their wrongful conduct and deter Jordan, Ammons and Lovett and others similarly situated from engaging in such a wrongful conduct in the future.

    WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment against Jordan, Ammons and Lovett as follows:

a. For  compensatory and consequential damages in an amount to be proved at trial but which amount exceeds this Court's jurisdictional minimum.

b. For exemplary and punitive damages in an amount to make an example of Jordan, Ammons and Lovett and to deter them and others similarly situated from engaging in similar wrongful conduct in the future.

c. For reasonable costs incurred in this action.

d. For such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.


            DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

    Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues triable by jury.


    Dated: September 17, 2003
    Queens, New York, USA

                        Respectfully Submitted,


                        Rafael I. Pinkhasov Pinchas
                        Plaintiff and Pro se
                   
TO: Kelby N, Brick
      Attorney for Defendants
      Jerald M. Jordan,
      Donalda K. Ammons,
      John M. Lovett
************************************************************

EXHIBIT B

        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
            FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

********************************
Rafael I. PINKHASOV PINCHAS
            Plaintiff,


vs.                        CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
                            WMN-03-2690
Jerald M. JORDAN,
Donalda K. AMMONS,
John M. LOVETT,
            Defendants.
********************************


            MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT


Plaintiff, appearing pro se, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant this Motion for Default Judgment. In support of this request:

   
    1. Defendants have, unlike in their previous lawsuit matters before this Court - WMN-01-2758 and WMN-03-857,  failed to plea or otherwise defend against  the above-captioned Complaint.

        a. Defendants received the Complaint on or around October 6, 2003.

        b. Rule 12 ( a ) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that defendants  shall serve an Answer within 20 days after being served with the Summons and Complaint.

        c. This 20 days period expired on or around October 27, 2003.

        d. Defendants did not serve an Answer by the October 27, 2003 deadline.

    2. Not only Defendants, as the unconstitutionally-elected and/or appointed officials of the International Sports Committee of the Deaf ( " CISS " ),  rampantly, willfully, irresponsibly and in their self-interest abused the legal system of the CISS  ( i,e., between 2000 and 2003 defendants have committed an aggregate of  343 rule violations inside the organization of the CISS ) but they have again chosen to abuse another system - this time a judicial one by violating Rule 12 ( a  ) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

    3.  Defendants have also been evasive by refusing to accept  the jurisdiction of the Lausanne, Switzerland-based specialized international sports law dispute forum - Tribunal Arbitral du Sport
( in French ) or Court of Arbitration for Sport  ( in English ) in order to arbitrate Plaintiff's Statement of Claim against Defendants.

    4. Thus, according to Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a Judgment by Default shall be entered when a party has failed to plead or otherwise defend.


    WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court grant him the following relief:

    a. An hearing to determine the amount of money judgment against Defendants
awarding compensatory, consequential, exemplary and punitive damages.

    b. An award to Plaintiff for his litigation expenses and other reasonable costs, and

    c. An award  to Plaintiff of such other and further legal and equitable relief as the Court deems just and proper.


            Dated: November 6, 2003
                      Queens, New York


                            Respectfully Submitted,



                            _______________________
                            Rafael I. Pinkhasov Pinchas
                            Plaintiff and Pro Se


TO: Kelby N. Brick
      Attorney for Defendants
      c/o The National Association of the Deaf
      814 Thayer Avenue
      Silver Spring Maryland 20910-4500  - By U.S. Certified Mail