Rose Glorioso-Brandt v. Alex M. Azar, II, Secretary of Health and Human Services

Background When I mention "Vol 1, 2, etc.," I am referencing testimony, from the hearings' transcripts (Judge Shubow presiding, Mr. Weld was the Agency's attorney). When I refer to "Ex 1, 2 etc.," I am referring to Exhibits in my Memo filed with the District Court in Maryland on May 8, 2017. I, the Petitioner flied a formal complaint of discrimination because of my disability and my supervisor David Escobedo (David) denying my Request. I testified that "Denise Mason Johnson (Denise), was the staff person approved by David to perform repetitive motion, etc... I was performing consulting duties. . therefore, I would be performing the same duties from home on Fridays." (Vol. 5 pgs 115, 123) In Vol 1, pgs 25&26, when I asked David if Denise helped me he states, "no." He states on pg 94, "no" when I asked him if he had staff help me. Denise agreed with me in Vol 4 pg 157, when I asked her if "David initiated and, directed . . approved and (was) fully aware of . (her) performing repetitive motion." Judge Shubow, in his decision (Ex 7, pg 18) stated, "Mr. Escobedo allowing Ms. Mason-Johnson to be basically Complainant's right arm was a very useful accommodation." Evelyn Lombardo Cusson, "Counsel" for HHS, Memo filed on June 6, 2017, on pg 5 of 10, states Denise is the "best accommodation that David, Escobedo could have given." David denying that he approved someone from the staff to help me, etc., is the reason for my perjury complaint flied with the District Court. 1. How can Judge and Counsel both make statements above, but did not address David's testimony denying this?