Hyatt Lies in his Defense to SS Number Disclose Charge

Before the Disciplinary Committee of
the Oregon State Bar

In Re Dan R. Hyatt

Response of complainant            )      Ethics Charges that Dan R. Hyatt
Moody, and                                )      repeatedly committed the felony of
Daniel A. Bernath                       )      disclosing Social Security numbers
in pro per                                     )      in violation of 42 USC §408 (a)(8)

Introduction

You requested that Dan R. Hyatt justify his breach of confidentiality and violation of federal law by revealing confidential medical information on citizens and Social Security Numbers entrusted to him. Instead of providing a justification for this Dan R. Hyatt attacks the party that exposed his misconduct and attacks with misrepresentations.

There is probable cause to believe that Dan R. Hyatt, as is his practice, made ex parte contacts with the represented party Mr. Moody and scared him off from participating in this investigation. Claimants fear that Social Security Judge Dan R. Hyatt has the power to take them off of Social Security benefits and cause them to starve and lose their apartment and are terrified of speaking the truth about him. (Exhibit 1) Many claimants have stated they wish to testify but are afraid Hyatt will somehow take away their meager disability benefits. These frightened Oregonians include the claimant that heard Dan R. Hyatt state that they are “white trash” and that another one that heard Hyatt state that he “has a problem with interracial couples”. (Exhibit 13) Bernath spoke with the claimant Thomas Bondurant and has tape evidence that Dan R. Hyatt said those words. (Exhibit 14) Another claimant who was evicted and lived on the streets begging for food because of misrepresentations Hyatt made in his decision (since overruled) says she afraid to testify at the Oregon State Bar for fear of a reprisal by Hyatt that will take away her food and home. (Exhibit 1) Now, the OSB record shows that Mr. Moody has been frightened, apparently by another one of Dan R. Hyatt’s ex parte communications with a represented social security claimant (evidence of Hyatt’s habit of ex parte communication with represented claimants, Exhibit 2, page 3 “Hyatt…issued a letter that is disparaging of Mr. Lowry. Hyatt began producing this letter and has required one or more claimants to read the letter. P4 Hyatt engaged in ex parte contact with Lowry clients to tell them that Lowry is not a good attorney

Exhibit 3, US 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals. Hyatt told two of Lowry’s clients that Lowry is a “poor attorney who does a poor job”. Hyatt has sent letters to Lowry’s clients telling them of their “rights” to better representation.

Exhibit 4, “David, Hyatt has made ex parte communications with my clients. Looks like he contacts them and said something like, “if you object to Bernath getting paid then I can make an order that he gets nothing.”

Dan R. Hyatt serves the role of in house disability determination service for SSA after the Oregon DDS has made their decision on whether a claimant is disabled. Social Security regulations demand that SS hearings be “informal.” There is no authorization that administrative law judges wear a black robe. Hyatt, using his own money to buy a choir robe, wears one. There is no requirement that they be called, “your Honor”. But Hyatt insists. There is no requirement that the ALJ’s desk be elevated in the hearing room. Hyatt’s desk is. Hyatt even sits under the seat of a US District Court judge in Washington State to flatter himself and his ego and terrorize citizens. He states that he must use that room, a mere 15 minute drive from the SSA hearing rooms. (Exhibit 5, page 3 footnote) The reality is, many conference rooms and hearing rooms without the seal and magnificence that ALJ Hyatt requires are empty and available at the same time Hyatt elevates himself on the platform of a US District Court and he chooses the large empty room that has the seal of the US District Court over his shoulder and the US District Court sign on the door. Hyatt routinely yells and intimidates frightened claimants and Oregon lawyers because it apparently gives him joy. (Exhibit 6, Exhibit 7, Exhibit 7B, Exhibit 7 C, Exhibit 2)

Hyatt has taken the term Administrative Law Judge and run with it and terrorized thousands of Oregon disabled citizens. Hyatt’s email even speaks to this grandiose self-adulation that Hyatt confers on himself. His email address is an abbreviated “His Honor 08”.

The US Supreme Court disagrees. The Supreme Court has held that ALJ’s were intended to be merely a “special class of semi-independent subordinate hearing officers”, not on par with Article III federal judges Ramspect v. Fed. Trial Examrs Conf. 345 US 182, 132 (1958) (citing legislative history)

The title “ALJ” has gone to Dan R. Hyatt’s head and he has been terrorizing Oregon citizens and Oregon lawyers for 11 years now by ignoring law, lying in his decisions about the evidence, continuing cases repeatedly as claimants are on their death beds and committing acts of cruelty against helpless Oregon citizens.

Daniel A. Bernath, an attorney for nearly 25 years, however has not been deterred by the enormous misuse of power by Dan R. Hyatt. As Bernath has received no instructions from Mr. Moody contrary to his initial instruction to vigorously defend Moody’s social security benefits, this memorandum is presented to aid the Oregon State Bar in its investigation.

The lesson for the Oregon State Bar is this; Dan R. Hyatt “feels” that the laws that protect Oregonians and all citizens do not apply to Dan R. Hyatt. Therefore he will break the law and breach ethics again and again in the future, just as he had repeatedly in the past. He is ignorant of his duty to citizens to keep their social security and medical evidence private. He has done so long before the Moody disclosure where Hyatt committed the felony of releasing citizen’s social security numbers to whomever he wishes in violation of 42 USC §408 (a)(8) with his notorious notebook filled with social security numbers and medical evidence of claimants thrust on the Oregon Bar and its secret contents spilling out in 2004. (Exhibit 8, Exhibit 9) The lesson for the Social Security Administration; Dan R. Hyatt has betrayed the trust of the American people. Dan R. Hyatt cannot be trusted to handle social security numbers and private medical evidence ever again.

OSB has “enabled” Hyatt in giving him this tyrannical attitude. How? Even after scores of complaints over the last eleven years about Dan R. Hyatt regarding his misrepresentations, ex parte contacts with claimants, theft of US Government property, with a file of complaints, responses and replies that total 900 pages, the OSB has swept all of his egregious conduct and the thousands of Oregonians he has hurt under the rug and onto the street.

The Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper, the Oregonian, through he’s columnist Steve Duin has observed this OSB cowardice and hypocrisy;

"...just how low the Oregon State Bar will go... the hypocrites who sit in judgment over the legal community can barely recognize, much less weed out, the untoward conduct in their own camp."
Steve Duin, Oregonian

Now is the time for OSB to actually do something to protect the citizens of Oregon after 11 years of perfidy and terrorism and disbar Dan R. Hyatt. A first year law student knows that a subpoena or a stipulation was the proper course to protect Mr. Moody’s social security number and get information to OSB. Instead because Dan R. Hyatt always believed that he can ignore the law Mr. Moody (and many others) have had their social security number broadcast outside of the SSA system, opened by the OSB mailroom, routed around and transferred and handled by who knows how many people-all in violation of his rights as per federal law. And this defiance by a United States Administrative Law Judge who sworn an oath to uphold the law and set an example to the rest of us by scrupulously following the law but instead “feels” he is above such petty conventions that govern the little people.

While not directly the responsibility of OSB, Dan R. Hyatt’s spectacular breach of ethics has shaken all Oregon citizens and all citizens of the United States’ faith in the Social Security Administration and all government institutions like the OSB (and the Oregon Supreme Court of which OSB is an element). Dan R. Hyatt was found by OSB to be fit to represent people and to be entrusted with their secrets. He has betrayed that trust and “feels” there is nothing wrong with that betrayal. Thereafter, he was vetted by the United States government and entrusted with the decision on who would receive disability benefits based on the law and regulation, in effect who would live and who would die, and Dan R. Hyatt admits that he makes that decision based on their race (“I have a problem with interracial couples.” (Exhibit 13) A white woman married to a black man is “white trash” said Hyatt) and whether he likes their attorney or not (“I find against a claimant if I don’t like their attorney.” Hyatt said this to attorney Tim Wilborn in September 2002 (exhibit 10) and then separately to attorney Alan Graf in Spring 2001, Exhibit 11) Confirming that Hyatt lets his seething anger against attorneys determine if a claimant gets disability benefits (Exhibit 12). Hyatt has been breaching judicial ethics since he was first given the job as ALJ. SSA trusted him with this life or death responsibility and he has abused this awesome power.)

Dan R. Hyatt is unrepentant and unapologetic about
Disclosing social security numbers in violation of 42 USC §408 (a)(8))

Therefore, he is likely to do it again and again and as he has done twice in the past,
Pulling the Oregon State Bar into these crimes

In 2007-08 Dan R. Hyatt stole US Government property and a claimant’s social security number and gave it to the Oregon State Bar, thus making OSB employees liable for possession of stolen property. Only when the Chief Social Security judge of the United States demanded that it be returned to Social Security did OSB surrender the stolen property.

But this is just part of a pattern of crime by Hyatt whereby he tries to pull the OSB into this web. Dan R. Hyatt also came to OSB offices and opened up his social security and fact-chocked “notebook” and showed it to at least one Oregon State Bar employee in 2004 but that OSB employee was wise enough to not take Hyatt’s bait. (Exhibit 8 and Exhibit 9) Thus, twice he has pulled the Oregon State Bar into possible criminal and civil liability. He shows all the signs of doing this again and again when given the opportunity.

Identity theft is at epidemic levels in the United States. Dan R. Hyatt has contributed to that and his outrageous statement that the law does not apply to him and thus he will act in a lawless fashion in the future has shown all Oregonians that cannot depend on the Oregon State Bar and US Social Security Administrative Law Judge Dan R. Hyatt to keep their social security number, medical facts and privacy rights safe. In Dan R. Hyatt’s view, He is the Law and the US Constitution, Oregon Revised Statues, the Oregon Code of Professional Responsibility, the United States Code and Social Security regulations are all meaningless papers unworthy of His consideration and unable to deter His hurtful conduct to Oregon citizens.

Even in Hyatt’s Defense he reveals a claimant’s name, his medical treatment and even the fact that he is on social security disability. He presents a what purports to be a hand written note from a dying man in a hospital and takes away whatever dignity that man may have left after Hyatt stretched out the trial and refused to give him his benefits with an On the Records (like a summary judgment). Dan R. Hyatt then uses him, his dying and his dignity as just another tool to defend Dan R. Hyatt-all in violation of common decency and Social Security regulation. Clearly, when the dying man, with his body and mind full of pain killing drugs wrote his note to Social Security he never envisioned that his private death be made public in the Oregon State Bar records. But Dan R. Hyatt lacks any respect of privacy rights, even when codified. He cares only about Dan R. Hyatt.

Hyatt’s defense also is “the Oregon State Bar and Scott Morrill made me do it.” He is saying that he got a letter from an Oregon State Bar employee requesting a “copy” of a tape, made of his grilling of a California Bar member speaking in the State of Washington about an Washington State citizen and containing that Washington State citizens Social Security Number and private medical facts. The OSB employee Morrill was no doubt ignorant of the fact that OSB has no jurisdiction over a California lawyer, representing a social security claimant in Washington State pursuant to Sperry v. Florida 373 US 379 (1963)

The OSB member also was ignorant that the CD tape recorded copy of the hearing contains privileged and secret confidential medical information and secret social security numbers. But Dan R. Hyatt, a man entrusted with the lives of thousands of people knew better. He knew the law quite clearly on splashing this information across the state lines and to anyone. He is constantly being briefed on his responsibilities for confidentiality by SSA but because of his hatred for members of the bar, he violated the law. He was even warned by the OSB in 2004 to not force his notorious notebook on the Oregon State Bar; the notorious notebook filled with social security numbers and private medical facts to “get” OSB member Tim Wilburn and other Oregon attorneys. (Exhibit 8, exhibit 9) But blinded by his hatred he ignored the OSB warning of a mere few years before and his training as a SSA ALJ. Hyatt then repeated his criminal act to “get” California bar member Daniel A. Bernath and disclosed more social security numbers in violation of 42 USC§408 (a)(8)) .

Hyatt says that the entire Social Security Courthouse is in an uproar after the Oregon State Bar and the policing arm of the Social Security Administration (General Counsel) began their investigation of the felony of Hyatt’s after he casually discloses social security numbers and medical records. This is very important for the Oregon State Bar to consider. Hyatt’s lobbying of the SSA work force is very harmful to the people who trust the Social Security Administration and the Oregon State Bar. Firstly, if SSA employees know that Hyatt is under investigation it can be only because he called them together and told them. The fax sits against the wall to his office and the letters are addressed to him or the Hearing Office Director (HOD). If anyone else has read the fax addressed to him or the HOD it is because Dan R. Hyatt wanders aimlessly from desk to desk and office to office inside SSA and tells them.

Secondly, Dan R. Hyatt is in effect telling the SSA employees that he is being “treated unfairly” just because he repeatedly reveals claimant’s social security numbers to everyone. Hyatt says that the SSA work force is in sympathy with him and his position. Therefore, Administrative Law Judge Hyatt, wandering from desk to desk and office to office in his black robe, is training the SSA work force that they too can repeatedly breach security and if they do it too then SSA is just being “unfair” to them, as it is to him.

(Hyatt lies to OSB by saying that SSA employees wish to shun Bernath. Lead Case Technician Mary Hardy has come out into the lobby to chat with Bernath in the last few days. Bernath has sent Hardy pictures of his grandchildren and his studies at Oxford in the summer of 2008. Hardy has given Bernath much helpful advice on how to raise a sometimes rebellious 17 year old daughter. Hardy told Bernath how pleased she was that all the SS judges showed up at her daughter’s wedding. SSA Hearings Scheduler Charlotte Rosenthal routinely, often and recently talks to Bernath by phone and recommends the best restaurants in Eugene {Oregon Electric Station}when Bernath is conducting hearings there and talk about her grandchildren and Bernath’s grandchildren).

Hyatt’s only defense is “so what’s the big deal?” That means that Hyatt will act in the future in his reckless manner and disclose Social Security numbers and private medical facts and likely has done so many times in the past. But, these are life or death violation. Illegal aliens are desperate to obtain social security numbers. People who are deathly sick and on disability benefits can have their benefits turned off because an illegal alien can start using the social security beneficiaries’ social security number so the alien can work in the fields. The effect is that the beneficiary is then faced with the loss of his life sustaining benefits…all because of the attitude, “what’s the big deal with keeping social security numbers secret?” of Dan R. Hyatt and “the law doesn’t apply to me, Dan R. Hyatt.”

Hyatt lies in Paragraph 11 of Hyatt’s “defense” “I felt that my duty under RPC 8.3 required me to report Bernath’s misconduct to the Bar. …. I did not redact anything from the hearing recording (including the social security number or private medical records and information)”

Hyatt admits he committed this felony. He says he committed this felony because of inapplicable state bar rule that in any event was overturned by the US Supreme Court. As an Oregon State Bar member he should know better. But as a US Administrative Law Judge, his ignorance of the law is unforgiveable and he must be disbarred.

Hyatt is a man who has life or death power over thousands of Oregonians. His hateful “feelings” to “get” lawyers (Lowry, Graf, Wilburn, Bernath, etc.) overrides his duty to protect these helpless people and obey the laws everyone else obey. His “feelings” have blinded him to his duty to obey the law and set an example for citizens and other people entrusted with these secrets to obey the law and protect helpless people.

He admits that he violated Social Security Administration regulations by filing a complaint against a claimants’ social security representative with a state bar association (SSA recognizes the US Supreme Court decision that local state bar associations have no jurisdiction Exhibit 9). The proper course is to file a complaint with the Social Security General Counsel. But Dan R. Hyatt “feels” these laws and regulations simply do not apply to him. He has violated these laws in the past-he’ll violate them in the future.

Hyatt’s wild actions, fueled by hatred of lawyers (Lowry, Graf, Wilburn, Bernath, etc.) who practice before him, are more important than any other thing. Indeed, Bernath is a California lawyer who Hyatt says made a misrepresentation before him, an employee of the federal agency Social Security at the Federal Building in the State of Washington. A first year law student would conclude that Hyatt’s legal reasoning is faulty; the OSB has no jurisdiction. Hyatt’s well documented hatred of the lawyers who practice before him is the most important thing to Hyatt, more important than following the law and ensuring citizen rights. Hyatt knows, even if Bernath, a California lawyer, made a misrepresentation to the Social Security Administration (Bernath did not) that the Social Security Administration has exclusive and sole authority to discipline Bernath and all state law and regulation yields under the United States Constitution Supremacy Clause. The OSB has no jurisdiction here. Sperry v. Florida 373 US 379 (1963) But Hyatt’s hatred then and his continued hatred now of the majority of the Oregon State Bar members and others who practice before him will cause him to break the law again and again in the future.

Hyatt Lies at Paragraph 12 of Hyatt’s defense. All claimants’ including Mr. Moody are required to sign an “Authorization to Disclose Information” form SSA-827 before their case will be accepted. Mr. Moody signed several copies of this form. (and it authorizes Hyatt to violate 42 USC §408 (a)(8))

Dan Hyatt states: “I have attached a form identical to several which Mr. Moody signed.” But Hyatt provides NO SUCH FORM signed by Mr. Moody and even if Moody did sign it Dan Hyatt attempts to deceive this tribunal when he omits the operative language, forbidding his theft and disclosure to non Social Security persons; (Exhibit 35)

TO WHOM (To whom does Barry Moody limit disclosure of his name and Social Security number, etc.): The Social Security Administration and to the State agency authorized to process my case, (usually called “disability determination services”), including contract copy services, and doctors and other professionals consulted during the process.

PURPOSE (what would be the sole reasons Moody permits disclosure of his name and Social Security number) Determining my eligibility for benefits, including looking at the combined effect of any impairments that by themselves would not meet SSA’s definition of disability; and whether I can manage such benefits.

EXPIRES WHEN (for these limited purposes of determining if Moody meets SSA’s rules for disability and whether he can manage benefits, SSA does not even have the authority to do that limited disclosing after a short time period is met) This authorization is good for 12 months from the date signed.

SSA 827 Page two

Therefore, Dan R. Hyatt attempts to deceive you again by giving you a blank SSA 827, not signed by Mr. Moody and deceiving the Oregon State Bar about what it permits if Moody did sign one years ago. It does not permit Hyatt to send Mr. Moody’s social security number and private medical facts to the 50 State Bar Associations and the thousands of State law enforcement agencies thus overruling 42 USC §408 (a)(8)) Hyatt also lies to OSB by implying that Moody signed such a document within the last year or at all. He has not.

To repeat; even if Moody did sign a SSA 827 (and there is no evidence that he did) it strictly limits where his information can go and that is only to those persons who can determine if he meets SSA regulations for benefits and handling of benefits and grants this very limited permission to view his medical records for 12 months.

Finally, even if Hyatt could overcome all these hurdles, he fails to address the bigger issue, he lied to the Social Security Administration to obtain Social Security property, the CD and no “authorization” by any claimant can authorize him to steal US Government property and distribute it where he pleases.

Indeed, the law is quite clear, he is barred from disclosing the information on the CD and barred from stealing US Government property but has acted unlawfully in the past and continues to do so with his deceit to the Oregon Bar, now.

Hyatt Lies at paragraph 14: “I believe the gravamen of PII Personal Identifier Information release restrictions is to prevent release of such information under circumstances where release may cause the individual harm.”

Again, Hyatt’s “feelings” and “beliefs” do not justify his committing the felony of violating 42 USC §408 (a)(8) time and time again. He provides no authority for his unique “belief” that this is the meaning of the law because no such authority exists. As a United States Administrative Law Judge, he knows better and must be more scrupulous in following the law than anyone else because of the example he must set and the deadly harm he can cause. Hyatt does know better but chooses to ignore the law to “get” lawyers whom he finds to be either “morons” or “assholes”.

The “likelihood of harm” is enormous; Mr. Moody who had his social security number stolen and given to OSB in 2008 and all the people in the notebook that Hyatt attempted to drop off at the OSB in 2004 (Exhibit 8, Exhibit 9) and the claimant’s numbers who were dropped off at his neighbors house in Washington State recently are in grave danger as their social security number is worth $250 each on the black market. (Social Security has not concluded its investigation of how Hyatt’s taking home of social security records affects their security. SSA must investigate, because of Hyatt’s lackadaisical attitude if Hyatt had copies made at Kinko’s, had confidential records sitting on his desk at home for neighbors and relatives to view, sitting in the front seat of Hyatt’s car, sitting open at his table at Starbucks, etc.)

Illegal aliens scramble to obtain legitimate SS numbers so they will not be deported. The disabled claimants will lose their benefits if SSA believes they are working when in fact it would be an illegal alien using a recipient’s number and the recipient now faces eviction and starvation because SSA stops benefits. In any case, 42 USC §408 (a)(8)) does not require Dan R. Hyatt’s mens rea. It only requires that Dan R. Hyatt disclosed these social security numbers. He admits he has. OSB personnel in 2008 and 2004 can testify that he has. Dan R. Hyatt admits he has. Therefore, he is guilty for these felonies and therefore he must be disbarred before he can harm any more Oregon citizens.

Other lies by OSB member Dan R. Hyatt
collateral to his felonious disclosure of Social Security Numbers
in 2004, 2008 and again in 2008

Dan R. Hyatt has attempted to confuse the Oregon State Bar. Like an octopus that is in danger of discovery, Hyatt has sprayed enormous quantities of ink in the water so we won’t see all the damage he has done to Oregon citizens. Such lies by Hyatt cannot be masked no matter how much ink Hyatt sprays out so they will be discussed here.

Hyatt lies to OSB about the so called “breathtaking” misrepresentation by Bernath. There is no such thing. Dan R. Hyatt is attempting to make a mountain out of a molehill to justify committing this felony and others by pretending he was acting in the public interest. Hyatt, contrary to Social Security regulation, covers himself with the cape of private attorney general and files complaints with State Bar Associations. Hyatt thus “believes” he can stroll down the halls at Social Security, randomly open any of the 10,000 files in his office, search for the sins and transgressions of lawyers and then file complains with anyone he wishes and sends any social security number and private information he wishes to send to any person or entity across the United States.

Hyatt intends to misuse the Social Security Administration and the desperate claimants by “setting up a sting” against Social Security claimants with the FBI, using the private social security numbers and sad predicaments of these Oregon citizens as the bait. (Hyatt’s Statement 25, 26 Hyatt discussed with a Forest Service officer, “setting up an FBI sting and we {the Forest Service employee and Hyatt} discussed setting up an FBI Sting and “Sher” recommended I keep Bernath “on the line.”} Hyatt also contacted hearing officer Atkins at home and Atkins, seeing the madness of his colleague “counseled against contacting the FBI…I do recall that {Atkins} counseling me to not act like the “lone ranger” on this one.” Hyatt, undeterred by the advise of his fellow hearing officer then contacted the Chief Administrative Law Judge in Seattle who also recognized Hyatt’s misguided obsessions also ordered him to NOT contact the FBI. (Hyatt statement paragraph 27)

Contrary to all security laws and regulation on secret Social Security numbers and private medical records, Hyatt has declared himself a junior G Man using the entire nationwide social security administration as his weapon. He is a hearings officer that his lost his way and forgot his function in our society, the law and his responsibilities all to the detriment of thousands of Oregon citizens.

As another example of his misuse of power, Dan R. Hyatt “believes” he can continue to send out bogus Notice of Hearing to claimants when he really wants to quiz claimant’s lawyer, get him to say something that Hyatt finds he can report to a bar association in another state that has no jurisdiction in any case, and then cancel the claimant’s hearing as the dying claimant sits there baffled as to what the US Government has just done to him. (Exhibits 36) These Oregon citizens have waited three or more years to have their case heard by a hearing officer at Social Security. Dan R. Hyatt does these things and will continue to do these things even though his conduct is a felony and he knows it. (Hyatt also sends out Notice of Hearing to “determine disability” but Hyatt misusing his position instead uses the hearing only to abuse, berate and dress down claimant’s attorney or claimant Exhibit 37, exhibit 38)

Hyatt says he committed the felony of disclosing a social security number to protect the citizens of Oregon from Daniel A. Bernath. This is nonsense. Bernath has never been disciplined in the nearly 25 years since admitted to the California Bar in December 1984. (In contrast, the Social Security Administration has sanctioned Dan R. Hyatt for “unprofessional conduct” April 14, 2002, sanction from Chief ALJ Frank Cristaudo, Lowry v. Dan R. Hyatt et al., 329 F.3d 1019) Bernath retired from practice for a time and became voluntarily inactive. During his voluntary inactive period he and his ex wife had a dispute over visitation of their child with his ex wife refusing visitation of their child. On or about July 1997, Bernath took the child support payments and put them into a bank account for his ex wife for that purpose. She retaliated by going to the County attorney.

Thereafter, a short time later, a stipulation was signed, Bernath paid the money in the bank account to his ex wife and she informed the Bar that he was in compliance and thereafter Bernath was declared “eligible” again. (Remember, that Bernath had in this time period, voluntarily made himself “ineligible” to practice by going onto “inactive” status. In effect, he was made “ineligible” when he was already voluntarily “ineligible.”)

To maintain a license to practice law in California a lawyer must pay annual dues, must attend continuing legal education and must comply with child support orders.

· If he fails to pay his bar dues then he will be declared “ineligible” to practice law.

· If he does not attend enough classes of CLE then he will be declared “ineligible” to practice law.

· If he does not comply with a child support order he will be declared “ineligible” to practice law.

The remedy; pay the bar dues-attend more classes of CLE- pay the child support. There is no penalty or punishment and the member is immediately declared “eligible to practice law”. The California Bar does not “suspend” the member and is careful to not use that word so as not to confuse people. Instead it states that the member is either “eligible” or “ineligible” to practice law. Indeed, when the Oregon State Bar made a complaint to the California State Bar that Bernath was misrepresenting that he was never suspended the California Bar stated that Bernath was correct-he had never been suspended or disciplined in his nearly 25 years since being sworn in as an attorney at law.

When California attorney Bernath told Dan R. Hyatt, (while Bernath and Hyatt were in Washington State) that he had never been suspended, Bernath’s comment was 100% correct. Incidentally thousands of California lawyer are declared “ineligible” to practice law each and every year and they remedy the deficiency and then become “eligible” with no fanfare.)

Again, Bernath is a California lawyer. He made his comments at the federal building in Washington State. Hyatt then sends a claimant’s social security number to the Oregon State Bar. (Using Hyatt’s reasoning, the Oregon Bar has jurisdiction over a Hawaii lawyer who makes a misrepresentation to a Social Security judge in a Puerto Rico courtroom) Did Dan R. Hyatt, entrusted with 10,000 social security numbers in his office also send this and other social security numbers to the California Bar, the Washington Bar, the US Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit and US District Court for Southern California as Bernath is also a member of those bars? In any case, state bar associations are completely preempted by Social Security regulation and federal law and state bar associations have no jurisdiction over what occurs before federal agencies. Hyatt knows this because Social Security superiors (Exhibit 9) told him so and because the law was well settled nearly half a century ago with Sperry v. Florida 373 US 379 (1963) Even though OSB has no jurisdiction, Hyatt AGAIN in 2008 pulled them into his misdeeds as he did in 2004 by providing them with stolen United States government property, making OSB liable for possession of stolen property.

Hyatt lies to the Oregon Bar when Hyatt says that Bernath does not disclose a non-event of “ineligible to practice” for a few months in 1995 to Bernath’s nearly 500 clients. Firstly, there is a form SSA 1696 {Exhibit 39} whereby a social security representative must disclose to the claimant the following:

I have been disbarred or suspended from a court or bar to which I have previously admitted to practice as an attorney. __yes __no

I have been disqualified from participating in or appearing before a Federal program or agency __yes __no

Hyatt misleads when he says that the requirement to practice before Social Security is that he NEVER has been suspended. The rule is that to practice law before this agency a lawyer must not be suspended when he is practicing before that agency. He may have been suspended in the past but the question refers to his present status. Bernath correctly checked the box that said that he is not suspended currently. Bernath has never been disqualified from practicing before a federal agency and he thus checked no on the second box as well. In the interest of overabundant disclosure (if the question refers to anything relevant or non-relevant that happened since Bernath became a lawyer nearly 25 years ago), Bernath writes into each SSA 1696 “admin action 7.1995” and each client signs stating that he see this.

(In any case, Bernath has never been suspended according to the California State Bar. The Oregon State Bar stated that Bernath lied to it when he stated that he was never suspended. OSB complained to the California State Bar and asked for them to investigate. The California Bar, again, for perhaps the fifth time, informed the OSB that Bernath had never been suspended, therefore Bernath’s statement was correct and the investigation regarding Bernath was closed, again, Exhibit 40.)

Furthermore, Bernath informs each client he was ineligible to practice law in July 1995 and has each client sign a statement that they understand that and wish for him to represent them. {Exhibit 42 and 42A} Dan R. Hyatt tells the opposite of the truth. Each client also signs an attorney client agreement. There, for a third time, Bernath writes that he was ineligible to practice for a few months in 1995. Therefore, Hyatt has committed an additional ethical violation of lying to the Oregon State Bar as it investigates his conduct and he does this again and again.

Misrepresentations by Dan R. Hyatt in his statement to Oregon State Bar
in undated document but attached to his lawyer’ letter of August 27, 2008

Paragraph 4. Hyatt“I deal regularly with about 25 attorneys and non-attorney representatives who advocate on behalf of claimants.”

Hyatt’s misrepresentation: Hyatt lies to the OSB by omission as he does not reveal that of these 25 attorney Hyatt has declared HALF of them to be too incompetent to practice law before him and has demanded that they each put in ten to twenty hours of additional time to draft a law review quality “trial brief” for a one hour hearing. The vast majority of these attorneys have passed the rigorous Oregon State Bar exam and all of them hold the degree of doctor of jurisprudence. This demand by Hyatt to add 10 to 25 hours additional lawyer time to each one hour hearing is a violation of many federal regulations and legal principles, including revealing attorney-client communications, attorney work product and US Reduction in Paperwork Act 44 USC § 3507. (Exhibit 16)

Paragraph 5 Hyatt makes the misrepresentation; “Bernath’s …duties were almost exclusively as a photocopy and filing clerk.”

Hyatt lies: Bernath performed the full range of support duties for a judge including discussion the merits of cases with at least one of the judges after recording their hearings. (ALJ Jones, Evans) Bernath in fact used to prepare the Hyatt Orders to Oregon Department of Disability Services. (Exhibit 44) (Hyatt denied claimant’s their due process of law by only sending claimants to medical evaluators who would determine that claimants were NOT disabled. Bernath protested this unethical practice by Hyatt) Bernath also schedule hearings, reviewed medical records, reviewed appeals and remands, monitored hearings, managed witnesses, litigants and legal counsel, corrected final decisions of judges and issued discovery requests and subpoenas. Bernath objected to Hyatt’s illegal orders that “cooked the evidence” so that claimants would be found to be not-disabled.

Bernath received many awards for his work in support of the judges. Said Mary Hardy, lead Case Tech; Bernath’ “people skills and professionalism are superior and he is able to handle both complex and sensitive tasks in a courteous manner.” (Exhibit 17)

Paragraph 6 Hyatt lies to the Oregon State Bar: Bernath told Hyatt that he was committing the felony of lying to Veterans Affairs to get benefits; Bernath was a ship’s photographer. Bernath “also told me he was a suspended member of the California Bar.”

Hyatt lies to the Oregon State Bar at paragraph 31 c. that “I have never had a personal relationship with Bernath.” “We have never discussed Vietnam which I don’t believe he has ever seen.”

Hyatt contradicts himself in the same statement but to his faint credit he does not contradict himself on the same page. First he says that Bernath and Hyatt have and never had a personal relationship and yet he says Bernath confessed to committing felonies to Hyatt (lying to the VA) and said to Hyatt that “he was (currently) a suspended member of the California Bar.” He says that Bernath and Hyatt never discussed Vietnam but also says that Bernath was a photographers mate who flew into Vietnam from an aircraft carrier.

Dan R. Hyatt lies repeatedly in this section of his Defense. Bernath never said that he was a suspended member of the California Bar because he never has been. He never said that he was lying to the VA. Bernath is rated at 90% disabled according to the VA’s examinations due to Agent Orange and jet plane fuel exposure during helicopter crashes. The VA then, as required by law, inquired into veteran Bernath’s symptoms which match the elements of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Bernath responded to their inquiries truthfully and VA medical doctors then declared that he was suffering from Severe Depression and PTSD and began therapy. With the peculiar rating system of the VA, Bernath was already at 90% disability. With the PTSD diagnosis his rating stated the same at 90% and therefore there is no reason for Bernath make up any symptoms (Exhibit 18) Bernath is undergoing therapy for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder because of his hyper-vigilance, waking multiple times in the night, nightmares of combat, etc. (Exhibit 19)

It is important to note that Dan R. Hyatt takes pleasure in making sport and being cruel to people with disabilities-an incompatible trait for a United States Social Security disability judge. (Exhibit 19) With Hyatt’s (1) seething hatred of Social Security lawyers, (2) his contempt for people with disabilities and (3) his inability to tell the truth, he is indeed a prime candidate to be cast out of the Oregon Bar.

Hyatt told Bernath about his experiences in Vietnam including holding a light while his shipmates shot at the enemy. Bernath told Hyatt of his flying into and activities in Vietnam in search and rescue missions (exhibit 18B) Hyatt is lying and obviously so. As he lies about things little and large, nothing he says can be believed.

Hyatt says that Bernath told him in “late summer of 2006” that Bernath was getting a VA rating and that was shortly before Bernath left the employment of Social Security. Hyatt lies. Bernath left employment with Social Security the day before Halloween 2005. (exhibit 21) and no such conversation occurred. He merely read a letter that Bernath wrote to Judge Haack advising her that his wartime injuries, which now included PTSD, required that he use a tape recorder as his handwriting was too illegible. Hyatt, read that memo and made up another false story to tell the Oregon State Bar.

Hyatt lies in paragraph 8 “although Bernath claims to have prior experience as a judge pro tem traffic court judge, I doubt that is true.”

Bernath was a judge pro tem in the Los Angeles Superior Court, the Los Angeles Municipal Court, the Culver Judicial District Court and was an arbitrator on complex business and personal injury cases. He did a few “calendars” of traffic court, perhaps two or three, when other judges were tied up on jury trials. (Exhibit 22)

Hyatt lies at paragraph 10 “I would provide him (OSB employee Scott) with the hearing recording if he would request a copy from me in writing.”

Hyatt lies by omission. He was told in 2002 that he must NOT provide information on Social Security claimants when he forced an Oregon State Bar employee to view the social security numbers and other private information in his notorious notebook. (Exhibit 8, Exhibit 9) Hyatt knew that he was breaking the law in 2007-2008 when he did it again. Hyatt was trying to cover his fanny by exposing the hapless Oregon State Bar employee’s by counting on OSB employee Morill’s ignorance. OSB employee Morrill didn’t know that Hyatt was pushing private medical information and social security numbers on OSB since 2004 in violation of law and needed the letter from Morrill to make it appear that Hyatt was merely cooperating with the OSB. In fact, Dan R. Hyatt engineered the entire felonious affair that has caused members of the Oregon State Bar to be investigated for possession of stolen US Government property. The Oregon State Bar is played for a patsy by Dan R. Hyatt.

Hyatt lies in paragraph 11. He says “There was a question in my mind about my ability to file a Bar complaint against a representative.” But elsewhere in his statement he reveals that there was no doubt in his mind. As per the orders that govern his conduct that Social Security ALJs are forbidden from filing such complaints with local bar associations and they can only file a complaint with the Social Security General Counsel of Social Security, Hyatt reveals that he knew that he was violating the regulation. (Letter from Dan R. Hyatt to Oregon State Bar, dated June 21, 2004, Exhibit 9) When the General Counsel saw that there was no basis in his complaint against Bernath and put it in the trash can, Hyatt defied Social Security regulation and pulled the Oregon State Bar into his lawlessness by getting Scott Morrill to send him a “cover letter” getting Hyatt off the hook in his mind and giving Hyatt plausible deniability to defy social security regulation and commit these felonies.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 15. After I provided (Oregon State Bar) with a copy of the hearing…Bernath began placing false and derogatory statements about me on his website.

Hyatt has been a prominent subject on the website Oregon State Bar Reporter, published on the internet, for about ten years now and not just recently. His lawlessness against Graf (2002), Wilburn (2004) and Bernath (2007-2008) and others has been reported to the 4,000 monthly readers of Oregon State Bar Reporter since 1998.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 16 “Bernath was woefully ignorant of the most basic principles of social security law.” “Bernath would stand and yell at me.” “his clients sent me several letters (to) thank me for my kindness….while their representative jeopardized their cases.”

This is nonsense. Hyatt has only heard the Green and Sterling cases. He has “continued” the others or transferred the others. There is no way he has “several letters” from two claimants.

It is also nonsense that Bernath stood up and yelled at Hyatt. No such thing occurred. After Bernath told Hyatt that he must not continue a hearing for Sterling because she was suicidal because of Hyatt’s mistreatment. Hyatt “continued” the hearing for another three months because Bernath did not recite Step Two of the Social Security regulations to Hyatt’s satisfaction. (Exhibit 23) Hyatt then told Bernath that his inability to recite was “unconscionable.” Hyatt then closed the hearing. Bernath and the dying Sterling then left the hearing room and Bernath said, “You know what’s unconscionable, this woman is dying and you won’t let her have a hearing.” Hyatt leaned back in his chair crossed his arms over his chest and said “yeah. And what are you going to do about it?”

If Bernath had actually stood up and yelled at Hyatt during a hearing, no doubt Hyatt would have pressed the button on his desk by his knee that would have summoned the guard in the lobby. Also, no doubt Hyatt would have declarations from the court reporter and the contract vocation expert witness that such an event occurred. No guard was summoned and there are no witness statements because, once again, Hyatt has lied to the Oregon State Bar.

Bernath has conducted approximately 380 trials and/or obtained OTRs or other favorable results for social security claimants in Washington State, Oregon, California and Idaho. Of these 380 trials he has been successful in approximately 370. His clients lavish appreciation and praise on him. (Exhibit 24) Nearly 25% of his new cases come from referrals from other claimants or winning claimants or from Oregon attorneys.

Hyatt thinks that all of the lawyers who practice before him are ignorant and woefully inadequate. Indeed, he makes ex parte communications with David Lowry’s clients and tells them he thinks Lowry is inadequate and urges them to should fire Lowry. Hyatt called attorney Wilburn “an asshole.” He called attorney Bernath “a moron” in front of his client. He told attorney Alan Graf that he will rule against him because he doesn’t like attorney Graf (instead of on the merits of the matter) and made the exact same comments separately to attorney Tim Wilburn and denied Lowry ALL attorney fees (Exhibit 2) Again, Hyatt thinks that because attorneys who practice before him are incompetent, he demands that over half of them they prepare a bar review quality legal brief or he will continue the hearing for three to four months if he finds any errors in the brief…all in violation of Social Security regulation. All of these lawyers, Bernath, Graf, Wilburn, Lowry, etc., make up the majority of cases before social security. All of them are highly successful in attracting clients and winning cases. Hyatt’s jealousy and seething rage against the successful members of the bar is very transparent.

Hyatt says that he provided a list of books to Bernath. Hyatt did no such thing and no such conversation took place. Hyatt said during their one meeting that he would grant Bernath $100 attorney fees per case and that he would put Bernath out of business by “continuing your cases five times if I want to” in an obvious attempt to have all of Bernath’s clients fire him. Indeed, Hyatt has done the same with David Lowry, Esq. by continuing all of David Lowry’s cases, denying all attorney fees, using anger and intimidation at hearings and has even contacted the clients of attorney David Lowry and suggested they find a better attorney all in an attempt to also put Lowry out of business. (Exhibit 2)

Hyatt lies at paragraph 18 “Bernath continued to add offensive and false slander of me on his website.”

Oregon State Bar Reporter is a news medium that regularly publishes. Each article is either vetted as 100% correct or is a reprint of a complaint to an official government body or other public record. It has been winning journalistic awards since 2001. (Exhibit 25) Bernath has never been sued by anyone for libel because there is no actionable comments on Oregon State Bar Reporter. After Hyatt told a claimant that she was “white trash” and another that he “has a problem with interracial couples” and the Oregon State Bar and the Social Security Administration did nothing about it a cartoon was placed on the website Oregon State Bar Reporter of a Klansman wearing a Social Security logo. Of course, this was a commentary on the refusal of OSB and Social Security in policing its hearing officers and attorneys. Under the U.S. Constitution, Amendment One, the cartoon is very mild commentary, fully protected and proper.

Bernath also sent copies of Oregon State Bar Reporter regarding Hyatt’s multiple wrongdoing to the Chief Judge and General Counsel so that they would remove Hyatt as an ALJ. As such, those missives are protected under the First Amendment as Bernath is permitted to petition the government for redress to have this rogue embarrassment to the Social Security Administration and to the Oregon State Bar removed from his job.

Hyatt lies at Paragraph 19. In Mid April, I received a fax of a Bernath letter to the IRS, stating that I was cheating on my taxes.”

Oregon State Bar Reporter received an anonymous report that Hyatt was holding hearings in the State of Washington a few day a month and then pretending that he didn’t have an office and staff in Portland Oregon and thus was dodging State of Oregon taxes. (Washington apparently doesn’t have an income tax).

The letter was not to the IRS. It accused Hyatt of nothing but was merely a news gathering letter asking for comment and investigation for journalism purposes and was sent my Bernath as editor of Oregon State Bar Reporter. (Exhibit 26) The letter was sent to Hyatt so he could clear up the report that he was dodging taxes. He did not take the opportunity to respond.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 19, “Bernath faxed a letter to Judge Linda Haack which he called “Dan vs. Dan”. In this letter, which she shared with me, Bernath suggested that Judge Haack act as a mediator so that Bernath and I could work out some kind of “deal” to continue “working together”.

No such letter was sent. (Exhibit 27) The letter is headlined, “Can you broker a peace (from Dan Bernath). (The body of the letter) It appears that Dan the lawyer is at odds with Dan the ALJ. I am sorry that it has come to this as we were buddies when I worked at ODAR and I am quite surprised by this turn of events (we are both Navy vets) and now it is just “destructive” for everyone, to quote an advisor to me inside of SSA. Is there any way that you can meet with us and we can work out an agreement where we can both live with each other…Is there some way that we can reach a peace and you can be a party to making it happen. Dan Bernath 503.639.6666”

Bernath had a good relationship with Judge Haack when Bernath worked at Social Security and as a representative. Haack socialized with Bernath when they were both SSA employees as they were near neighbors in Tigard and discussed bus routes to work and Haack came to Bernath’s Chinese New Year Party as his home. Just as attorney Graf sought a meeting with Hyatt with a mediator to work out a solution to Hyatt’s angry and obstructive behavior…just as attorney Lowry sought out a meeting with Hyatt with a mediator to work out a solution to Hyatt’s ex parte contacts with his clients urging them to fire Lowry and denying Lowry attorney fees…just as attorney Wilborn met with Hyatt to get him to follow the law instead of ruling against his clients because Hyatt thought Wilborn was “an asshole” SO TOO DID BERNATH attempt to meet with Hyatt with a mediator.

These lawyers are married to the law and logic and conciliation. All believed that if they met with Hyatt they could learn what was causing Hyatt’s seething rage at the attorneys as it caused so much pain to their thousands of clients. Haack does not have uncontrolled rage and contempt toward claimants or attorneys and Bernath had faith that she should be in on such a conciliatory meeting as a neutral-person to keep things calm and keep the meeting on the agenda. But, it is no surprise that all hearing officers at Social Security are putting distance between themselves and the unlawful acts of Dan R. Hyatt.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 22

Bernath did not stand in the doorway of the judge’s chamber; Hyatt never said those things but appeared quite calm and never said the words “I am sick of you…etc.” Hyatt never threw any paper at any desk. He was not at all angry (Exhibit 28, Exhibit 29)

Hyatt lies at paragraph 22

Bernath never said the words attributed to him. (Exhibit 29) Bernath never said that “you’d be off the website by noon”. Hyatt has never been off the website Oregon State Bar Reporter since 1998. As a news medium, the stories on Oregon State Bar Reporter begin on a prominent page when they are new and prominent, depending on their news value, (Exhibit 100, Exhibit 101, Exhibit 102) and then are moved to other parts of Oregon State Bar Reporter as other news stories come in.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 24.

Hyatt’s misconduct has always been published on Oregon State Bar Reporter since 1998 and has never been removed.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 25.

Bernath did not demand $10,000 from Hyatt. Bernath only requested that Hyatt reconsider his unlawful orders and the letter Hyatt produces is merely a standard Motion for Reconsideration and exhibit for an application for Writ of Mandamus. Hyatt unlawfully interfered with the clients’ agreements to pay Bernath for his successful legal work. Hyatt had done that with two clients, each of them owed Bernath approximately $5,000 for a total of $10,000. Bernath had made a motion to the Chief Judge in Seattle to overturn Hyatt’s unlawful order but had heard nothing from the Chief Judge. Bernath, on advice of counsel, was then preparing a Writ of Mandamus to file before the US District Court judge to overturn Hyatt’s illegitimate orders. The email to Hyatt was a Motion for Reconsideration for Hyatt and was also an exhibit in the Writ of Mandamus to show the US District Judge that SSA had refused to act and thus the writ was ripe. The Motion for Reconsideration even pointed Hyatt to the law that he had violated.

While the Writ of Mandamus was in the process of being prepared, the Chief Judge overturned Hyatt’s unlawful orders and the issues became moot. The attorney client contracts were ordered to be honored and the fees that the clients agreed to pay Bernath were paid to Bernath for his successful legal work for them.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 28.

Hyatt’s misconduct has been published on Oregon State Bar Reporter since 1998 and has never been removed. Hyatt started his coercion of Bernath in February 2007 and continued his coercion until September 2008. Hyatt recused himself from the Moody case in February 2007, saying his rage would not permit him to follow the law in deciding case when Bernath is the attorney.

But Hyatt continued his criminal coercion to get Bernath to stop his news gathering and news publishing up until September 2008. Mr. Ball hired Dan Bernath and his trial was set for August 2008. Dan Hyatt’s assistant who schedules his hearings telephoned Bernath after Bernath told her that he had just taken over the case and needed more time to review the issues and “reading” (studying) English/Welch law at Oxford in August to obtain his English solicitor license. Bernath and Charlotte Rosenthal remember the mild misstatement, made on or about September 9, 2008, when Rosenthal called him and said she wanted to schedule the “Ball case.” Bernath went to his shelve and said, “which one, I have two balls.” Bernath and Rosenthal laughed at the misstatement. Bernath asked, “Who’s the ALJ on this one.” She said, “Hyatt.” Bernath said, “Hyatt recuses himself on my cases.” Rosenthal then said, “No he hasn’t. I can’t take him off as the ALJ on these cases until he tells me to.”

Bernath demanded that Hyatt recuse himself as the claimant was desperate and Bernath was not going to yield to Hyatt’s criminal coercion. (Exhibit 30) The memorandum was initially sent on July 28, 2008 demanding that Hyatt recuse himself a year and a half after Hyatt first declared himself unfit to sit on Bernath’s hearings was ignored by Hyatt as he continued the pressure. Bernath then sent the memorandum to Rosenthal, Hyatt and the HOD (Hearing Office Director) at a time after Hyatt was being investigated for criminal coercion. Rosenthal, Hyatt’s clerk, said to Bernath that she could only take Hyatt off the case when Hyatt said so. Bernath then sent the note again to the HOD and added the comment, “Dear HOD, This claimant is entitled to a hearing today. Disqualify Hyatt and assign a different judge.” Therefore, only after the OSB and the FBI began its investigation of Hyatt’s criminal coercion did Hyatt release the Ball case and permit another judge to hear the case. If the criminal coercion complaint had not been made, Hyatt’s criminal coercion would be continuing even after September 8, 2008.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 31 a. Hyatt stated that he would order that I be paid only $100 per case when the client agreed to pay me 25% of the back benefits up to $5,300. Hyatt couldn’t even do that-he ignores the attorney client agreement and ordered Bernath be paid $0 in attorney fees on the Green and Sterling cases. He has done the same thing with attorney David Lowry which resulted in Lowry suing Hyatt in US District Court (Exhibit 2) Bernath is not “incompetent and rude” as Hyatt charges. He is an advocate and is a vigorous one on behalf of his desperate and dying clients. (Exhibit 24)

Hyatt lies at paragraph 31 c. “I have never had a personal relationship with Bernath while he worked at ODAR.”

The truth was that Hyatt was Bernath’s mentor. He wished for Bernath to become an administrative law judge himself and counseled Bernath on how to do it. He gave Bernath the name of the person to call in Washington D.C. to begin the process and the US Government website and keyword to use to learn when the next exam and applications were to be given and that information was written down on a piece of paper from his desk “FROM THE DESK OF JUDGE DAN HYATT: (this yellow note is Exhibit 31)

Dan Hyatt also mentored Dan Bernath to become an administrative law judge. Hyatt even gave Bernath Hyatt’s application when he applied to become an Administrative Law Judge (Exhibit 32) They used to joke that we were the only three “sailors” at ODAR as there were only 4 US Navy veterans out of the nearly 70 employees there (Bernath, Hyatt, Walker, Tielens) and that as Bernath spent most nights aboard an aircraft carrier and few nights on the ground in Vietnam that Bernath got “ice cream and a movie every night” during the war. Often times Bernath and Hyatt would refer to each other as “sailor” and/or “shipmate.” (see declaration of Bernath Exhibit 33, regarding the personal relationship Hyatt had with Bernath before he began to represent Social Security claimants and declaration of Bernath of meeting in April 2008 at Washington State federal building Exhibit 28, second page).

When Bernath inquired of friends inside of Social Security why Hyatt had begun a harassment campaign on Bernath and was putting Bernath out of business, Bernath was told, “some people just don’t like to see their friends make good.”

Hyatt lies at paragraph 31 d.

Hyatt says that he doesn’t even remember the Sterling case. That is a pity and instructive to the Oregon State Bar as how lightly Hyatt takes his life or death power over ordinary Oregon citizens. Bernath requested an OTR Fully Favorable (On the Records-similar to a summary judgment motion) for Sterling because she was dying in 2006. Hyatt ignored that request. Hyatt then set a hearing but said that Bernath didn’t recite “Step Two” correctly and stopped the hearing saying he’d reset it in three or four months. Bernath wrote a memo to Hyatt (exhibit 23) begging Hyatt to give the woman her benefits as all medical evidence showed that she was disabled. Hyatt refused and reset the hearing months later. Bernath wrote to Hyatt warning him that claimant was going to kill herself unless she got her hearing because of the three years of agony, frustration medical deterioration and poverty. Even though claimant was disabled by law in 2006, Hyatt made Sterling wait another two years, postponed her trial at least twice and ignored the fact that she was suicidal because he wanted to punish her attorney. Sterling wrote a 10 page single spaced letter to United States Senator Gordon Smith outlining the many misdeeds of Dan R. Hyatt. Senator Smith responds that Social Security has no mechanism in place to remove criminal hearing officers and there is nothing he can do. (This is also what the 9th Circuit Court has stated in Lowry v. Dan R. Hyatt et al. 329 F.3d 1019. Exhibit 34. The 9th Circuit says that they are sympathetic to the agony of claimants who are abused by Hyatt but it is up to the Social Security Administration to promulgate the rules to remove him-and the disorganized Social Security Administration has yet to do it after a decade of promising to construct such a mechanism. The 9^th Circuit says that SSA’s attitude is lackadaisical. Dan R. Hyatt counts on this gridlock when he tells lawyers with Hyatt’s arms crossed across his chest, “so, what are you going to do about it?” Hyatt thus feels safe to act in hurtful and cruel ways to claimants; unless the Oregon State Bar steps up and protects Oregon citizens.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 31 h. “I have never threatened to throw Bernath out of court. On one occasion he appeared to be having difficulty with his files, etc., and I offered to have Tim, our guard, help him out.”

This statement by Dan R. Hyatt does not even pass the “laugh test.” (Exhibit 20) Tim weights 350 pounds or so. There are 6 hearings taking place simultaneously, one after the other, each hour. Tim’s duties including keeping hundreds of people from wandering toward the courtrooms; there is no barrier to stop them except for Tim. Tim was tasked with searching all lawyers, expert witnesses, claimants and their families as they arrive. At times the crowd waiting to be searched by Tim is so large that the line winds out of the lobby of the Social Security Court and into the elevator corridor. Hyatt says that he would call Tim away from that duty (so he would forget who was searched and who needed to be searched…so Tim could not control the crowd who could wander around Social Security’s offices, etc.,) so that Tim could perform this extreme courtesy for a lawyer Hyatt contradictory says is “rude” and “difficult”, etc.? As Hyatt lies about all matters, large and small, nothing that Dan R. Hyatt says can be believed.

Hyatt lies at paragraph 31.j

Hyatt has a long history of lying to the Oregon State Bar and US District Court judges and magistrates. (Exhibit 43)

Hyatt once again uses the private lives of Social Security claimants to satisfy his rage against all Social Security attorneys. The so called “letter” from Mr. Green does not appear to be in the handwriting of the handwriting of Mr. Green in his file. Mr. Green was dying in March 2008 and is most likely dead by now. Just as in the Sterling case, Bernath in 2006, requested that he immediately receive social security benefits because he was disabled as per the rules of Social Security. Hyatt refused. Hyatt forced the dying man (who was nearly a skeleton after losing 100 pounds to his diseases) to appear at the hearing two years later in 2008, when he had only a few days left to live because he wanted to punish Green’s lawyer, Daniel A. Bernath. If Hyatt did receive a letter from Green it was written by Mr. Green on his deathbed as he attempted to have as much money as possible go to his widow and not pay any money to compensate attorney Bernath for his successful representation. As it is his practice, no doubt, Dan R. Hyatt made an ex parte contact to get a letter manufactured as evidence to use here.

Bernath, as is his practice and in compliance with Oregon law, tape recorded the conversation with Mr. Green where Green says that he never said or wrote any letter to Social Security or Dan R. Hyatt. Bernath will be pleased to play that tape recording for the Oregon State Bar at Dan R. Hyatt’s disbarment hearing. (Exhibit 15) (By the way, Dan R. Hyatt says Bernath called Hyatt a Nazi. Bernath has no recollection of this but recalls that Mr. Green told him that he had been abused by Social Security and Judge Hyatt because two years after Green was declared disabled by his medical doctors, he had to prove it to Judge Hyatt three different ways even as Green was on his deathbed, as Hyatt wanted to punish Green’s attorney-Daniel A. Bernath. Bernath may have stated that to Green that Hyatt is a “tyrant” and has stated that he has problems with interracial couples as reported in the official records of the Oregon State Bar).

The cruelty of Dan R. Hyatt to Oregon citizens is truly unspeakable and extreme. Green spent his last few years living in poverty because Hyatt refused to grant him his benefits so Green spent his last few hours and days on his deathbed to get his disability benefits, as Hyatt placed one obstacle after the other in front of him.

The cruelty of Dan R. Hyatt to Oregon citizens, the breaching of security of their private medical histories, the theft of their Social Security numbers are all caused by the uncontrolled and seething rage of Hyatt toward the lawyers who practice law before him. Says Alan Graf, Oregon attorney, in Willamette Week: “Judge Dan R. Hyatt’s personal reactions to claimants and attorneys at times have clouded his objectivity and caused unnecessary suffering.”

If the Oregon State Bar continues to neglect disciplining Hyatt for his misconduct, he will continue to cause this suffering on thousands of Oregon citizens for decades into the future.