KLAYMAN v. OBAMA et al

Filing 76

STRICKEN PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER FILED 2/7/2014.....AMENDED COMPLAINT (Third Amended Complaint) against KEITH B. ALEXANDER, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR, LOWELL C. MCADAMS, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ROGER VINSON with Jury Demand filed by MARY ANN STRANGE, LARRY E. KLAYMAN, CHARLES STRANGE.(Klayman, Larry) Modified on 2/10/2014 (znmw, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LARRY KLAYMAN,
2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006
and
CHARLES AND MARY ANN STRANGE,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Plaintiffs,

Civil Action No. 13-CV-851

v.
BARACK H. OBAMA II, individually
and in his professional capacity,
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20500
and
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., individually
and in his professional capacity as U.S. Attorney General,
555 Fourth St. NW
Washington, DC 20530
and
KEITH B. ALEXANDER, individually
and in his professional capacity,
Director of the National Security Agency,
9800 Savage Rd.
Fort Meade, MD 20755
and
ROGER VINSON, individually
and in his professional capacity,
Judge, U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20530
and

1

JAMES R. CLAPPER, individually
and in his professional capacity,
Director of National Intelligence,
Washington, DC 20511
and
JOHN O. BRENNAN, individually
and in his professional capacity,
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency,
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington, DC 20505
and
JAMES B. COMEY, individually,
and in his professional capacity
Director Of The Federal Bureau Of Investigation
Federal Bureau Of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20535
and
NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY,
Director of the National Security Agency,
9800 Savage Rd.
Fort Meade, MD 20755
and
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20530
and
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20535
and
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Washington, DC 20505
Defendants.

2

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Larry Klayman, a former U.S. Department of Justice prosecutor, and Plaintiffs
Charles and Mary Ann Strange (collectively “Plaintiffs”) hereby sue Barack H. Obama II, Eric
H. Holder, Keith B. Alexander, Roger Vinson, James R. Clapper, John O. Brennan, James B.
Comey, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”),
the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), and the National Security Agency (“NSA”),
(collectively “Defendants”), in their personal and official capacities, for violating Plaintiffs’
constitutional rights, Plaintiffs’ reasonable expectation of privacy, free speech and association,
right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures, and due process rights, as a result of the
below pled illegal and criminal acts. Plaintiffs pled below allege as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. This is an action for monetary, declaratory, equitable, and injunctive relief as a result of he
U.S. Government’s illegal and unconstitutional use of electronic programs in violation of the
First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. In addition, this lawsuit
challenges the Government’s expansive acquisition of Plaintiffs’ telephone and internet
metadata under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, 50 U.S.C §1861 and the Government’s bulk
collection of internet content under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
(“FISA”) (50 U.S.C. §1881a). Further, this case challenges the legality of Defendants’
participation and conduct in a secret and illegal Government scheme to intercept and analyze
vast quantities of domestic and foreign telephonic and internet communications.
2. Specifically, on June 5, 2013, The Guardian posted a classified order from the secretive
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISA”) directing Verizon and all of its affiliates
and subsidiaries to turn over, “on an ongoing daily basis,” the following tangible things: “All
call detail records or “telephony metadata” created by Verizon for communications (i)

3

between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local
telephone calls.”
3. Judge Vinson’s order would give the NSA over hundreds of millions of phone records on a
daily basis. The information would also include a list of all the people that Verizon customers
call and who called them; how long they spoke; and where they were on a given day. Further,
there is nothing in the order requiring the Government to destroy the records after a certain
amount of time nor is there any provisions limiting who can see and hear the data.
4.

The order, issued and signed by Judge Vinson, violates the U.S. Constitution and also
federal laws, including, but not limited to, the outrageous breach of privacy, the unreasonable
searches and seizures, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and the due process rights
of American citizens.

5. This surveillance program was ordered and authorized by President Obama and primarily
undertaken by the NSA and the other Defendants, intercepting and analyzing the
communication of hundreds of millions of Americans. Additionally, Plaintiffs and millions
of Americans not only subscribe to Verizon for telephone communications, but also to send
emails, text messages, as well as browse the internet. Prior to this disclosure and revelation,
Plaintiffs had no reasonable opportunity to discover the existence of the surveillance program
or the violation of the laws alleged herein.
6. Verizon maintains domestic telecommunications facilities over which hundreds of millions
of Americans’ telephone communications pass every day. They also manage some of the
largest databases in the world containing records of most or all communications made
through their myriad telecommunications services and operations.

4

7. Verizon has opened its key telecommunication databases to direct access by the NSA and/or
other Government agencies, intercepting and disclosing to the Government the contents of its
customers as well as detailed communication records over one hundred million of its
customers, including Plaintiffs. Verizon continues to assist the Government in its secret
surveillance of over one hundred million of ordinary Americans citizens on a daily basis.
8. Plaintiffs are suing for declaratory relief, damages, and injunctive relief to stop this illegal
conduct and hold Defendants, individually and collectively, responsible for their illegal
collaboration in the surveillance program, which has violated the law and damaged the
fundamental freedoms of American citizens.
THE PARTIES
9. Plaintiff Larry Klayman is an individual and an attorney who is a subscriber and user of
Verizon Wireless at all material times. In fact, Plaintiff Larry Klayman has been a subscriber
and user of Verizon Wireless for many years. Klayman routinely communicates with
members of the public as well as journalists and associates by telephonic communications
and electronic messages using Verizon services. Klayman’s communications, particularly as
an attorney, are sensitive and often privileged. Plaintiff Klayman resided in the District of
Columbia (“D.C.”) for over twenty years and continues to conduct business in Washington,
D.C. as the Chairman and General Counsel of Freedom Watch and otherwise. Plaintiff Larry
Klayman is a public advocate and has filed lawsuits against President Obama and has been
highly critical of the Obama administration as a whole. Defendants have accessed the records
pertaining to Plaintiff Klayman. On information and belief, Defendants have accessed the
records pertaining to Plaintiff Larry Klayman pursuant to the Order issued by Judge Vinson
in addition to accessing his telephone conversations.

5

10. Plaintiff Klayman frequents and routinely telephones and e-mails individuals and highranking Government officials in Israel, a high-conflict area where the threat of terrorism is
always present. U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies are continuously monitoring the
telecommunications in Israel in order to prevent any future attacks by terrorists.
11. While in Israel, most recently in 2009, 2010, and 2012, Klayman met with the Press
Secretary for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mr. Mark Regev, as well as Daniel B.
Shapiro, who is now the U.S. Ambassador to the United States to the State of Israel. Plaintiff
Klayman also communicates with Mr. Regev internationally via telephone and e-mail and
has continued to do so for approximately twelve years. In 2012 Plaintiff Klayman was in
Jerusalem and Tel Aviv during the war with Hamas and experienced rocket attacks while he
was in Tel Aviv. Moreover, it has been revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden that the
NSA has been accessing the telephone and internet metadata of the Israeli prime minister.
12. Plaintiff Klayman also met with Ron Nachman who was mayor of the city of Ariel, Israel
until his death in 2013. Plaintiff Klayman remained in telephone and e-mail communication
with Mr. Nachman and his aides after his visit to Israel. Importantly, Ariel is located in
Judea, which Palestinians and other Arabs falsely call “Occupied Territory.” Judea is a
breeding ground for terrorists.
13. Plaintiff Klayman has also telephoned and e-mailed Danny Danon, a member of Israel's
Knesset (legislative body), who is currently serving as the Deputy Minister of Defense in
the Cabinet of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
14. In addition, Plaintiff has been in telephone and e-mail contact with Aaron Klein in Israel, an
investigative reporter who hosts a radio show on WABC in New York, which originates in
Israel. In fact, Klayman was recently interviewed by Aaron Klein regarding the NSA, during

6

which time the radio show experienced what the host called "a tech meltdown." Specifically,
software used by the radio station "dropped" Plaintiff Klayman from the phone line and
listeners who had called in to ask Klayman questions were cut out in mid-sentence. It is clear
that the NSA was attempting to harass him, Aaron Klein and anyone connected to this show,
which has been critical of the Defendants, including President Obama.
15. Plaintiff Klayman also telephoned and e-mailed individuals within Spain in preparation for
his visit to Spain in July of 2012 where he met with prominent human rights lawyers to
discuss bringing criminal charges against the Islamic Republic of Iran and its officials for
violations of human rights. Plaintiff continued communication via email and telephone with
those he met in Spain following his visit. Prior to this, Plaintiff Klayman telephoned and emailed individuals in India in preparation for his trip to India in 2007, where he served
process on the Prime Minister of India. Similarly, in May of 2012, Plaintiff Klayman
traveled to the headquarters of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
("OPEC") located in Vienna, Austria in order to personally serve it with process and has
made calls and communicated through email to and from Austria in this regard. Among
OPEC’s members is the Islamic Republic of Iran, and other Islamic states, which further,
harbor and/or have close ties to terrorism. In fact, the oil revenues of OPEC help fund
terrorism and terrorists bent on destroying the United States, its ally Israel, and other western
and European interests. Plaintiff Klayman also routinely sends and receives e-mails and
telephone communications to and from Italy, France, Great Britain, Morocco, Germany,
Belgium and other European Union nations which have very large Muslim populations and
where terrorist cells are bred and located and thus where terrorist attacks have been
perpetrated resulting in numerous deaths and maimed persons.

7

16. In light of Plaintiff Klayman's foreign contacts and communications, including frequent
telephone calls and e-mail correspondence, the Defendants would have inevitably been
monitoring Plaintiff Klayman in the ordinary course of their surveillance. In fact, given
Plaintiff Klayman's contacts in the regions he has traveled to, Plaintiff Klayman was
undoubtedly targeted by the Defendants and his domestic and foreign communications
gathered and under surveillance.
17. Plaintiffs Charles and Mary Ann Strange are the father and step-mother of Michael Strange, a
member of Navy SEAL Team VI who was killed when the helicopter he was in was attacked
and shot down by terrorist Taliban jihadists in Afghanistan on August 6, 2011. Plaintiffs
Charles and Mary Ann Strange are consumers, subscribers, and users of Verizon
Communications. On information and belief, Defendants have accessed Plaintiffs Charles
and Mary Ann Strange’s phone, internet, and computer records particularly since these
Plaintiffs have been vocal about their criticism of President Obama as commander-in-chief,
his administration, and the U.S. military regarding the circumstances surrounding the shoot
down of their son’s helicopter in Afghanistan, which resulted in the death of their son and
other Navy Seal Team VI members and special operation forces. Plaintiffs Charles and Mary
Ann Strange have substantial connections with Washington, D.C., as they hold press
conferences in Washington, D.C. and lobby in Washington, D.C. as an advocate for their son
and to obtain justice for him, as well as to change the policies and orders of President Obama
and the U.S. military’s acts and practices, which contributed to their son’s death. Plaintiffs
Charles and Mary Ann Strange also make telephone calls and send e-mails to foreign
countries and have received threatening e-mails and texts from overseas, in particular
Afghanistan.

8

18. Defendant Barack H. Obama ("Obama") is the President of the United States and currently
resides in Washington, D.C.
19. Defendant Eric H. Holder ("Holder") is the Attorney General of the United States and
conducts his duties as the Attorney General in Washington, D.C.
20. Defendant Keith B. Alexander ("Alexander") is the Director of the NSA. He is also the
commander of the U.S. Cyber Command, where he is responsible for planning, coordinating,
and conducting operations of computer networks. He is also at the command for U.S.
National Security Information system protection responsibilities. He conducts his duties for
the NSA in Washington, D.C.
21. Defendant Roger Vinson ("Vinson") is a judge of the FISC.
22. Defendant James R. Clapper (“Clapper”) is currently the Director of National Security and
conducts his duties as the Director of National Security in Washington, D.C.
23. Defendant John O. Brennan ("Brennan") is currently the Director of the CIA and conducts
his duties in Washington, D.C.
24. Defendant James B. Comey ("Comey") is currently the Director of the FBI and conducts his
duties in Washington, D.C.
25. The National Security Agency ("NSA") is an intelligence agency of the U.S. Department of
Defense and conduct its duties in Washington, D.C.
26. The U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") is a U.S. federal executive department responsible
for the enforcement of the law and administration of justice, and its headquarters is located in
Washington, D.C., where it conducts most of its activities and business.
27. Defendant Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) is responsible for providing national security
intelligence to senior U.S. policymakers and conducts its duties in Washington, D.C.

9

28. Defendant Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) is a governmental agency that serves as
an internal intelligence agency and conducts its duties in Washington, D.C.
29. All of these Defendants, each and every one of them, jointly and severally, acted in concert
to violate the constitutional privacy rights, free speech, freedom of association, due process
and other legal rights of Plaintiffs.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
30. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 (Federal Question).
31. Jurisdiction and venue are proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, which states in pertinent part,
“[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the
Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” At issue here is the unconstitutional
violation of Plaintiffs' rights under the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution.
32. Supplemental jurisdiction is also proper under 28 U.S.C. §1367, which states in pertinent
part, " . . .in any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district
courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims
in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or
controversy under Article III of the U.S. Constitution.”
33. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and thereon alleges that, based on the places of business of
the Defendants and/or on the national reach of Defendants, a substantial part of the events
giving rise to the claims herein alleged occurred in this district and that Defendants and/or
agents of Defendants may be found in this district.
STANDING
34. Plaintiffs bring this action because they have been directly affected, victimized and severely
damaged by the unlawful conduct complained herein. Their injuries are proximately related

10

to the egregious, illegal and criminal acts of Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson,
Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA, each and every one of them, jointly and
severely.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
35. The NSA began a classified surveillance program to intercept the telephone and internet
communications of persons inside and outside the United States, a program that continues to
this date. The U.S. Government, on the orders authorization of the President, the Attorney
General, the DOJ and the NSA, has obtained a top secret court order that directs Verizon to
turn over the telephone records of over one hundred million Americans to the NSA on an
ongoing daily basis.
36. On April 25, 2013, Defendant Judge Roger Vinson, acting in his official and personal
capacities and under the authority of Defendant Obama, his Attorney General and the DOJ,
ordered that the Custodian of Records shall produce the production of tangible things from
Verizon Business Network Services, Inc. on behalf of MCI Communication Services Inc,
individually and collectively, to the NSA and continue production on an ongoing daily basis
thereafter.
37. Judge Vinson ordered access to electronic copies of the following tangible things: all call
detail records or "telephony metadata" created by Verizon for communications (i) between
the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local
telephone calls. Telephony metadata includes comprehensive communications routing
information, including but not limited to session identifying information (e.g. originating and
terminating telephone number, International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) number,

11

International Mobile station Equipment Identity (IMEI) number, etc.) trunk identifier,
telephone calling card numbers, and time and duration of call.
38. Defendant Vinson’s Order requires Verizon to turn over originating and terminating
telephone numbers as well as the location, time, and duration of the calls. In essence, the
Order gives the NSA blanket access to the records of over a hundred million of Verizon
customers’ domestic and foreign phone calls made between April 25, 2013, when the Order
was signed, and July 19, 2013, when the Order is supposed to, on its face, expire. In addition
to telephone communications, millions of Americans use Verizon to send text messages and
emails as well as browsing the internet.
39. Defendant Vinson, in an attempt to keep his illegal acts and those of other Defendants as a
secret, further ordered that no person shall disclose to any other person that the FBI or NSA
has sought or obtained tangible things under his order.
40. Based on knowledge and belief, this Order issued by Defendant Vinson is the broadest
surveillance order to ever have been issued; it requires no level of reasonable suspicion or
probable cause and incredibly applies to all Verizon subscribers and users anywhere in the
United States and overseas.
41. Defendant Vinson's Order shows for the first time that, under Defendant Obama's
administration, the communication records of over one hundred million of U.S. citizens are
being collected indiscriminately and in bulk - regardless of whether there is reasonable
suspicion or any “probable cause” of any wrongdoing.
42. On June 5, 2013, The Guardian published an article entitled, "NSA collecting phone records
of millions of Verizon customers daily. Exclusive: Top secret court order requiring Verizon
to hand over all call data shows scale of domestic surveillance under Obama."

12

43. Since June 5, 2013, Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey,
Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA have been widely condemned among American citizens
regarding their failure to uphold the U.S. Constitution and intentionally violating the
fundamental rights of Plaintiffs and over one hundred million of other Americans.
44. As just one example, Senator Rand Paul called the surveillance of Verizon phone records "an
astounding assault on the Constitution.”
45. In fact, the news of Judge Vinson’s Order comes as the Obama administration is under fire
following revelations that the DOJ has seized two months of telephone records of a number
of Associated Press’ reporters and editors, claiming that the requests were part of an
investigation into the leak of classified information, as well as the telephone records and
emails of reporters and management of Fox News. This is thus a pattern of egregious
ongoing illegal, criminal activity.
46. Such schemes by the Defendants in concert with the Government have subjected untold
number of innocent people to the constant surveillance of Government agents. As Jameel
Jaffeer, the ACLU’s deputy legal director, stated, “It is beyond Orwellian, and it provides
further evidence of the extent to which basic democratic rights are being surrendered in
secret to the demands of unaccountable intelligence agencies.”
47. To date, Defendants have not issued substantive and meaningful explanations to the
American people describing what has occurred. To the contrary, criminal charges are
reportedly being pursued by Defendants Obama, Holder, the DOJ, and the NSA against the
leakers of this plot against American citizens in a further effort to suppress, obstruct justice,
and to keep Defendants’ illegal actions as secret as possible.

13

48. While the Government has represented that “. . . any bulk collection of internet metadata
pursuant to Section 215 (50 U.S.C. §1861) was discontinued in 2011,” given the history of
misconduct and the pattern of lying by the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper,
as well as the Obama administration’s NSA, these representations cannot be believed. Mem.
Op. at 4, fn. 6 (Dec. 16, 2013). Indeed, such claims are not only questionable and without any
support but are also directly at odds with what whistleblower Edward Snowden has revealed.
The Government’s argument that such surveillance and collection of information was
discontinued in 2011, a mere three years ago, holds no weight, especially since they can
easily return to their old practice of illegally collecting such metadata.
49. In any event, the Government’s claim that they have voluntarily ceased the offensive conduct
in 2011 does not deprive the Court of its power to adjudicate the issue. Specifically, the
Supreme Court has stated [i]t is well settled that ‘a defendant’s voluntary cessation of a
challenged practice does not deprive a federal court of its power to determine the legality of
the practice” for “if it did, the courts would be compelled to leave ‘[t]he defendant . . . free to
return to his old ways.” Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Env’l Services, Inc., 528 U.S. 167,
189 (2002) (quoting City of Mesquite v. Aladdin’s Castle Inc., 455 U.S. 283, 289 (1982)); see
United States v. W.T. Grant Co., 345 U.S. 629, 632 (1953) (holding that “voluntary cessation
of allegedly illegal conduct does not deprive the tribunal of power to hear and determine the
case.)
50. Moreover, the Government has conceded that “at one time [the Government] acquired bulk
Internet metadata . . . pursuant to FISA’s pen/trap provision.” Govt.’s Opp’n at 15. “The data
collected certain routing, addressing, and signaling information such as ‘to’ and ‘from’ lines
in an e-mail . . . and the date and time an e-mail [was] sent.” In addition, the NSA collects

14

large amounts of such transactional information from certain telecommunication service
providers and analyzes it to obtain foreign intelligence information. In light of the
Government’s past conduct, specifically its intrusive and unlawful surveillance and
collection of such information, Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights guaranteed under the First,
Fourth, and Fifth Amendments have directly been violated as a result.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Fourth Amendment Violation - Each and Every Defendant)
(Bivens v. VI Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics)
51. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege all of the previous allegations in paragraphs 1 through 50 of this
Third Amended Complaint with the same force and affect, as if fully set forth herein again at
length.
52. The Fourth Amendment provides in pertinent part that people have a right to be secure in
their persons against unreasonable searches and seizures, that warrants shall not be issued but
upon probable cause, and that the place of search must be described with particularity.
53. Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ
and NSA, acting in their official capacities and personally, violated the Fourth Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution when they unreasonably searched and seized and continue to search
Plaintiffs’ phone records and millions of innocent U.S. citizens' records without reasonable
suspicion or probable cause.
54. Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ
and NSA, acting in their official capacity and personally, violated the Fourth Amendment by
not describing with particularity the place to be searched or the person or things to be seized.
55. In fact, the blanket and vastly overbroad order issued by Defendant Vinson, acting on behalf
of the federal Government and therefore Defendant Obama as he is the chief executive of the

15

federal Government, as well as the other Defendants, does not state with any particularity
who and what may be searched.
56. The collection and production of the phone records allows Defendant NSA to build easily
and indiscriminately a comprehensive picture and profile of any individual contacted, how
and when, and possibly from where, retrospectively and into the future.
57. By reason of the wrongful conduct of Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson,
Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA, Plaintiffs suffered and continue to
suffer from severe emotional distress and physical harm, pecuniary and economic damage,
loss of services, and loss of society accordingly.
58. These violations are compensable under Bivens v. VI Unknown Named Agents of Federal
Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). As a direct and proximate result of the intentional
and willful actions of Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey,
Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA, Plaintiffs demand judgment be entered against
Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ
and NSA, each and every one of them, jointly and severally, including an award of
compensatory and actual damages, punitive damages, equitable relief, reasonable attorneys
fees, pre-judgment interest, post-interest and costs, and an award in an amount in excess of
$12 billion U.S. dollars and such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(First Amendment Violation - Each and Every Defendant)
(Bivens v. VI Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics)
59. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege all of the previous allegations in paragraphs 1 through 58 of this
Third Amended Complaint with the same force and affect, as if fully set forth herein again at
length.

16

60. Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ
and NSA, acting in their official capacity and personally, abridged and violated Plaintiffs’
First Amendment right of freedom of speech and association by significantly minimizing and
chilling Plaintiffs’ freedom of expression and association.
61. Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ
and NSA’s acts chill, if not “kill,” speech by instilling in Plaintiffs and over a hundred
million of Americans the fear that their personal and business conversations with other U.S.
citizens and foreigners are in effect tapped and illegally surveyed.
62. In addition, Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI,
CIA, DOJ and NSA, acting in their official capacity and personally, violated Plaintiffs’ right
of freedom of association by making them and others weary and fearful of contacting other
persons and entities via cell phone out of fear of the misuse of Government power and
retaliation against these persons and entities who challenge the misuse of Government power.
63. By reason of the wrongful conduct of these Defendants, Plaintiffs suffered and continue to
suffer from severe emotional distress and physical harm, pecuniary and economic damage,
loss of services, and loss of society accordingly.
64. These violations are compensable under Bivens v. VI Unknown Named Agents of Federal
Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
65. As a direct and proximate result of the intentional and willful actions of Defendants Obama,
Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA, Plaintiffs
demand that judgment be entered against Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson,
Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA, each and every one of them, jointly and
severally, including an award of compensatory and actual damages, punitive damages,

17

equitable relief, reasonable attorneys fees, pre-judgment interest, post-interest and costs, and
an award in an amount in excess of $12 billion U.S. dollars and such other relief as the Court
may deem just and proper.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Fifth Amendment Violation – Each and Every Defendant)
(Bivens v. VI Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics)
66. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege all of the previous allegations in paragraphs 1 through 65 of this
Third Amended Complaint with the same force and affect, as if fully set forth herein again at
length.
67. Plaintiffs enjoy a liberty interest in their personal security and in being free from the
Defendants’ and the Government's use of unnecessary and excessive force or intrusion
against his person.
68. Plaintiffs enjoy a liberty of not being deprived of life without due process of law, as
guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
69. Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ
and NSA violated Plaintiffs' constitutional rights when they caused Judge Vinson's order to
be illegally granted, thereby giving the Government and themselves unlimited authority to
obtain telephone data for a specified amount of time.
70. By reason of the wrongful conduct of the Defendants, each and every one of them, jointly
and severally, Plaintiffs suffered and continue to suffer from severe emotional distress and
physical harm, pecuniary and economic damage, loss of services, and loss of society
accordingly.
71. These violations are compensable under Bivens v. VI Unknown Named Agents of Federal
Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). As a direct and proximate result of the intentional

18

and willful actions of Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey,
Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA, Plaintiffs demand judgment be entered against
Defendants Obama, Holder, Alexander, Vinson, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, FBI, CIA, DOJ
and NSA, each and every one of them, jointly and severally, including an award of
compensatory and actual damages, punitive damages, equitable relief, reasonable attorneys
fees, pre-judgment interest, post-interest and costs, and an award in an amount in excess of
$12 billion U.S. dollars, and such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Plaintiffs demand declaratory and injunctive and other equitable relief against all of
Defendants as set forth below.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
72. Plaintiffs demand that judgment be entered against Defendants, each and every one of them,
jointly and severally, for compensatory and actual damages because of Defendants’ illegal
actions causing this demonstrable injury to Plaintiffs, punitive damages because of
Defendants’ callous, reckless indifference and malicious acts, and attorneys fees and costs in
an amount in excess of $12 billion U.S. dollars and such other relief the Court may deem just
and proper.
73. Plaintiffs demand declaratory, equitable and injunctive relief for their injuries in the
following ways: (1) a cease and desist order to prohibit this type of illegal and criminal
activity against Plaintiffs and other U.S. citizens from occurring now and in the future; (2)
that all Plaintiffs’ phone, e-mail, internet, and social media records and communication
records, whether telephonic or electronic, be returned to the provider and expunged from
federal government records; and (3) a full disclosure and a complete accounting of what each
Defendant as a whole has done and allowed the DOJ, CIA, FBI, and NSA to do; and (4) that

19

this Court retain jurisdiction to implement an effective judicial monitoring mechanism to
insure that the Defendants do not egregiously continue, after they are enjoined, to violate the
constitutional rights of the Plaintiffs and all Americans in the future, particularly since the
Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Court, through judges such as Defendant Vinson, has
colluded or acquiesced with Defendants in their unlawful conduct. Defendants cannot, given
their documented pattern of lying under oath, deceit and unlawful unconstitutional conduct,
be left on their own, without court supervision, to obey the law.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiffs respectfully demand a jury trial on all issues so triable.
Dated: February 5, 2014
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Larry Klayman
Larry Klayman, Esq.
General Counsel
Freedom Watch, Inc.
D.C. Bar No. 334581
2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 345
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorney for Himself, Pro Se, and Plaintiffs

20

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 5th day of January, 2014, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing Third Amended Complaint (Civil Action No. 13-cv-851) was submitted electronically
to the District Court for the District of Columbia and served via CM/ECF upon the following:

James J. Gilligan
Special Litigation Counsel
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 883
Washington, D.C. 20044
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Randolph D. Moss
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LLP
1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20006
[phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Larry Klayman
Larry Klayman, Esq.
General Counsel
Freedom Watch, Inc.
D.C. Bar No. 334581
2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 345
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

21