October 12, 2008

Over 35 years, Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume has been reading laws and practicing same without income and formal accreditation and certification by the so called Bar System.

Dr. Ofume has researched and investigated several law bodies or domains and the ONLY troubling indicator to lawyers/attorneys, lawmakers and others which he found domestically and internationally is "JURISDICTION."

Initial head start was on June 11, 1978 when he invited some scholars to his student apartment (Lyon, France) to talk about the "ETHICS OF TRESPASS IN DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL RELATION AND DIPLOMACY." Some of these scholars were lawyers and he observed the overwhelming difficulties they faced in trying to resolve the problem of trespass vis-à-vis domestic and international jurisdictions.

The discussions tried to separate domestic and international trespasses and jurisdictions and also separated nation by nation and decided to discuss particular nation alone but without solution on how to overcome the problem of jurisdiction and trespass.

After the discussion, Dr. Ofume separated trespass and jurisdiction and worked on them separately. The result was wonderful and Dr. Ofume finally found that resolving the problem of jurisdiction will resolve the problem of trespass domestically and internationally without deliberate trespass by people that desire to engage in conflict and war.

Dr. Ofume advised that JURISDICTION must be thought inside and outside mainstream formal and informal law schools and para-law training centers.

In 1999 Dr. Ofume also advised all law schools across the world to do the same. He made a cut to deliver the CURRICULUM to institutions gratis. The publication was censored by the Canadian government.

At Harvard Law School, Dr. Ofume applied for admission and also applied to teach Jurisdiction as core and non-elective course. Some people are directly and indirectly making secret efforts to steal the program. The Publishers are watch the trend.

SEE FURTHER READINGS BELOW

_______________________________________________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY (LAW SCHOOL) & McGILL UNIVERSITY (LAW SCHOOL):

POLITICS & RACE/COLOR CLOUD ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE

October 8, 2008

Posted below in support of this domestic and international protests

are Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume’s Intended JD Thesis/Dissertation

Statement submitted to HARVARD UNIVERSITY (LAW SCHOOL), Complaint/

Appeal to THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (Civil Rights), academic and

professional qualifications and experiences and further readings.

Publishers call on all donors and grantors to stop forthwith donating

and granting fund to McGill and Harvard Universities (Law Schools) to

stop future occurrences of the roll of executive power/audacity in

institutional admissions and related administrative trespass.

Over 35 years Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume have been interested to read/

teach/practice law with the intention to help bottom-top victims

without border including becoming Advocate/ Representative for the

Dead.

Dr. Ofume believes that research, investigation and review are the

major keys to win bad and good cases. To move to Bar anywhere, Dr.

Ofume made strong background by majoring in Ethics (Doctorate),

Mediation, Conflict Management/Resolution and Advanced Mediation (core

law study in Canada ), studied Philosophy up to doctorate level,

studied Anthropology/Ethnology up to M.Phil, fluent in English/French,

challenging bad policies/practices, finally engaged in advocacy in

nature of private law studies and at the same time doing serious/

contentious cases up to claim of over $1.5 billion.

In Canada and United States, McGill University and Harvard University,

with the strings of academic and professional qualifications and

experiences stated above/below, Dr. Ofume submitted his credentials

for certification to enable him do Bar Examination.

Worst part of this travail to Bar is hatched in Canada with his

application for admission to read combined English/French law degree

at McGill University. The contra-position in University Admission in

Canada by the Prime Ministers of Canada Jean Jacques Chretien and Paul

Martin horrified the world because McGill University has direct

academic and profession cooperation with one of the Universities

(Universite Jean-Moulin, Lyon III, France) where Dr. Ofume earned

doctorate degree (Panafricanism) and ADMISSION REQUIREMENT at McGill

University (Law School) was equivalent to grade twelve (12) High

School certificate or ordinary degree of social sciences or

humanities. PMs of Canada sanctioned the admission.

In US initially it was smooth because Dr. Ofume submitted his

credentials to THE MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF BAR EXAMINERS and unlike

Canada, the Mass Board reviewed his credentials and swiftly responded

and certified him with some normal guidelines - read J.D. (Juris

Doctor) and enroll to do Bar Examination. Dr. Ofume believes in

qualitative standard and excellence.

With the certification letter of the Mass Board of Bar Examiners,

under International Student bearing, Dr. Ofume moved to apply for a

admission at HARVARD UNIVERSITY (LAW SCHOOL) to read J.D. to enable

him do Bar Examination. The requirements is ONLY grade twelve (12)

High School certificate or ordinary degree of social sciences or

humanities.

Please read Dr. Ofume’s Complaint/Appeal (Review) all of which is

being swept under the rug by the THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

(Civil Rights) since October 2007.

Further Readings:

http://groups.google.com/group/google.public.support.general/browse_t...

http://groups.google.com/group/google.public.support.general/browse_t...

http://groups.google.com/group/google.public.support.general/topics

http://groups.google.com/group/google.public.support.general/browse_t...

___________________________________________________________________________­_

Intended JD Thesis/Dissertation Statement

Theme:

JURISDICTION: UNCOVERED BURDENS AND TASK IN LAW RESEARCH, MAKING,

INVESTIGATION, TEACHING, WRITING AND PRACTICE

Extract:

“…Jurisdiction is a new pattern and structure of Law Education to

guide lawmakers and legislative mechanism and activities towards on-

going centuries…The dissertation unearthed constitutional federal

democracy of America and route not taken to reduce several hundreds of

unnecessary and conflicting laws and costs and crimes which

unbordered, conflicting, uncountable and congested laws have created

on governmental, non-governmental and personal policies and

practices.

All burdens of dissemination and costs will be put on academia and

government because it is foundation and border making project which is

reason why “Jurisdiction” must be taught in all levels of law

education… The problem is that without good foundation or

jurisdiction, law research, investigation, teaching, writing and

practice will be in shambles leading to greater and uncontrolled costs

and malice or crimes in the society…Leaders, lawmakers and other

policymakers have been misusing their executive power in office and

plunging the people and nation into starvation, pains, war, conflict

and instability. The five major law interaction which drew the

attention of the topic are Law Making, Research, Investigation,

Practice, Teaching and Writing.

The fields interwoven within two major grids which are VERTICAL AND

HORIZONTAL JURISDICTIONS…Example of the limitation of this bilinear

latter-time division maybe seen heavily burdening government and

administration under federal democracy and several other system of

government. America Federal Constitutional Democracy is one of the

focus case group because it has clearly exemplified policy and

practice where there are several federating states and counties or

districts vis-à-vis score of general and interlocking acts,

regulations, rules, constitutions, etc and further interlocking or

conflicting laws such as supreme legislative bodies or mechanisms such

as federal laws which are sanctioned and unsanctioned by further

supreme laws such as uncountable universal or international

conventions, covenants, treaties, declarations, etc which the federal

government has ratified, signed and assented without preliminary

determinations and/or reviewing the sanctions arisen out from and

within the local VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL JURISDICTIONS… In Research,

investigation, Teaching, Practice and Writing, there are enormous

difficulties in finding the law boundaries and borders between

domestic and intra-domestic boundary and border on FIRST PART and

continental and intra-continental boundary and border on SECOND PART

and international boundary on THIRD PART and several local regulatory

administrative and other rules, regulations, closures, etc which are

randomly applied under executive and other orders without

consideration of the emerging conflicts... For the government and

academia, the topic will create a huge review process and the outcome

will be great savings and reduction of crimes and other malice in the

society.

Therefore, in part, the topic intends to recommend that law schools

and other law base training centers teach “JURISDICTION” at all

levels thus, under-graduate to post-graduate… As the government is

pumping money into this direction and the topic will save several

billions of dollars from the legal and other costs wasted because of

the costs relating to lack of proper knowledge of “JURISDICTION” in

both domestic and international litigations, decisions and other

activities emanating from jurisdictional trespasses…”

Purpose and focus:

The dissertation will grant the Lawyers, leaders, lawmakers, writers,

policymakers, etc three major relief. Lawyers, leaders, lawmakers,

writers, policymakers, etc have had distress testimonies that the most

difficulty they encounter in making domestic and international

decisions, writing, litigating action, etc is LAW JURISDICTION. It

will resolve the longstanding multiple difficulties encountered in

litigation and law research, investigation, teaching, writing and

practice, particularly finding the borders between different laws and

jurisdictions and their applications from law border to law border to

sanction or reduce jurisdictional trespasses on ONE PART. Filing

action in the state court instead of federal court. Reason that

several people are in prison and the prison inmates are expanding at

disadvantage rate because of score of under informed knowledge of the

implication of the day to day action of the people, therefore the work

will define law premises of civic, economic, social and political

conduct and decision on SECOND PART. The dissertation/thesis will

reduce time and costs in litigation, research, investigation, writing,

teaching and practice on THIRD PART. Leaders, lawmakers, writers,

policymakers, lawyers, researchers, investigators, teachers, etc that

have taken the course of study, “Jurisdiction” will know the

relationship between one and another law domain or border.

“Jurisdiction” will be bordered on two law parts, horizontal and

vertical borders.

Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D.

___________________________________________________________________________­____

Page 1 of 6 Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law

School

Phillip C. Ofume & Seven

NGOs

33 Arlington Street, Suite 1

Lynn, Massachusetts 01902

Mobile: (617) 888 – 4205 (No

Voice Message)

Tel. (617) 263- 8604 (No

Voice Message )

Tel (781) 842-1225 (24-hr

service & No Voice Message )

Tel. (781) 598-0219

Mobile: (617) 240 – 3944 (No

Voice Message)

Websites: “Dr. Phillip

Ofume”;

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Dr.+Phillip+Ofume+Political+Mani...

http://groups-beta.google.com/ group/soc.org.nonprofit/topics?start=

10&hl=en&sa=N; etc. E-mail:

globalaids_hivcureinteract...@yahoo.co.uk, confid1...@hotmail.com

___________________________________________________________________________­_______

Our File: Ofu-NGOs/Domestic/03/08/Complaint/078923 Date: March

11, 2008

VIA US CERTIFIED MAIL OR HAND DELIVERY

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights }

U.S. Department of Education }

Office for Civil

Rights }

550 12th Street S.W. }

Washington, D.C. 20065 }

}

Copies to: }

Ms. Donna L. Russell - Team Leader/Civil Right Attorney }

Office for Civil Rights (OCR), }

OCR, Boston Enforcement Office } Complaint No.

01-08-2015

U.S. Department of Education

}

33 Arch Street, Suite 900 }

Boston, MA 02110-1491 }

}

}

Director - Complaint }

U.S. Department of Education }

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS }

400 Maryland Avenue, SW }

Washington, D.C. 20202-1100 }

Dear Sir or Madam:

Re. U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR)

Closing Complainant’s Complaint - OBJECTION

Re. Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School

(Complaint No. 01-08-2015)

The Complainant, Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume moves to request the

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights to review the unfertile

and unlearned decision of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR).

Page 2 - Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law

School (Complaint No. 01-08-2015

1. Reason for Review Per Fact and Issue:

a. On first part of the two major foundations of this request for

review, the Complainant request an in-dept perusal of his 6-page

statement and Statement of Complaint (attached herein) in support of

his request for reconsideration because prior to the decision upon

which reconsideration is sought, the OCR did not conduct any research

and investigation because of the control of the OCR and the defendant

by the highly racist former governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney

(Canadian and US Citizens) and its agencies such as the present and

past secretaries of justice and attorney-generals of Massachusetts.

They (above mentioned) have been the bona fide agent of the

Complainant’s political rivals or Canadian/Nigerian governments under

the multi-billion dollars loot deposits inside and outside Mass.

Several related complaints before the past and present Attorney-

Generals of Massachusetts have remained unattended

b. On second part of the two major foundations of the Complainant’s

request for review, the Complainant request interrogatory at issue

following:

i. whether under pro se complaint and federal/Mass. Rules of

pleading initial Statement of Complaint, the OCR has legal claim to

deny reconsideration because the Complainant failed to present

detailed and lengthy statement of complaint or what the OCR called

“an insufficient factual basis to support your Claim that Harvard Law

School discriminated against you because of your national origin when

it stated that your application for admission was incomplete. ” . The

OCR found Complainant’s “Insufficient” because OCR neglected, failed

and refused to conduct research and investigation to uncover

“sufficiency”. A brief statement of issue which requires review is

whether insufficient factual basis to support Claim is basis to reject

Statement of Complaint which is supposed to be brief and concise to

limited specific fact before case management proceedings. (see Fed.

Rules of Civil Procedure 8, 9 & 12).

ii. whether censoring application for admission for over seven (7)

months and the defendant came up with empty letter stating ONLY

“incomplete application” without stating what and what that are

“incomplete application” is not the usual racist prowl to deprive its

prey access to right to services in both ancient and modern times.

Under usual racist pretences or lack of anti-racism, discriminatory

and xenophobia expertise and experience, the OCR which is not supposed

to be an anti-racism, discriminatory and xenophobia agency under multi-

racial/cultural/colour constitutional democracy of America shifted

left to support “all white university (Harvard) where nonwhite is used

as cosmetic tool to cloud multiculturalism.

Page 3 - Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School

(Complaint No. 01-08-2015

c. OCR has no iota of ground to take the Complaint or refuse

reconsideration. Reference to past and on-going cases, directly and

indirectly in Massachusetts similar discrimination on basis of

national origin, political belief and alliance, race and colour have

affected several other non-whites including the Complainant and his

family (see Mrs. Maureen Ofume v. American Red Cross (Admission and

Examination - Health Training Program) et al; Kleber Ofume v. Suffolk

University (Admission) et al. These complaints have been swept under

the rug by the past government of Mitt Romney now operates under

cover of several racists which were bred by Romney’s government.

2. Reason for Review on Law basis

In the United States of America, state and federal laws and

decisions of the law courts up to the Supreme Court of America

disbelief and oppose the decision of the OCR to dismiss initial

Complaint including pro se complaint with scores of arguable issues,

special circumstances, interactive evidential circumstances, disputed

issues of fact or law, and irreparable harms and damages because of an

unfounded allegation that it failed to state all claim (in face of the

initial statement of complaint) upon which relief maybe granted

without referencing the Fed. Rules of Civil Procedure 8, 9 & 12.

In reversing a similar rush or improper decision of the US

District Court, which dismissed the entire FORMA PAUPERIS and PRO SE

litigations in Denton, Director of Corrections of California, et al.

v. Hernadez, the Court of Appeals on remand from this Court for

consideration, the Court's intervening decision in Neitzke v.

Williams, 490 U. S. 319, held that an in forma pauperis complaint "is

frivolous [under § 1915(d)] where it lacks an arguable basis either in

law or in fact," id., at 325. Also see Coppedge v. United States, 369

U. S. 438, 447 (1962). Held that it is more horrible that, the §

1915(d) frivolousness determination, frequently made sua sponte before

the defendant has even been asked to file an answer, cannot serve as a

fact finding process for the resolution of disputed facts or issue of

law.

“An in forma pauperis complaint may not be dismissed,

however, simply because the court finds the plaintiff's allegations

unlikely. Some improbable allegations might properly be disposed of on

summary judgment, but to dismiss them as frivolous without any factual

development is to disregard the age-old insight that

Page 4 - Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School

(Complaint No. 01-08-2015

many allegations might be "strange, but true; for truth is always

strange, Stranger than fiction." Lord Byron, Don Juan, canto XIV,

stanza 101 (T. Steffan, E. Steffan, & W. Pratt eds. 1977).

In paragraph 1 of the Order appealed, the US District Court further

states that reason for dismissing 100% of the Appellant’ Complaint is

because “ 28 U.S.C. s. 1915(e)(2) permits courts to dismiss the

actions of persons proceeding in forma pauperis if the action fails to

state a claim upon which relief may be granted…”

MARSHALL, J., delivered the opinion for what

they called a unanimous Court. Robert S. Spear argued the cause for

petitioners. Linley E. Pearson, Attorney General of Indiana, and David

A. Nowak, Deputy Attorney General were said to be on the briefs.

George A. Rutherglen, by appointment of the Court, 488 U.S. 939 ,

argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent. The question at

issue presented is whether a complaint filed in forma pauperis which

fails to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)

is automatically frivolous within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 1915(d).

Justice Marshall, “ The answer, we hold, is no. ”

See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). 9 [490 U.S. 319,

331] “We therefore hold that a complaint filed in forma pauperis is

not automatically frivolous within the meaning of 1915(d) because it

fails to state a claim. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is

accordingly Affirmed.”

In attempt to further fix the problem on wrongful

dismissal of the litigation brought under FORMA PAUPERIS and PRO SE,

US Supreme Court made bold decisions in NEITZKE v. WILLIAMS, 490 U.S.

319 (1989) 490 U.S. 319 thus stating that, “ The District Court

dismissed the complaint sua sponte as frivolous under 1915(d) on the

grounds that Williams had failed to state a claim upon which relief

could be granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The

Court of Appeals, holding that the District Court had wrongly equated

the standard for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6)…” and

further held that, “A complaint filed in

Page 2 - Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School

(Complaint No. 01-08-2015

Page 5 - Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School

(Complaint No. 01-08-2015

forma pauperis is not automatically frivolous within the meaning of

1915(d) because it fails to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). The two

standards were devised to serve distinctive goals and have separate

functions.”

3. Conclusion

OCR’s premature decisions as to failure to start any research and

investigation, close the Complaint and failure to reconsider the

Complaint be dismissed. Under this condition, Complainant hereby

suggest combination of independent researchers, investigators and Jury

Hearing.

Respectfully requested,

_________________

Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D.

(Complainant)

Address of the Defendant:

Harvard University - Law School

1515 Massachusetts Avenue

Cambridge, MA 02138

Copies to:

1. President George W. Bush

President of the United States of America

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20500

2. The Honourable Governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick

STATE HOUSE

Boston, MA

3. Vice- President Richard Cheney

Washington Office:

Eisenhower Executive Office Bldg.

Washington, DC 20501

4. The Honourable Secretary Condoleezza Rice,

US Secretary of State,

U.S. Department of State

2201 C Street NW

Washington, DC 20520

Page 6 - Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School

(Complaint No. 01-08-2015

5. The Honourable Secretary Michael Chertoff

Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School P.

6/6

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

DHS Headquarters

Washington, D.C. 20528

6. The Honourable Secretary

US Secretary of Justice and Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Main

Washington, D.C. 20530

7. Senate Majority/Minority Leaders.

The 108th Congress of the US

416 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510-4205

8. Dr. Nguyen Van Hanh or Director

Office of Refugee Resettlement

370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW

ORR/6th Floor

Washington, DC 20447

(901 D Street)

9. The Office For Civil Right, U.S. Department of Education (“OCR”)

Department of Education

John W. McCormack Post

Office and Courthouse

Room 222

Boston, MA 02109

________________________________________________________________________

Important Note: All the telephones and related communication listed

above remain disconnected - Phillip Ofume v. Verizon Inc. (Dept. of

Energy and Com. & FCC)

________________________________________________________________________

Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School P.

1/5

Phillip C. Ofume & Seven NGOs

33 Arlington Street, Suite 1

Lynn, Massachusetts 01902

Mobile: (617) 888 – 4205 (No

Voice Message)

Tel. (617) 263- 8604 (No

Voice Message )

Tel (781) 842-1225 (24-hr

service & No Voice Message )

Tel. (781) 598-0219

Mobile: (617) 240 – 3944 (No

Voice Message)

Websites: “Dr. Phillip

Ofume”;

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Dr.+Phillip+Ofume+Political+Mani...

etc. E-mail: globalaids_hivcureinteract...@yahoo.co.uk,

confid1...@hotmail.com

________________________________________________________________________

Our File: Ofu-NGOs/Domestic/10/07/Complaint/05945 Date: October

03, 2007

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL

Director - Complaint

U.S. Department of Education

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS

400 Maryland Avenue, SW

Washington, D.C. 20202-1100

Dear Sir or Madam:

COMPLAINT

Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School

BACKGROUND

Please accept this letter as a formal Complaint against the Harvard

University - Law School at Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Harvard University - Law School discriminated against Dr. Phillip C.

Ofume because of his ethnic place of origin of the Niger Delta Region

of Nigeria and political belief and the people mandate to become the

President of Nigeria. The mandate of Dr. Ofume is a huge scare for the

Canadian/Nigerian governments and Nigeria’s foreign and domestic oil/

gas companies and their allies. Dr Ofume will be the First President

of Nigeria hail from the NIGER DELTA REGION since the birth of Nigeria

in 1914. Dr. Ofume and his family have suffered terrible cruelties

because of this mandate to become the President of Nigeria. Niger

Delta Region of Nigeria produces over 95% of Nigeria’s revenue and

wealth but highly impoverished. See http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Dr.+Phillip+Ofume+Political+

Manifesto.

In Massachusetts, Mrs. Maureen Ofume of the Niger Delta Region of

Nigeria was forcibly removed from the Examination Hall during State

operated Healthcare Training Examination by

Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School P. 2/5

American Red Cross and Spectrum Healthcare Center. Ms. Jacky of the

Niger Delta Region of Nigeria was forcibly removed from the

Examination Hall during State operated Healthcare Training Examination

by American Red Cross and Spectrum Healthcare Center. In

Massachusetts Kleber Ofume (A & B+ graduate of Classical High School)

of the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria was denied admission to study at

SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY at Boston. In Massachusetts, other indigenes of the

Niger Delta Region of Nigeria are denied admission and to the extent

of infecting them with mock TB to prevent them from getting job and

related service. The Canadian government controls Nigeria’s mines,

power, communication and part of oil/gas sector and armed with score

of insurgents or political assassins. In Massachusetts, September 2005

- present, Dr. & Mrs. Ofume suffer zero-income including poor

people’s food ration or food stamps. These cruelties were carried out

under the instruction and direction of the Governor of Massachusetts,

Mitt Romney (Canadian and American citizens).

JURISDICTION

We believe that the Law of the United States listed below prohibits

Harvard University - Law School and other universities from using

ethnicity and political belief as factors for admissions and providing

other learning services:

a. United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title III 42 U.S.C. sec.

2000b

b. United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IV 42 U.S.C. sec.

2000c

c. United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI 42 U.S.C. sec.

2000d

d. United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII 42 U.S.C. sec.

2000e

e. United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII 42 U.S.C. sec.

2000e-5(e)(1)

f. Sec. 201(1) (A) (B) [42 U.S.C. 12131] Title II of Public

Services. Subtitle II (A) -

Prohibition Against Discrimination and Other Generally

Applicable Provisions.

g. Civil Rights Act of 1964 sec. 407 of Title IV - Desegregation

of Public Education

h. UN Convention of July 28, 1951 Articles 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22,

23, 24, 25 et seq.

STATEMENT OF FACT

1. On September 29, 2005 Dr. Ofume and his family escaped persecution

in Canada on their way to Washington DC but they were forced to land

in Massachusetts under a conspiracy. Canadian/Nigerian governments

crossed over into US to continue the persecution and they have

successfully influenced the majority of service providers including

Harvard University - Law School. See Ofume family v. Department of

Homeland Security et al - US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit,

Boston, MA Docket Number: 1:07-cv-10085-13 Defendants and score of

cases posted below in paragraph 9.

2. Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume is resident of Lynn of Massachusetts

and Refugee, stateless

Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School P. 3/5

person and prisoner of conscience adopted by the United Nations High

Commission for Refugees and Amnesty International (Int. Secretariat,

London UK) and lawfully admitted in the United States on September 29,

2005 and October 07, 2005.

3. In Massachusetts, for the purpose of EVALUATION, ASSESSMENT AND

CERTIFICATION of Dr. Ofume’s Credentials or academic and professional

qualifications and experiences thus, in September 2006, Dr. Ofume

submitted his resume and other credentials to the BOARD OF BAR

EXAMINERS to enable him sit Bar Examination and meet the requisites to

establish law office in Massachusetts. The letter of the BOARD OF

BAR EXAMINERS dated September 28, 2006 herewith attach certified Dr.

Ofume’s academic and professional qualifications and experience and

requested Dr. Ofume to do two things.

4. As early as November 2006 Dr. Ofume submitted his application

forms, two highly undisputed thesis/dissertation statements (attached)

and other documents and materials including the evaluation, assessment

and certification of the BOARD OF BAR EXAMINERS. In the Office of the

Dean of Admission, the listed of submissions stated in paragraph 6 of

the letter dated November 28, 2006 of Dr. Ofume was instantly

reviewed and found to be sufficient and no further submission was

requested by Harvard University - Law School. see Dr. Ofume’s resume

at: http://groups-beta.google.com/ group/soc.org.nonprofit/topics?

start= 10&hl=en&sa=N

5. Very shocking the letter of Harvard University - Law School dated

June 04, 2007 (attached) denied Dr. Ofume’s Application for Admission

and the cover-up path or lay reason for their denial is cited verbatim

in para 1 as follows:

“Your Application for admission to Harvard Law School remains

incomplete.”

Question is raised as to why Harvard Law School known for teaching law

would decline to list evidence or the purported incomplete documents

mentioned in their denial letter, November 2006 through June 2007 and

rationale behind about one year closure to disclose the required

document.

6. Dr. Ofume has strings of academic and professional qualifications

and experiences which include but are not limited to Doctorat du 3e

Cycle(DEA, DEP), Ethics, Universite Catholique, Lyon France; Doctorat

du 3e Cycle(DEA), Panafricanism (Politics in Africa and African

Politics) Universite Jean Moulin Lyon III France; Scolarite au

Doctorat du 3e Cycle(S.Dr. - Comparative Philosophy/Philosophy of

Science) Universite Catholique, Lyon France; M.Phil. Anthropological

and Ethnological Research, Universite Catholique, Lyon France; BA,

General Philosophy, Universite Catholique, Lyon France; Dip. (French)

Ecole Pegue Geneva Switzerland/Universite Claude Bernard Lyon II

France; FIAM(Business Administration) Institute of Administrative

Management of Nigeria; CDCL(Public Administration) Institute of

Administrative Management of Nigeria; M.Sc.(Labour Science -Completed

one Year) Universite Jean Moulin Lyon III France; NCMP - Mediation,

Dalhousie University Law Faculty/Henson College Nova Scotia; NCMP -

Negotiation and Conflict Resolution, Dalhousie University Faculty of

Law/Henson College Nova Scotia; NCMP Advanced Mediation- Dalhousie

University, Faculty of Law/Henson College Nova Scotia; Different

Certificates of Computer Sciences; etc. and on-going Juris Doctor and

Ph.D. (Ministry) and experienced in advocacy, defence, solicitation

and representation inside and outside the law courts and campaign for

civil liberties in over 16 countries; led the largest academic

association in Canada

Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School P. 4/5

(Canadian Sociology and Anthropology Association ); etc.see Dr.

Ofume’s resume at: http://groups-beta.google.com/ group/

soc.org.nonprofit/topics?start= 10&hl=en&sa=N

7. In 1998, Dr. Ofume applied to read LAW formally in all Canadian

law schools but overwhelmingly sanctioned and blocked by the Prime

Minister of Canada, Rt. Honourable Jean Jacques Chretien. Informally,

Dr. Ofume enrolled to do private law studies and practicing at the

same time, thus across several contentious cases especially, Ofume v.

RadioShack InterTAN Canada Limited (Volume of Claim: $2.5Billion);

NGOs v. Government of Nova Scotia; Ofumes v. Canadian Imperial Bank

Commerce; Ofumes v. Citadel Insurance Company; NGOs and Ofumes v.

Federal Government of Canada at the United Nations; etc. Dr. Ofume

further registered with the Legal Department - Citadel Insurance

Company, Canada and further perfected the terrain of his study/

practice by way of walk-in law research and investigation (law

schools, libraries, private/public consultations, etc.).

8. Dr. Ofume has over seven (7) years experience in Canadian law

courts without income across domestic mechanism (Boards, Tribunals,

Commissions, Provincial Supreme Courts, Court of Appeals, Supreme

Court of Canada, etc) and international mechanism at the United

Nations against Canada and secured three UN Special Rapporteurs and

three UN Reports - 1999 - 2003. Few nations and people are able to

secure three UN Special Rapporteurs and three UN Reports within three

years.

9. In Canada, Dr. Ofume’s cases are uncountable and the shortlist of

his cases in United States is as follows:

i. Immigration Court, JFK Federal Building, Boston MA - Ofume family

v. Government of America Lead file No. 97-446-370 . Three (3)

Administrative Appeals to the Office of Administrative Appeal (OAA);

three (3) Complaints to the Executive Office for Immigration Review -

Office of the Chief Immigration Judge, VA USA; Individual Hearing;

etc. Not included.

ii. Ofume family v. Department of Homeland Security et al - US

District Court, Boston, MA

Docket Number: 1:07-cv-10085-GAO Document 3-1 Filed 01/23/2007)

including several pre-trial Motions/Applications. 10 Defendants.

iii. DTA ( SUPERIOR COURT, LAWRENCE, MA - Ofumes v. DTA Civil Docket

No. ESCV2006-00381)

iv. Ofume family v. Boston Housing Authority - preparing for appeal

soon as decision is rendered per hearing on June 26, 2007.

v. Ofume family v. Keyspan Inc. and District Sheriff - SUPERIOR

COURT SALEM, MA CIVIL ACTION NO. 2007 - 1198-D

vi. DTA ( SUPERIOR COURT, LAWRENCE, MA - Ofumes v. DTA Civil Docket

No. ESCV2006-00381) - 2007 Civil Appeal

vii. Ofume family v. Department of Social Services - SUPERIOR COURT

SALEM, MA CIVIL

Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume v. Harvard University - Law School P. 5/5

DOCKET # ESCV2007-0107-A

viii. Ofume family v. Registry of Motor Vehicles - Division of

Insurance - Appeal

ix. Ofume family v. Comcast Inc. - SUPERIOR COURT SALEM, MA CIVIL

DOCKET # ESCV2007-0107-A

x. Ofume family v. DTA APPEAL NO. 315921

xi. Ofume family v. Social Security Administration

xii. Ofume family v. Department of Homeland Security et al - US Court

of Appeals for the First Circuit, Boston, MA Docket Number: 1:07-

cv-10085-13 Defendants.

Ofume family - Lead File A#: 97-446-370 P. 3/3

xiii. Ofume family v. Department of Homeland Security (VERMONT SERVICE

CENTER) - Application for Job Authorization, Adjustment of Status, etc

before the Commissioner (DHS).

xiv. Ofume family v. Nancy & Salvatore Vigorito et al 07-CV-00178 -

Northeast Housing Court.

etc.

10. We will go to the extent to request Harvard University - Law

School to disclose their admission files for over ten (10) years to

show whether there are applicants denied admission with the above

academic and professional qualifications and experiences and

certification. In conclusion we add the warning of US Supreme Court in

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. (2003) and Community Schools v. Seattle

School District No. 1 551 U.S. (June 2007).

We will appreciate your prompt response purpose of the urgency of our

Complaint.

Yours very truly,

_________________

Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D.

(Complainant)

Address of the intended Defendant:

Harvard University - Law School

1515 Massachusetts Avenue

Cambridge, MA 02138