I had surgery with a plastic surgeon, Dr. Paul Nassif in Beverly Hillls, and left me devastated. I do not feel that this surgeon was ethical or professional in his approaches, and was greedy after my money.

In April 2009: Dr washed his hands of me by trashing me to his attorney Domingo J. Rivera (you can see Domingo Rivera on the Medical Justice site on http://www.medicaljustice.com/medical-justice-lawsuit-deterrence-videos.aspx). Since then, I have been receiving threats from Domingo Rivera, to shut my mouth; preventing me from spouting out, on the internet, my ‘bad’ experiences and ‘bad’ results I received from his Dr ‘client’. They pester me about Dr’s ‘Gag Contract’ called ‘Mutual Agreement to Maintain Privacy’, which we patients have to sign.

In December 2009: his patients publicly revealed that Dr.uses ‘Gag Contracts’. There was a hot debate on various plastic surgery forum sites. The Dr is one of the contributors of the sites (Dr. pays forum sites to give him space on the forum to promote his company). This seemed to affect him badly, especially when his business depends on internet marketing. To include, forum posters found it hypocritical that the Dr displays his rating feedback on his website homepage to promote his business, considering that his patients are given ‘Gag Contracts’. Dr's home web page: www.rhinoplastyspecialist.com/

In January/February 2010: Dr's name was no longer present in the Member look up section on the Medical of Justice site.

In February and March 2010: Dr’s attorney Domingo Rivera kept on corresponding with us sending threats to stifle my freedom of expression on the internet. Last threat I received from Domingo J. Rivera was four days ago. (Scroll down to see evidence)

So, how come Dr's attorney Domingo Rivera kept corresponding considering that Dr's name was not present on the members’ look up Medical of Justice site? Domingo J. Rivera was Dr’s attorney both before Dr’s name was no longer present in the Member look up section on the Medical of Justice site and after. And Domingo J.Rivera is on the Medical Justice site. http://http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8T1jO1uEjA

Is it that perhaps Dr. is still a Medical of Justice member and the Medical of Justice does not list the Dr’s name to prevent him from losing his internet based potential customers because most of the patients are against Medical Justice? Is it that perhaps the Medical of Justice are aware that the Dr has a lawsuit with an insurance company and they want to cover him up?

Attorney Domingo J. Rivera had more cases related to the stifling of freedom of expression of victims on the internet. This is another case featured on SFWeekly News:

“S.F. Plastic Surgeon Wants to Shut Down Negative Web Commenters
A A A Comments (4) By Ashley Harrell Wednesday, Mar 16 2011

First Amendment attorneys in Washington, D.C., have taken up the case of a man being sued by a San Francisco plastic surgeon for posting negative comments about her online.

The name of the surgeon — Usha Rajagopal — might sound familiar. Last year, SF Weekly published a feature about her ascent in Google rankings with the help of search engine expert Tracy Rosecrans ["Doctoring the Web, " Ashley Harrell, 9/15/10]. Rosecrans' distinct screen name — trosecra — appears Internetwide attached to gushing reviews of Rajagopal that Rosecrans denied she wrote. The story also detailed how Rajagopal received probation from the Medical Board of California after a patient slipped into a coma during liposuction and later died.

Rajagopal retains her medical license, and is still the first Google hit for "San Francisco" and "plastic surgeon." And apparently, she's still concerned about her online reputation. In October, she filed a lawsuit against Cannoli38 and other posters who criticized her on Google Maps. Although Cannoli38's comment has since been removed, it appears in a memorandum of support filed by defense attorneys. "She is responsible for putting a woman into a vegetative state who later died, " Cannoli38 wrote, citing the Weekly article. "Rajagopal is a danger who shouldn't be allowed to have a medical license."

When Cannoli38 found out Rajagopal had subpoenaed Google to obtain his identity, he contacted attorneys from the Public Citizen Litigation Group and the American Civil Liberties Union. For them, the case held the possibility for setting a legal precedent — not in California, but in Virginia.

Rajagopal filed her suit there, according to Cannoli38's attorney, Michael Page, to avoid a California SLAPP statute that penalizes lawsuits attempting to silence criticism that is in the public interest. Page calls Rajagopal's lawsuit a baseless attempt to get people to remove their posts.

Rajagopal didn't return SF Weekly's calls for the first story or this one, but her lawyer, Domingo Rivera, denies that the lawsuit is frivolous. Although he offered no clear explanation for the suit being filed in Virginia, he says he believes other doctors have conspired to damage Rajagopal with an online smear campaign. He also pointed out that one post accusing his client of hiring Rosecrans to create fake reviews is factually inaccurate. He says patients wrote reviews for the doctor, who gave them to Rosecrans, who posted them with her account. It's a strange explanation, considering Rosecrans originally denied posting the reviews to SF Weekly.

Page and his lawyers have filed a motion to quash Rajagopal's subpoena for Cannoli38's identity and to ask for sanctions on Rajagopal and her lawyer. Cannoli38 — who is not a doctor and is not from Virginia — had initially taken down his review. He's considering putting it back up!”