Todd A. English v. Sonny Perdue, Secretary of Agriculture

I. Did the Court(s) err in its discretion in applying the standard for “plausible cause for relief,” as it relates to dismissing a claim during pretrial mo­ tions when applied to Title VII and ADEA com­ plaints)? II. First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments, should the Court consider “violations of the law(s),” specifi­ cally “due process,” when determining “plausible cause for relief” when applied to Title VII and ADEA claims? III. Did the Court err in its discretion when it allowed English’s Attorney of Record to withdraw after only providing a “conclusory statement”? IV. Did the Court err in its discretion when it failed to consider “temporal proximity,” as it relates to Ker’s conclusory statement, when it allowed him to withdraw from this case? V. Sixth Amendment, was the USDA “investigation” I] <V of part of Attorney Ker’s representational responsibil­ ities as it relates to English’s third EEO complaint? VI. Did the investigation the USDA conducted against English violate my constitutional rights under the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments? VII. Is evidence submitted into the docket part of the same case, and not just items submitted in the “original complaint”? Vm. First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments, is it legal for the Department of Justice to represent an agency, who’s managers have violated the Civil Rights of a Federal Employee who has Constitutional guar­ antees of Due Process of the law(s)?