Willie Lee HavMmeri v. Methodist Health Systems, Dallas

Willie Lee HavMmeri (Petitioner) vs Methodist Health Systems (Respondent) Writ of Certiorari, United States Supreme Court Cause No. Willie Lee HavMmeri (Petitioner) vs Methodist Health Systems (Respondent) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Willie Lee HavMmeri vs. Methodist Health Systems (MHS) Petition for a Writ of Certiorari I, Willie Lee HavMmeri, Petitioner, have been systematically denied the ability to plead my case for WRONGFUL TERMINATION due to RETALIATION for filing an official complaint with the company (MHS) for GENDER DISCRIMINATION. I asked that no one be disciplined during my complaint and that we all receive additional training. I was fired for stealing time 23 DAYS after my initial complaint, despite my evidence to the contrary which was presented at the time of my unexpected termination. (April 10th 2020) QUESTIONS PRESENTED:

1. Did the Pandemic (Covid-19 Federally Mandated Shutdowns/Lockdowns) present a considerable factor in the Equitable Tolling of Time, Reasonable Diligence and the Inaccessibility of the Clerk’s Office (as defined in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(A)(3)) regarding TIMELY FILING judicial documents during the year 2020?

2. Does the Respondent’s (Methodist Health Systems) Motion to Dismiss based on failure to state a claim in a timely manner (180th day limit, with documents acknowledged by EEOC on 181st day) SUPERCEDE the “Right to Sue” granted by the EEOC for the particular claim?

3. Does suspected Judicial Misconduct or Failure to Address Facts/Motions constitute a justification for a new trial in a different venue?

4. Was the Magistrate’s decision to Dismiss with PREJUDICE the appropriate and justified ruling by the US District Court of Northern Texas?

5. Does a Right to Sue issued by a federal agency grant a petitioner of the court an actual actionable right to sue in this case? This ruling BY THE SUPREME COURT shall have NO BEARING on whether the respondent Methodist Health Systems has broken any employment laws nor the respondent’s guilt with regards to my initial claims before the lower courts for WRONGFUL TERMINATION, RETALIATION BASED ON GENDER DISCRIMINATION. 1 PANDEMIC PRO SE Covid-19 and the Federally mandated lockdowns effect on equitable tolling and the inaccessibility of the clerk’s office for filing claims