"I speak often of The Rothschild family and very often quote Meyer Rothschild as saying, "Let me control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws". It was he who first uttered the words, "New World Order".
I have also believed that The Federal Reserve - a privately owned company - rules our country by virtue of Rothschild's saying quoted above. There was a book written by Eustice Mullins many years ago, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, in which he exposes the Rothschild's, their connections to JP Morgan, the Bush (as in former Presidents) family, the Rockefeller's and others of our wealthy elite. The book is available to view on line. Simply google The Secrets of the Federal Reserve. If you have difficulty finding it, email me at info@gold666.org and I will happily send you the link.
I recently came across this article, The Sunday Times gains unprecedented access to the world's most powerful, and most secretive, investment bank and felt it important enough to republish here as was reported by Destination Yisra'el. It is eye opening."
r
Read Post Here
http://jpmorgan666.blogspot.com/2009/12/jp-morgan-and-goldman-sachs-one-of-ten.html
r
Friday, December 11, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
The Trillion Dollar Heist - High Finance Coverups - Judicial Corruption - Stolen Patents .. the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case..
"Following is a brief account and links to further information on the most hideous of ethics, legal and judicial crimes ever committed. Some say that all roads to today’s political and legal system corruptions lead to www.iviewit.tv regarding the Iviewit Technologies, Inc. inventions and the attempt by former patent counsel to steal them.
Crimes then committed in mass to cover them up when the attorneys, including former RNC Chief Counsel Michael Grebe formerly CEO of accused Foley and Lardner and Proskauer Rose, were found stealing patents and complaints filed. To lost five year case files at the FBI and US Attorney, causing investigators to elevate the matters to DOJ OIG, Glenn Fine and FBI OPR, H. Marshall Jarrett both currently investigating the matters.
To patents suspended by the Commissioner of Patents pending completion of several year investigations by federal authorities. To host of other state, federal and international crimes committed to enact the thefts and further crimes to cover up.
The cover ups may go all the way to the top, including rumors that the Bush v. Gore election was a fraud to gain the criminals top down control of Justice. With the fox in the henhouse, all heck broke loose on this great nation, criminals running (ruining) the country. To the next election with Bush and Kerry both Skull and Bones members.
To this election where all but two candidates are members of Council on Foreign Relations, an extreme right wing group with a subversive agenda, founded and stacked with Skull and Bones members, Bilderberg members and other cultish members of far right groups, all who worship a Hitler way of life. www.iviewit.tv/senatecultbill.htm This lifestyle includes Deciders, Torture, Concentration Camps (Gitmoschwitz), removal of Habeas etc. all to remove citizen rights to enact a new world order and killing many "terrorists" (whatever that is), other dissenters (anyone they do not like) and massive amounts of people who they find inferior, like I guess those in New Orleans who they let die as they floated to the ceilings and then created a ghetto for them to come back too.
All of this coming to fruition in The Honorable Shira A. Scheindlin courtroom at the United States District Court ~ Southern District of New York Docket No. 07Civ11196 (SAS), a case the judge related to an insider Whistleblower case of Christine C. Anderson v. the State of New York, et.al. where Anderson claims that as a 62 yr old female Supreme Court of New York attorney for the disciplinary committee, she was molested by superiors to keep whitewash cases against prominent and connected attorneys. Anderson’s initial filings mention Iviewit as one of the causes of her termination.
The Iviewit cases at the First Dept of New York are against senior attorneys, mainly from Proskauer Rose and a one Steven Krane, former President of the NYSBA who were caught in violations of public offices handling complaints illegally and ordered for investigation by the First Dept. Investigations that later were derailed by further conflicts and violations of public offices by leading NY disciplinary figures.
The case rises to Chief Judge Judith Kaye in New York and the crimes they are all originally accused involve fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Office to steal inventions worth a trillion dollars from Proskauer’s client Iviewit.
That is a primer, after reviewing the Iviewit homepage, if you would like to talk further of the entire tentacles to the ethics committees, the Justice Department and Supreme Courts of Florida and the Virginia and Florida Bar Associations.
Eliot I. Bernstein
Founder & Inventor
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
Iviewit Holdings, Inc.
www.iviewit.tv
iviewit@iviewit.tv "
r
Source of Post
http://afjjusticewatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/mukasey-at-bat.html
r
Crimes then committed in mass to cover them up when the attorneys, including former RNC Chief Counsel Michael Grebe formerly CEO of accused Foley and Lardner and Proskauer Rose, were found stealing patents and complaints filed. To lost five year case files at the FBI and US Attorney, causing investigators to elevate the matters to DOJ OIG, Glenn Fine and FBI OPR, H. Marshall Jarrett both currently investigating the matters.
To patents suspended by the Commissioner of Patents pending completion of several year investigations by federal authorities. To host of other state, federal and international crimes committed to enact the thefts and further crimes to cover up.
The cover ups may go all the way to the top, including rumors that the Bush v. Gore election was a fraud to gain the criminals top down control of Justice. With the fox in the henhouse, all heck broke loose on this great nation, criminals running (ruining) the country. To the next election with Bush and Kerry both Skull and Bones members.
To this election where all but two candidates are members of Council on Foreign Relations, an extreme right wing group with a subversive agenda, founded and stacked with Skull and Bones members, Bilderberg members and other cultish members of far right groups, all who worship a Hitler way of life. www.iviewit.tv/senatecultbill.htm This lifestyle includes Deciders, Torture, Concentration Camps (Gitmoschwitz), removal of Habeas etc. all to remove citizen rights to enact a new world order and killing many "terrorists" (whatever that is), other dissenters (anyone they do not like) and massive amounts of people who they find inferior, like I guess those in New Orleans who they let die as they floated to the ceilings and then created a ghetto for them to come back too.
All of this coming to fruition in The Honorable Shira A. Scheindlin courtroom at the United States District Court ~ Southern District of New York Docket No. 07Civ11196 (SAS), a case the judge related to an insider Whistleblower case of Christine C. Anderson v. the State of New York, et.al. where Anderson claims that as a 62 yr old female Supreme Court of New York attorney for the disciplinary committee, she was molested by superiors to keep whitewash cases against prominent and connected attorneys. Anderson’s initial filings mention Iviewit as one of the causes of her termination.
The Iviewit cases at the First Dept of New York are against senior attorneys, mainly from Proskauer Rose and a one Steven Krane, former President of the NYSBA who were caught in violations of public offices handling complaints illegally and ordered for investigation by the First Dept. Investigations that later were derailed by further conflicts and violations of public offices by leading NY disciplinary figures.
The case rises to Chief Judge Judith Kaye in New York and the crimes they are all originally accused involve fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Office to steal inventions worth a trillion dollars from Proskauer’s client Iviewit.
That is a primer, after reviewing the Iviewit homepage, if you would like to talk further of the entire tentacles to the ethics committees, the Justice Department and Supreme Courts of Florida and the Virginia and Florida Bar Associations.
Eliot I. Bernstein
Founder & Inventor
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
Iviewit Holdings, Inc.
www.iviewit.tv
iviewit@iviewit.tv "
r
Source of Post
http://afjjusticewatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/mukasey-at-bat.html
r
Patent Attorney Was involved - Nothing you Can Do.
Imagine inventing the Holy Grail of Inventions.
Imagine it being worth Trillions of Dollars, you have the investors, you have the invention, you have a Patent Attorney - and then your patent attorney steals your invention, another guy you met 9 months after you invented your invention, well he claims to be the inventor.
Patent Fraud is Committed, Lies are filed with the US patent office and well there you go, NOTHING can be done and no one cares.
So you fight, no one is listening, but the bad guys know your there yammering, so they try and kill you, they get you evicted from your home, and they put the run on you constantly for years.
l
Sure a Trillion Dollars is alot of Money, and sure there was plenty to go around, but we can't have one of Not So Elite getting the attention and big money off of an invention that will change the way TV, Cell Phones, Marketing, Gaming and the Technology Industry as a whole operates forever. A technology so amazing that the Internet is now a dynamic multi-media part of all of our lives in a way that was not imagined before this technology was invented then Stolen.
A technology that enabled YouTube to be Sold for Billions. This technology is now used among many top technology companies and seems to be controlled by one man, the Patent attorney who you trusted with your propiertary information.
A Story like this can't be True Right?
And surely it could never happen to YOU, Right?
Well Knowledge is Power.
Find Out more at www.IviewIt.TV - scour this site, read documents, watch videos of the courts, learn this story well, because this is the Goliath of Stories of where justice is violated on every level and this story involves all your famous faces of High Finance, Big Money Tech Companies, Politicians and the Elite in Mass.
Stay tuned at www.DeniedPatent.com as we paint you a picture of how this all came about, who the real victims are, how you keep from being the next victim, who the Real Inventors are and how we know. We will show you a timeline of when everyone really met, when business plans came in, taxes were filed right?
The shareholders wrote checks right? Was this to Brian Utley and the Companies that were made up out of thin area to file the Stolen Patents or did the shareholders invest their money in the Real Inventors: Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink.
Proof on Top of Proof and Still the Real Inventors of the Iviewit Technology get no credit, they are simply left out in the cold on a Trillion Dollar Invention because of Political Clout, HUGE law firms protecting their own, cover ups in the US Patent Office and Cleaners in the US Supreme Court System.
This Stolen Patent Story fights for all who have ever been jailed, murdered, shut down, shut up, had their patent stolen or protype destroyed... this Fight is for you. We deserve to know about things like the Searl Generator and other wonderful - amazing inventions where inventors were jailed, were shut down for years just so that you would not have access to Free Energy.
r
The IviewIt Technology battle to get justice served is About all of Us, and Well I Say Enough Is Enough.
I say United We Stand behind Eliot Bernstein in getting Justice for the Iviewit Inventors -Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink. We Stand for the Shareholders and with this we stand for justice for all who have had patents stolen, have been set up and lied about within the justice system to keep the truth hidden.
For all who have had judges serve them life altering InJustice. And for all over centuries who Techology has been stolen and whereby Greed and Controling the "We the People has Won".
Now is Time for the Good To Reign over the Bad.
Time to Step up and Lend your Voice.
r
Join Us at www.DeniedPatent.ning.com
Where soon there will be Major Discussions,
Tons of Documents, Videos, and Proof that
will in No Way Be able to be Ignored.
r
the US Justice System May keep ignoring the Rights and the Credit for Invention of
Eliot Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink. And they may never serve justice and fiduciary obligation to the Shareholders that believed in, invested in Iviewit.
r
Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink may get no credit at all, the SBA may be able to do nothing,
the Patent Office may ignore the Truth, the New York Supreme Court may Ignore the Truth,
Condone Corruption, and allow the Violation of Individual Rights.
p
The Florida Courts May Allow Corruption
and Shareholders may be powerless..
k
But We the People
We will Know the TRUTH Once and For all and the
Truth about Who Really Invented the Technology
that so many now use. ( We will tell you exactly who is using the invention, who is getting paychecks from the invention, what players and politics is involved) Stay Tuned at http://www.deniedpatent.com/
r
We the People will Not Deny Credit to
the Real Inventors: Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink.
r
WE the People will Stand United and Boycott every Company involved
in this Stolen Technology, we will complain about every judge
and attorney over and over until the truth is Exposed.
r
We will Expose The Truth
and You Will Know. SO no matter what
the Courts Does, what the Corruption Does,
what the Cover ups allow. Well you will always
be able to find the Truth and Know that you have
no Rights in the United States of America, So you will have to
move overseas and Patent your Trillion Dollar Technology there.
r
We the People will Stand by Whistleblower Christine Anderson in her Moxy -
Her Honor to Speak the Truth and She will not Stand Alone.
d
We the People will not hide under our beds
while bad things happen to other people.
We are Watching and this WILL not Go unNoticed.
e
The US Patent Office, and the Powers that be in your US Justice System - well they May let this injustice go, but It will NOT go quietly and the Truth Will forever be available on Thousands of Blogs. And you will never tell the Patent Attorney in the US about your Inventions Again.
r
Please Reprint any of these Posts.
Give Us a Link.
Spread this Story
in the Name of Justice For All.
r
Tell this Story over and over.
r
Stop the Suppression of the Truth.
s
Stop Corruption in the US Courts.
Stop Big Banks, Big Money, and the Cartel that Keeps Us Down, keeps us in debt, and keeps control over our quality of life. All of these Players are Connected to the Trillion Dollar Heist of the IviewIt Technology.
r
If Eliot Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink lose this battle and some guy they met 9 months after they invented the Iviewit Techology gets credit for his invention, while his patent attorney has the rights to the patents as well as others who betrayed him... well if this Goes Away with NO Justice. Your Next. It can happen to any of you at any time for any reason.
r
If you Do Not Stand Now with Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink - and get behind the Iviewit Shareholders and Stand on the Right Side of This then Forever Hold your peace. The players involved in all this are coming for you next. In small ways, in big ways... if not now then When?
r
All this Proof after Proof. And if the Justice System ignores it, well then the Rumors are True, Laws in the US cannot be enforced, high finance crime is legal, SEC Crimes are Legal, Patent Office Corruption is Legal, "Cleaners" are Legal and well the US will be recognized world wide as the place to easily and seemingly legally steal a Trillion Dollar Technology at anytime.
r
Stop This.
Enough is Enough.
Imagine it being worth Trillions of Dollars, you have the investors, you have the invention, you have a Patent Attorney - and then your patent attorney steals your invention, another guy you met 9 months after you invented your invention, well he claims to be the inventor.
Patent Fraud is Committed, Lies are filed with the US patent office and well there you go, NOTHING can be done and no one cares.
So you fight, no one is listening, but the bad guys know your there yammering, so they try and kill you, they get you evicted from your home, and they put the run on you constantly for years.
l
Sure a Trillion Dollars is alot of Money, and sure there was plenty to go around, but we can't have one of Not So Elite getting the attention and big money off of an invention that will change the way TV, Cell Phones, Marketing, Gaming and the Technology Industry as a whole operates forever. A technology so amazing that the Internet is now a dynamic multi-media part of all of our lives in a way that was not imagined before this technology was invented then Stolen.
A technology that enabled YouTube to be Sold for Billions. This technology is now used among many top technology companies and seems to be controlled by one man, the Patent attorney who you trusted with your propiertary information.
A Story like this can't be True Right?
And surely it could never happen to YOU, Right?
Well Knowledge is Power.
Find Out more at www.IviewIt.TV - scour this site, read documents, watch videos of the courts, learn this story well, because this is the Goliath of Stories of where justice is violated on every level and this story involves all your famous faces of High Finance, Big Money Tech Companies, Politicians and the Elite in Mass.
Stay tuned at www.DeniedPatent.com as we paint you a picture of how this all came about, who the real victims are, how you keep from being the next victim, who the Real Inventors are and how we know. We will show you a timeline of when everyone really met, when business plans came in, taxes were filed right?
The shareholders wrote checks right? Was this to Brian Utley and the Companies that were made up out of thin area to file the Stolen Patents or did the shareholders invest their money in the Real Inventors: Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink.
Proof on Top of Proof and Still the Real Inventors of the Iviewit Technology get no credit, they are simply left out in the cold on a Trillion Dollar Invention because of Political Clout, HUGE law firms protecting their own, cover ups in the US Patent Office and Cleaners in the US Supreme Court System.
This Stolen Patent Story fights for all who have ever been jailed, murdered, shut down, shut up, had their patent stolen or protype destroyed... this Fight is for you. We deserve to know about things like the Searl Generator and other wonderful - amazing inventions where inventors were jailed, were shut down for years just so that you would not have access to Free Energy.
r
The IviewIt Technology battle to get justice served is About all of Us, and Well I Say Enough Is Enough.
I say United We Stand behind Eliot Bernstein in getting Justice for the Iviewit Inventors -Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink. We Stand for the Shareholders and with this we stand for justice for all who have had patents stolen, have been set up and lied about within the justice system to keep the truth hidden.
For all who have had judges serve them life altering InJustice. And for all over centuries who Techology has been stolen and whereby Greed and Controling the "We the People has Won".
Now is Time for the Good To Reign over the Bad.
Time to Step up and Lend your Voice.
r
Join Us at www.DeniedPatent.ning.com
Where soon there will be Major Discussions,
Tons of Documents, Videos, and Proof that
will in No Way Be able to be Ignored.
r
the US Justice System May keep ignoring the Rights and the Credit for Invention of
Eliot Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink. And they may never serve justice and fiduciary obligation to the Shareholders that believed in, invested in Iviewit.
r
Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink may get no credit at all, the SBA may be able to do nothing,
the Patent Office may ignore the Truth, the New York Supreme Court may Ignore the Truth,
Condone Corruption, and allow the Violation of Individual Rights.
p
The Florida Courts May Allow Corruption
and Shareholders may be powerless..
k
But We the People
We will Know the TRUTH Once and For all and the
Truth about Who Really Invented the Technology
that so many now use. ( We will tell you exactly who is using the invention, who is getting paychecks from the invention, what players and politics is involved) Stay Tuned at http://www.deniedpatent.com/
r
We the People will Not Deny Credit to
the Real Inventors: Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink.
r
WE the People will Stand United and Boycott every Company involved
in this Stolen Technology, we will complain about every judge
and attorney over and over until the truth is Exposed.
r
We will Expose The Truth
and You Will Know. SO no matter what
the Courts Does, what the Corruption Does,
what the Cover ups allow. Well you will always
be able to find the Truth and Know that you have
no Rights in the United States of America, So you will have to
move overseas and Patent your Trillion Dollar Technology there.
r
We the People will Stand by Whistleblower Christine Anderson in her Moxy -
Her Honor to Speak the Truth and She will not Stand Alone.
d
We the People will not hide under our beds
while bad things happen to other people.
We are Watching and this WILL not Go unNoticed.
e
The US Patent Office, and the Powers that be in your US Justice System - well they May let this injustice go, but It will NOT go quietly and the Truth Will forever be available on Thousands of Blogs. And you will never tell the Patent Attorney in the US about your Inventions Again.
r
Please Reprint any of these Posts.
Give Us a Link.
Spread this Story
in the Name of Justice For All.
r
Tell this Story over and over.
r
Stop the Suppression of the Truth.
s
Stop Corruption in the US Courts.
Stop Big Banks, Big Money, and the Cartel that Keeps Us Down, keeps us in debt, and keeps control over our quality of life. All of these Players are Connected to the Trillion Dollar Heist of the IviewIt Technology.
r
If Eliot Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink lose this battle and some guy they met 9 months after they invented the Iviewit Techology gets credit for his invention, while his patent attorney has the rights to the patents as well as others who betrayed him... well if this Goes Away with NO Justice. Your Next. It can happen to any of you at any time for any reason.
r
If you Do Not Stand Now with Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink - and get behind the Iviewit Shareholders and Stand on the Right Side of This then Forever Hold your peace. The players involved in all this are coming for you next. In small ways, in big ways... if not now then When?
r
All this Proof after Proof. And if the Justice System ignores it, well then the Rumors are True, Laws in the US cannot be enforced, high finance crime is legal, SEC Crimes are Legal, Patent Office Corruption is Legal, "Cleaners" are Legal and well the US will be recognized world wide as the place to easily and seemingly legally steal a Trillion Dollar Technology at anytime.
r
Stop This.
Enough is Enough.
r
It is Your Watch Now.
www.DeniedPatent.com
www.DeniedPatent.com
r
r
Monday, December 7, 2009
MPEG - as anti-competitive Monopolistic Patent Pooling Scheme
"Iviewit technologies are currently being utilized by almost every major imaging and video application. These technologies have been at the heart of one of the most fascinating patent stories in the history of the United States and one of the most fascinating crimes ever attempted.
The Iviewit story begins with invention by several inventors working to overcome limitations that were prevalent in early attempts at virtual imaging and low bandwidth video communications.
The true inventors were Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink.The first spark of invention was in finding a solution for imaging pixelation upon zoom in a low bandwidth environment and utilizing a low resolution file.
In prior art, the user when zooming in virtual images was plagued by pixelation. The iviewit invention in scaled imaging solved for this pixel distortion when zooming in low bandwidth on low resolution, resulting in what is commonly found on digital cameras today and referred to as "digital zoom".
The imaging invention, although discovered in this virtual reality domain has now penetrated every form of digital imaging technology both in hardware and software. The scaled inventions leading to new medical imaging devices, new camera applications, satellite imaging advancements and new zoom television sets as are now offered by Sony.
The second invention for scaled video and often referred to by video technologists and engineers worldwide as a "holy grail" discovery, was the key to unlocking full frame rate, full screen, low bandwidth video as is now found on almost every website worldwide. Scaled video is now embedded in every video player such as the Real Player, QuickTime and Microsoft players. Without this invention video on the Internet, other than postage sized grainy transmissions, would not be possible.
This invention has since transformed the prior art on video content creation and distribution for all forms of video components (i.e. HDTV, Television, DVD, HDDVD) and on almost every digital video/imaging product from videocams, to medical applications, to satellite video and imaging.
The third invention combines scaled video and scaled imaging to form a unique platform of video that can be zoomed into without pixel distortion. The fourth invention was for a remote controlled camera and video applications whereby control of video and imaging inventions from a communication environment could be obtained.Other inventions in digital sound, video and imaging were also discovered around these primary inventions. Patents were filed for the inventions with leading US law firms including Proskauer Rose LLP, Foley and Lardner, Blakely Sokoloff Zafman and Taylor and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein and Schlissel, as well as, leading international law firms around the world.
Or so the shareholders of the companies, Iviewit, thought so.Currently, the United States Patent & Trademark Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the are investigating charges that the law firms herein named have committed fraud against the United States Patent & Trademark Office through a series of fraudulent patent applications with attempt to steal the inventions from the inventors. Similarly, the Institute of Professional Representatives before the European Patent Office (epi) are investigating similar charges of fraud committed by the international legal representatives involved. Multitudes of information regarding the inventions can be found at the iviewit website http://www.iviewit.tv/ that in depth information regarding the investigations and other actions can be found.
The main culprit behind these thefts is the video body, self titled, MPEGLA, LLC and their subsequent license known as MPEG, attempting through a patent pooling scheme, similar to other pooling schemes that have historically been involved in anticompetitive and monopolistic practices. Prior strong arm tactics of patent pools and methods to illegally corner markets and steal inventions have been stopped via the Department of Justice efforts.
Section IV attempts to draw conclusions for antitrust enforcement from the history of patent pooling cases and the economic analysis.
The economic analysis suggests that restrictive licensing terms should not necessarily raise competition concerns if patents are not substitutes for each other. However, the cases reveal that many unlawful patent pooling and cross-licensing arrangement were actually cartel agreements thinly disguised as patent licenses. Such shams should not escape antitrust condemnation even if the patents involved in the arrangement are not substitutes.
Section IV notes that the social return from challenges to weak patents is much higher than the private return and ends with a recommendation that antitrust agencies become more proactive in this area."
Later similar concern is also raised;
"Other arrangements have been shams, in which firms agree to abide by restrictive licensing terms as a means to cartelize an industry. In cases such as U.S. Gypsum the patent was incidental to a larger purpose, which was to impose downstream restraints that eliminated competition." http://elsa.berkeley.edu/users/gilbert/wp/patent_pools100302.pdf.
Antitrust for Patent Pools:
A Century of Policy EvolutionRichard J.Gilbert
October 3, 2002
In the Singer sewing US Supreme Court case, similar to the blocking of Iviewit technologies by MPEGLA, LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court summarized the central competitive issue as follows:
What is claimed here is that Singer engaged in a series of transactions with Gegauf and Vigorelli for an illegal purpose, i.e., to rid itself and Gegauf, together, perhaps, with Vigorelli, of infringements by their common competitors, the Japanese manufacturers.
The Government claims that in this respect there were an identity of purpose among the parties and actions pursuant thereto that in law amount to a combination or conspiracy violative of the Sherman Act.
In the Iviewit case for example, the MPEG codec at the time before invention was incapable of producing a low bandwidth video that could produce a marketable video at internet speeds. The mathematical limitations at bandwidths from 28k-750k produced a horrific video that was not marketable, thus the search for the "holy grail" began for a method to transmit video in this medium that was full screen, full frame rate.
Now the MPEGLA patent pool at the time before the Iviewit inventions was a very small pool with a very small number of patents in the pool and fewer licensees. The pool was begun by a former MIT student and lawyer, Kenneth Rubenstein, who likens himself to the gatekeeper of the pool with his self proclaimed title of patent evaluator for the pool.
The inventors of the technologies, seeing that they had found the grail invention, rushed to get the ideas patented and hired the law firm of Proskauer Rose LLP. A slimy attorney from the firm, named Christopher Clarke Wheeler (recently arrested and convicted for Drunk Driving with Injury ~ Del Ray Beach, FL PD) said he would check if his firm had patent counsel.
A few weeks later he returned and claimed that Kenneth Rubenstein was with the firm in New York and that he was involved in the MPEG patent pool. Wheeler claimed that with Rubenstein's blessing on the inventions, they would be included in the pools and Iviewit and its shareholders would derive royalties from the pool.
Somewhere though, on the way to the patent office, Rubenstein and his band of thieves, decided on a very complicated artifice to defraud the inventors and shareholders and steal the inventions for themselves.
This blog will attempt to expose what these law firms have done in the attempt to steal the inventions and then to attempt to cover up their crimes through manipulation of the legal system that elevates to the highest court in this land. At the same time, these attorneys are under very real federal and international investigations for their crimes.
The only way to escape prosecution will be to manipulate the justice department, the commerce department and the Supreme Court, if they fail, certain federal prison sentences await them.
This blog will cover the crimes and allow for others to post comments relating to their experiences with what appears a corrupt group of patent law firms that has found a way to steal inventions from inventors, disguised as trusted attorneys from leading law firms. Again, the meat of the story and much evidence can be found at www.iviewit.tv where we welcome your comments and any help you may be able to give in bringing these criminals to justice."
r
Source of Post
http://patentgate.blogspot.com/2005/12/mpeg-as-anticompetitive-monopolistic.html
p
More on this Story at
www.DeniedPatent.com
r
Crystal L. Cox
IndustryWhistleblower.com
r
The Iviewit story begins with invention by several inventors working to overcome limitations that were prevalent in early attempts at virtual imaging and low bandwidth video communications.
The true inventors were Eliot I. Bernstein, James F. Armstrong, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Patti Daniels and Matthew Mink.The first spark of invention was in finding a solution for imaging pixelation upon zoom in a low bandwidth environment and utilizing a low resolution file.
In prior art, the user when zooming in virtual images was plagued by pixelation. The iviewit invention in scaled imaging solved for this pixel distortion when zooming in low bandwidth on low resolution, resulting in what is commonly found on digital cameras today and referred to as "digital zoom".
The imaging invention, although discovered in this virtual reality domain has now penetrated every form of digital imaging technology both in hardware and software. The scaled inventions leading to new medical imaging devices, new camera applications, satellite imaging advancements and new zoom television sets as are now offered by Sony.
The second invention for scaled video and often referred to by video technologists and engineers worldwide as a "holy grail" discovery, was the key to unlocking full frame rate, full screen, low bandwidth video as is now found on almost every website worldwide. Scaled video is now embedded in every video player such as the Real Player, QuickTime and Microsoft players. Without this invention video on the Internet, other than postage sized grainy transmissions, would not be possible.
This invention has since transformed the prior art on video content creation and distribution for all forms of video components (i.e. HDTV, Television, DVD, HDDVD) and on almost every digital video/imaging product from videocams, to medical applications, to satellite video and imaging.
The third invention combines scaled video and scaled imaging to form a unique platform of video that can be zoomed into without pixel distortion. The fourth invention was for a remote controlled camera and video applications whereby control of video and imaging inventions from a communication environment could be obtained.Other inventions in digital sound, video and imaging were also discovered around these primary inventions. Patents were filed for the inventions with leading US law firms including Proskauer Rose LLP, Foley and Lardner, Blakely Sokoloff Zafman and Taylor and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein and Schlissel, as well as, leading international law firms around the world.
Or so the shareholders of the companies, Iviewit, thought so.Currently, the United States Patent & Trademark Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the are investigating charges that the law firms herein named have committed fraud against the United States Patent & Trademark Office through a series of fraudulent patent applications with attempt to steal the inventions from the inventors. Similarly, the Institute of Professional Representatives before the European Patent Office (epi) are investigating similar charges of fraud committed by the international legal representatives involved. Multitudes of information regarding the inventions can be found at the iviewit website http://www.iviewit.tv/ that in depth information regarding the investigations and other actions can be found.
The main culprit behind these thefts is the video body, self titled, MPEGLA, LLC and their subsequent license known as MPEG, attempting through a patent pooling scheme, similar to other pooling schemes that have historically been involved in anticompetitive and monopolistic practices. Prior strong arm tactics of patent pools and methods to illegally corner markets and steal inventions have been stopped via the Department of Justice efforts.
Section IV attempts to draw conclusions for antitrust enforcement from the history of patent pooling cases and the economic analysis.
The economic analysis suggests that restrictive licensing terms should not necessarily raise competition concerns if patents are not substitutes for each other. However, the cases reveal that many unlawful patent pooling and cross-licensing arrangement were actually cartel agreements thinly disguised as patent licenses. Such shams should not escape antitrust condemnation even if the patents involved in the arrangement are not substitutes.
Section IV notes that the social return from challenges to weak patents is much higher than the private return and ends with a recommendation that antitrust agencies become more proactive in this area."
Later similar concern is also raised;
"Other arrangements have been shams, in which firms agree to abide by restrictive licensing terms as a means to cartelize an industry. In cases such as U.S. Gypsum the patent was incidental to a larger purpose, which was to impose downstream restraints that eliminated competition." http://elsa.berkeley.edu/users/gilbert/wp/patent_pools100302.pdf.
Antitrust for Patent Pools:
A Century of Policy EvolutionRichard J.Gilbert
October 3, 2002
In the Singer sewing US Supreme Court case, similar to the blocking of Iviewit technologies by MPEGLA, LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court summarized the central competitive issue as follows:
What is claimed here is that Singer engaged in a series of transactions with Gegauf and Vigorelli for an illegal purpose, i.e., to rid itself and Gegauf, together, perhaps, with Vigorelli, of infringements by their common competitors, the Japanese manufacturers.
The Government claims that in this respect there were an identity of purpose among the parties and actions pursuant thereto that in law amount to a combination or conspiracy violative of the Sherman Act.
In the Iviewit case for example, the MPEG codec at the time before invention was incapable of producing a low bandwidth video that could produce a marketable video at internet speeds. The mathematical limitations at bandwidths from 28k-750k produced a horrific video that was not marketable, thus the search for the "holy grail" began for a method to transmit video in this medium that was full screen, full frame rate.
Now the MPEGLA patent pool at the time before the Iviewit inventions was a very small pool with a very small number of patents in the pool and fewer licensees. The pool was begun by a former MIT student and lawyer, Kenneth Rubenstein, who likens himself to the gatekeeper of the pool with his self proclaimed title of patent evaluator for the pool.
The inventors of the technologies, seeing that they had found the grail invention, rushed to get the ideas patented and hired the law firm of Proskauer Rose LLP. A slimy attorney from the firm, named Christopher Clarke Wheeler (recently arrested and convicted for Drunk Driving with Injury ~ Del Ray Beach, FL PD) said he would check if his firm had patent counsel.
A few weeks later he returned and claimed that Kenneth Rubenstein was with the firm in New York and that he was involved in the MPEG patent pool. Wheeler claimed that with Rubenstein's blessing on the inventions, they would be included in the pools and Iviewit and its shareholders would derive royalties from the pool.
Somewhere though, on the way to the patent office, Rubenstein and his band of thieves, decided on a very complicated artifice to defraud the inventors and shareholders and steal the inventions for themselves.
This blog will attempt to expose what these law firms have done in the attempt to steal the inventions and then to attempt to cover up their crimes through manipulation of the legal system that elevates to the highest court in this land. At the same time, these attorneys are under very real federal and international investigations for their crimes.
The only way to escape prosecution will be to manipulate the justice department, the commerce department and the Supreme Court, if they fail, certain federal prison sentences await them.
This blog will cover the crimes and allow for others to post comments relating to their experiences with what appears a corrupt group of patent law firms that has found a way to steal inventions from inventors, disguised as trusted attorneys from leading law firms. Again, the meat of the story and much evidence can be found at www.iviewit.tv where we welcome your comments and any help you may be able to give in bringing these criminals to justice."
r
Source of Post
http://patentgate.blogspot.com/2005/12/mpeg-as-anticompetitive-monopolistic.html
p
More on this Story at
www.DeniedPatent.com
r
Crystal L. Cox
IndustryWhistleblower.com
r
Letter to Sachin Garg from Eliot Bernstein Regarding Proskauer Rose and the IviewIt Stolen Patent.
"Sachin,
First thank you and I am sorry that writing a news story has put you in the middle of Patentgate but the name should give some warning as to just how big of a story is unfolding and just how frightened the law firms are of public awareness of the story. The others copied were shareholders and friends. First, I have published only the actual news story from your site at my blog, I will not publish further without permission of yours but that was already a published article.
1. No court has decided in Proskauer's favor any of the allegations, as no court has heard the case or tried the criminal aspects of any of the petitions filed by Iviewit. The courts having denied the Iviewit petitions clearly serve as NO victory to either side. The bar complaints in Florida and New York were never prosecuted or heard by the bars and were dismissed on review, again clearly no victory.
In fact, in Florida and New York, at the bars and disciplinary departments, Proskauer partners were found violating state Supreme Court bar positions and these allegations have been filed against the partners but have been refused to be heard by the courts. Again, clearly no legal victory for Proskauer, just a delay to a ticking bomb.
2. The only court case I am aware of is the Proskauer instigated billing case against Iviewit in Florida. It is now learned that the companies sued have stolen intellectual properties in them and were identically named to Iviewit entities, this was part of the original attempt to steal the inventions.
Proskauer did all the corporation set up work and controlled the patent work, thereby the ones that are responsible for the corporate and patent scheme and artifices to defraud shareholders found in this case.
The billing case was a fiasco for Proskauer from the start, in fact, until senior management at AOLTW/WB were doing due-dilligence for a twenty five million dollar investment in Iviewit, Iviewit was not even aware that it was in litigation with anyone. How might this be you ask, the answer is simple, Proskauer had sued companies that looked and smelled like Iviewit companies, but they were duplicate companies whereby stolen IP was being funnelled out the door.
Imagine the company's surprise when AOLTW/WB notified the company at an investment meeting that we were in a lawsuit with our former attorneys, Proskauer and Proskauer's former management hires had filed an involuntary bankruptcy on us.
The reason I say former was because weeks before learning of these legal actions Proskauer and their management were fired by the Board because it appeared that bogus companies and patents existed and we were just finding the beginnings of the evidence at the time.
At that time that the company learned of this from AOLTW/WB I had fled Florida where the corporate HQ was for Iviewit, because upon firing Brain Utley, he flew to California and threatened me with my life if I told anyone about the patents we were finding in his name. The problem was that I had already notified certain investors, shareholders and authorities of the crimes.
That night, I called my wife in Florida and told her to pack our home and children, leave our stuff behind and flee Florida. A few days later that is what she did, we took residency at the St. Regis hotel in LA, then the Luxor, then a house in LA, then a house in Escondido, then back to Florida for the billing case, then out of Florida when the car was blown up to California.
We have been on the run for our lives since that day, waiting to get these matters into court, a fair court, but that has proven difficult as these law firms have positioned to block us through conflicts and violations of public office and downright violating the law as if it did not exist.
Whilst we hid in California we prepared our case for the Florida billing case. The first thing the company did was to meet with the lawyers who had been representing the supposed Iviewit companies in the lawsuit and bankruptcy. We then fired them and replaced them with counsel, Steven Selz, Esq. and Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq. who helped try and put together a counter complaint that would bring to the court the crimes that at the time were known. At that time we did not know a fraction of the crimes committed.
The judge would not let the case expose the criminal elements and after denying a counter complaint that contained the allegations, the judge limited the case to only billing issues. The judge ignored the fact that Proskauer did not have any bills or retainer with the companies they sued. In fact, at that time it appeared that in the billing case and the involuntary bk that the companies sued had no obligations to either Proskauer or their former management in the bk.
In the two cases the parties appeared to have no claims against the companies they sued. At the time, we thought they were merely stupid and filed against the wrong companies. At the time we did not know that two sets of identical companies had been formed and that two sets of nearly identical patent applications had been filed.
Back to the billing court room where upon dismissing the counter complaint containing the allegations of fraud including fraud on the United States Patent & Trademark Office and foreign nations, the judge dismissed two law firms (Steven Selz, Esq. and Schiffren & Barroway) who were representing Iviewit, on the eve of trial (this was after a trial had been scheduled and then cancelled without notice to Iviewit or our counsel).
The first trial would have inevitably brought the matters into court whether the judge tried to exculpate Proskauer by limiting it to a billing case and certain false and perjured statements of Rubenstein and Wheeler in their depositions would have been fair game for trial.
At the re-scheduling hearing both counsels for Iviewit submitted requests from the judge requesting to be relieved as counsel stating the other would be representing us at the trial. Selz, who had been representing the case for almost two years was asked in writing by Schiffrin and Barroway to step down as they had signed and Letter of Understanding with Iviewit to represent us in all court cases and to infuse Iviewit with two million dollars of cash, this document can be found at the iviewit site under the Supreme Court link on the left navigation bar, under the Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 130, and ruled a default judgement for Iviewi's failure in 15 days to obtain replacement counsel.
Iviewit's rights to counsel denied, Iviewit's access to the court shutdown and further Selz disappeared for weeks with all the files for appeal and Schiffrin & Barroway defaulted on their signed LOU, also trying to hijack the Iviewit case files, to prevent appeal, it was obvious that Schiffrin & Barroway were planted to derail the case and with Judge Labarga this is exactly what unfolded.
Again, this case was limited to billing issues and it was not until almost two years later that the companies sued were found to be illegal mirror companies with stolen patents in Brian Utley's name. We learned this information from the patent office, who reviewed Iviewit attorney intellectual property documents from the law firms, including Proskauer, that had falsified inventors, owners and assignees on them.
Immediately the Patent Office OED Director Harry I. Moatz began formal investigation of the attorneys and began to aid Iviewit in getting their patents into suspensions by petitioning the Commissioner of Patents that Fraud on the United States Patent Office had occured. Those investigations remains ongoing.
3. The only victories, if you can call them that, that Proskauer may want to inform you of, are at the state bars in New York and Florida. Yet victory may not be the word, conflict of interest and violation of public offices, are the correct words.
In both state bars, Proskauer partners were found after several years, to be handling bar complaints against their partners while holding Supreme Court Bar Associations positions that conflicted with their personal involvement in the matters. Upon finding these conflicts, in Florida the matter was brought to the Supreme Court of Florida who began to review the case and when they found that the conflicts elevated to the President of Flabar and other inside employees they simply denied to hear the case and matters against Proskauer and their partners caught violating their public offices.
A way out of the mess that would have caused considerable embarrasement to the Florida Supreme Court so they just denied to hear it, yet again this is a no win for either side. It is strange the court took this course but the Florida Supreme Court appears conflicted with Florida Bar as it is directly under their control and a part of the Supreme Court.
This may be the single greatest threat to the institution of law and all good lawyers, to have a self regulating attorney controlled bar that can be infiltrated by guilty lawyers who handle the complaints against themselves and their firms. Even once caught in conflict and violation these attorneys if they gain control of the highest positions at the bar can then simply deny to accept complaints against those caught violating public office including themselves.
In fact, legal counsel for Florida Bar, John Anthony Boggs, writes in a a letter, (Iviewit Supreme Court Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 265) that although Triggs was in violation of his office post with the Supreme Court of Florida - Florida Bar post, that is could have, would have been ok had he at the time filed a conflict waiver, which he failed to do. Should of, could have, would have, are baseless arguements, and then to clinch it, Boggs sites a reference to proposed law, instead of the law, thinking we and you would be foolish enough to rely on his citing of proposed law which was not enacted at that time. It appears Boggs may have been the officer writing the proposed legislation and changes to bar law.
Was Boggs' authoring such law in attempt to exculpate bar members like Triggs, I will leave this to your interpretation. When this is then brought to the state Supreme Court of Florida, who has liability for the bar officers and the Florida Bar officers, a total miscarriage of justice can and did occur in these matters, whereby the court simply denied a citizens complaints by denying the public a chance to have the bar members prosecuted. An attorney protection agency is thereby devised, not a consumer friendly organization, as our experiences with these attorney country clubs show.
Just how high in the courts and administration did Proskauer and the other law firms plant. How high does Patentgate go?
This refusal of the bar of Florida and the Supreme Court of Florida to accept complaints against their officers in violation of public office led to Iviewit filing a petition with the Supreme Court of the United States to force Florida to prosecute those caught in verified conflicts of interest.
The Supreme Court denied the petition, again the case was not heard and obviously Proskauer cannot claim that as court victory as the case was not heard, again a victory for neither side. None of this is a court victory, obviously that would take a court to hear the matters and then decide after reviewing the facts. Not the case but I would like to hear Proskauer claim that either the Supreme Court of Florida or the United Supreme Court Case was decided in their favor in this matter. This is an untrue statement so I believe they will try to dance versus confront the fact that the case can still be filed and heard in court.
This case scares the Iviewit shareholders, as they were denied rights to file complaints against Supreme Court of Florida bar members who had violated public offices and the bar then refused complaints against those officers caught and verified in conflict by the bar. This means that public officers caught violating office and who have formal written complaints against them, can simply position within the bar to handle the complaints against themselves and refuse docketing of complaints against these matters, quite inapposite the Florida Constitution's intent on setting up a bar.
Bar complaints were filed against all of the following and were refused formal docketing by the bar: Matthew Triggs (violated a public office rule regarding representing anyone before the bar in a blackout period for officers of the bar, he represented Wheeler in such blackout period), Christopher Wheeler (intitial complaint was filed and never heard by Florida Bar so no victory for Proskauer) subsequent complaints were not docketed for formal procedures to take place, Anthony Boggs, Kelly Overstreet Johnson (she was President of Bar and handling the case matters against Wheeler and forgot to tell us she worked directly under Wheeler's brother, James Wheeler, at small real estate firm in Boca) and Eric Turner for violating internal rules of Flabar.
These complaints are of tantamount interest to citizens of the US as no legal power allows the bar to dismiss bar complaints filed by Iviewit shareholders against its members without formal docketing and disposition.
Reminiscent of communist Russia where complaints against public officials were dealt with by "off with your head." Yet this case behooves the question of just how high up this fiasco goes in the administration and within the legal system. Yet in all those bar complaints, including the original Wheeler, all handled by officers caught in conflict, Proskauer cannot say that any of them were heard or decided in their favor by a court of law for this is simply untrue and your review of the matters will so find.
4. In New York same game, different players, but with a big twist. At the same time we found the Florida Bar Proskauer conflicts, we found one in New York. Past President Steven C. Krane (former law clerk for Chief Judge of the New York courts Judith Kaye ), a Proskauer partner and former President of the New York State Bar Association had defended Kenneth Rubenstein his Proskauer partner in his bar complaint at the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division: First Department - Departmental Disciplinary Committee.
Krane while having conflicting posts and an officer of the First Department DDC handled this complaint filed by the Iviewit shareholders.
Krane also is the most prominent member of the disciplinary system in New York, including holding prominent posts at the First Department and he took the case while being excluded under his former position (prohibitions against representation for one year after being NYSBA President) and violation of his active roles at the First Department at the time the complaints were filed. Krane when discovered in conflict then even represented himself in his own complaint while holding positions at the First Department DDC, talk about a conflict, Iviewit Supreme Court Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 215 - Krane suicide note.
Note that Krane attempts to state that he is not conflicted because of his NYSBA role, which is false, but more importantly he fails to disclose his conflicts with his roles at the First Department, yet he was busted by Clerk of the First Department, Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, who disclosed after Krane's suicide note that she served on a First Department Disciplinary Committee with Krane and Cahill (chief counsel of First Dept DDC) and whereby Krane held a role, amongst others, as a referee.
This confession, led to further complaints agaisnt Krane and now against Cahill, for both had tried to cover up this most grand conflict and violation of Supreme Court of New York Disciplnart Department office violations. Prior to Wolfe's confession, Cahill had tried to defend Krane's representation of Rubenstein and himself, Cahill's inquiry is still under investigation by Martin Gold, Exhibit 237 and 323 and inquiry #2004.1122. Mr. Gold has never contacted us regarding the disposition of this inquiry and fails to return calls or letters, perhaps your journalistic efforts will get further with this public inquiry.
Before taking the defense of Rubenstein or himself, Krane failed to seek any waivers or conflict of interest checks from the Bar or First Department DDC and certainly there is cause for concern here. That concern led to a petition with the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division: First Department and after review by five justices, Rubenstein, Krane and Joao were ordered for formal IVESTIGATION by that court, see Iviewit Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 295.
The matters were transferred to the Second Department Disciplinary Committee who decided to try and dismiss the cases on review and skirt the court ordered investigation. Upon recieving a letter stating that Second Department was not investigating per the five justices court order, we found that the case worker at Second Department DDC had admitted conflicts with Steven Krane and we filed complaints against her.
These complaints were not formally docketed and disposed of in accordance with law, she denied to file complaints against herself, acting as chief counsel for that department. We took the matters to Lawrence DiGiovana the Chairman of Second Department DDC and he refused to file charges against chief counsel for failing to docket the complaints, and a complaint was filed against him. Also, and still under investigation, is a complaint against Thomas Cahill of the Chief Counsel of the First Department DDC for his involvement with Krane that caused the conflicts to go unchecked originally.
At that time, it was learned that Krane who clerked for Judith Kaye (and she is one of the most powerful members of the disciplinary committee)had far more conflict with this relation.
The reason, Judith Kaye whose office refused to even answer the calls after the mess began, although they did take submissions from Iviewit, was found to be married to a Proskauer partner Stephen Krane. Both Krane and Stephen Kaye are members of the newly formed Proskauer intellectual property department and this means from the Chief Judge down through all of the disciplinarydepartments they control, New York cannot hear the matters without bias and prejudice. As Krane, Rubenstein, Stephen Krane (and through marriage Judith Kaye) are all conflicted and in fact Iviewit shareholders, their interest should never have come near these complaints, but instead direct involvement is found.
Judith Kaye also has interest in defending her husband and former law clerk from facing these charges as they could end up serving lengthy federal sentences and total loss of assets, especially if a RICO is brought against Proskauer and those allegations have been made to the proper federal investigators of the matters and are being investigated formally.
Yet, you may ask what happened to the Court ordered investigations of Krane, Rubenstein and Joao, the answer is that they were railroaded by the Second Department DDC and Second Department who tried to dismiss them on review and avoid the formal court ordered investigation of five justices. This will now lead to the next 5 United States Supreme Court petitions to be filed by the Iviewit shareholders.
In New York it is futile to try and get the matters investigated as court ordered because the conflicts rise to the top, so we will beginpetitioning the Supreme Court shortly to force formal investigations and force the Bar to docket complaints against their members caught in the fiasco who refuse to file complaints against themselves.
Again, in New York the only court that has heard the matters has ruled for formal investigation to be completed that has never occured. Even at the Second Department Proskauer cannot claim that a court heard their case and ruled in their favor as this is patently false and I would love to see that in the press.
The Second Department tried to wiggle out with a dismissal on review but this means they never heard the case.
What is outrageous is that all of these lawyers accused fear the court room against one pro-se inventor, so they have to use every dirty legal trick to avoid the court, position in conflicts, abuse public offices, and then try to state that those are court room victories, how weak.
The letters they have from the Florida Bar and New York departments trying to say Proskauer was not patent counsel or the likes are worthless, all tendered by people in conflict who have evaded prosecution through clever court politicking and perhaps payola and the likes. Again, it behooves the question of just how high up in the administration and legal community this crime elevates. Further, they have not been cleared in a single formal investigation by state, federal and international authorities.
Ask Proskauer, if Eliot and Iviewit are wrong or liars, why are thier patents in suspension pending charges that Rubenstein and 8 others have committed fraud on the United States Patent & Trademark Offices. Why are all the other criminal investigations still underway? Why were you not able to win a decisive court room victory in the allegations of crimes (do not let them bore you trying to convince you the billing case they instituted vindicated them from federal, international or state crimes, those matters were never heard in that court).
Please address these issues with Proskauer. As to being told to take down a news story, it appears they fear the press and public disclosure.
I would consult a lawyer as to what they can do but I do not think they can do much other than try to get a court order to take it down. You are astute to note that if they have nothing to worry about...
Yet, they have a lot to worry about as again the truth being told will bring down the house and the crimes if prosecuted by the goverment are so voliminous as to cause federal prison sentences for all involved. They appear to be using the monies stolen from my technologies to buy off government seats, even within esteemed institutions such as Supreme Courts and state bars, to stave off the inevitable court room day where they have to face the evidences against them.
Kudos to them for holding it off this far, yet it has just entangled so many more people and now to hold off the justice department and other investigators or try to derail those, would take cabinet level officers at the Commerce Dept, the Patent Dept, the FBI, the DOJ and others and this would inevitably lead to a Patentgate for those in the administration and courts found to have violated thier public offices or laws. How high did it go is the question asked by Iviewit shareholders and others and until a conflict free court is found Iviewit does not wish to disclose information relating to the elements we are already aware of and our view of how high this goes.
It is interesting to note, the Florida billing case was judged by Jorge Labarga who is the Florida judge who threw the election of Gore v. Bush to the Supreme Court who decided quite unconstitutionally the President, instead of allowing for a recount of the bogus ballots.
The threads are deep, I do not want your life to be jeopardized, one look at my family's car blown up should scare you, knowing that the fire inspectors of FLorida have already determined incinary devices and accelarants to have been used. I was evicted from my house in Florida last year by a court, Labarga's courthouse, W. Palm Beach, where all of our rights were denied in yet another antict to destroy our ability to bring these matters to the public.
Yet, as you have probably read at our site, I fear no evil and so I pursue with all the others who wait for the truth to be told and our inventions returned. Have you called Crossbow Ventures for their story and what has happened after their meetings with the Inspector General of the Small Business Administration.
r
I would love to see the letters Proskauer sent to both you and Erik.
Best regards ~ Eliot "
r
Source of this Post
http://patentgate.blogspot.com/
r
First thank you and I am sorry that writing a news story has put you in the middle of Patentgate but the name should give some warning as to just how big of a story is unfolding and just how frightened the law firms are of public awareness of the story. The others copied were shareholders and friends. First, I have published only the actual news story from your site at my blog, I will not publish further without permission of yours but that was already a published article.
1. No court has decided in Proskauer's favor any of the allegations, as no court has heard the case or tried the criminal aspects of any of the petitions filed by Iviewit. The courts having denied the Iviewit petitions clearly serve as NO victory to either side. The bar complaints in Florida and New York were never prosecuted or heard by the bars and were dismissed on review, again clearly no victory.
In fact, in Florida and New York, at the bars and disciplinary departments, Proskauer partners were found violating state Supreme Court bar positions and these allegations have been filed against the partners but have been refused to be heard by the courts. Again, clearly no legal victory for Proskauer, just a delay to a ticking bomb.
2. The only court case I am aware of is the Proskauer instigated billing case against Iviewit in Florida. It is now learned that the companies sued have stolen intellectual properties in them and were identically named to Iviewit entities, this was part of the original attempt to steal the inventions.
Proskauer did all the corporation set up work and controlled the patent work, thereby the ones that are responsible for the corporate and patent scheme and artifices to defraud shareholders found in this case.
The billing case was a fiasco for Proskauer from the start, in fact, until senior management at AOLTW/WB were doing due-dilligence for a twenty five million dollar investment in Iviewit, Iviewit was not even aware that it was in litigation with anyone. How might this be you ask, the answer is simple, Proskauer had sued companies that looked and smelled like Iviewit companies, but they were duplicate companies whereby stolen IP was being funnelled out the door.
Imagine the company's surprise when AOLTW/WB notified the company at an investment meeting that we were in a lawsuit with our former attorneys, Proskauer and Proskauer's former management hires had filed an involuntary bankruptcy on us.
The reason I say former was because weeks before learning of these legal actions Proskauer and their management were fired by the Board because it appeared that bogus companies and patents existed and we were just finding the beginnings of the evidence at the time.
At that time that the company learned of this from AOLTW/WB I had fled Florida where the corporate HQ was for Iviewit, because upon firing Brain Utley, he flew to California and threatened me with my life if I told anyone about the patents we were finding in his name. The problem was that I had already notified certain investors, shareholders and authorities of the crimes.
That night, I called my wife in Florida and told her to pack our home and children, leave our stuff behind and flee Florida. A few days later that is what she did, we took residency at the St. Regis hotel in LA, then the Luxor, then a house in LA, then a house in Escondido, then back to Florida for the billing case, then out of Florida when the car was blown up to California.
We have been on the run for our lives since that day, waiting to get these matters into court, a fair court, but that has proven difficult as these law firms have positioned to block us through conflicts and violations of public office and downright violating the law as if it did not exist.
Whilst we hid in California we prepared our case for the Florida billing case. The first thing the company did was to meet with the lawyers who had been representing the supposed Iviewit companies in the lawsuit and bankruptcy. We then fired them and replaced them with counsel, Steven Selz, Esq. and Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq. who helped try and put together a counter complaint that would bring to the court the crimes that at the time were known. At that time we did not know a fraction of the crimes committed.
The judge would not let the case expose the criminal elements and after denying a counter complaint that contained the allegations, the judge limited the case to only billing issues. The judge ignored the fact that Proskauer did not have any bills or retainer with the companies they sued. In fact, at that time it appeared that in the billing case and the involuntary bk that the companies sued had no obligations to either Proskauer or their former management in the bk.
In the two cases the parties appeared to have no claims against the companies they sued. At the time, we thought they were merely stupid and filed against the wrong companies. At the time we did not know that two sets of identical companies had been formed and that two sets of nearly identical patent applications had been filed.
Back to the billing court room where upon dismissing the counter complaint containing the allegations of fraud including fraud on the United States Patent & Trademark Office and foreign nations, the judge dismissed two law firms (Steven Selz, Esq. and Schiffren & Barroway) who were representing Iviewit, on the eve of trial (this was after a trial had been scheduled and then cancelled without notice to Iviewit or our counsel).
The first trial would have inevitably brought the matters into court whether the judge tried to exculpate Proskauer by limiting it to a billing case and certain false and perjured statements of Rubenstein and Wheeler in their depositions would have been fair game for trial.
At the re-scheduling hearing both counsels for Iviewit submitted requests from the judge requesting to be relieved as counsel stating the other would be representing us at the trial. Selz, who had been representing the case for almost two years was asked in writing by Schiffrin and Barroway to step down as they had signed and Letter of Understanding with Iviewit to represent us in all court cases and to infuse Iviewit with two million dollars of cash, this document can be found at the iviewit site under the Supreme Court link on the left navigation bar, under the Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 130, and ruled a default judgement for Iviewi's failure in 15 days to obtain replacement counsel.
Iviewit's rights to counsel denied, Iviewit's access to the court shutdown and further Selz disappeared for weeks with all the files for appeal and Schiffrin & Barroway defaulted on their signed LOU, also trying to hijack the Iviewit case files, to prevent appeal, it was obvious that Schiffrin & Barroway were planted to derail the case and with Judge Labarga this is exactly what unfolded.
Again, this case was limited to billing issues and it was not until almost two years later that the companies sued were found to be illegal mirror companies with stolen patents in Brian Utley's name. We learned this information from the patent office, who reviewed Iviewit attorney intellectual property documents from the law firms, including Proskauer, that had falsified inventors, owners and assignees on them.
Immediately the Patent Office OED Director Harry I. Moatz began formal investigation of the attorneys and began to aid Iviewit in getting their patents into suspensions by petitioning the Commissioner of Patents that Fraud on the United States Patent Office had occured. Those investigations remains ongoing.
3. The only victories, if you can call them that, that Proskauer may want to inform you of, are at the state bars in New York and Florida. Yet victory may not be the word, conflict of interest and violation of public offices, are the correct words.
In both state bars, Proskauer partners were found after several years, to be handling bar complaints against their partners while holding Supreme Court Bar Associations positions that conflicted with their personal involvement in the matters. Upon finding these conflicts, in Florida the matter was brought to the Supreme Court of Florida who began to review the case and when they found that the conflicts elevated to the President of Flabar and other inside employees they simply denied to hear the case and matters against Proskauer and their partners caught violating their public offices.
A way out of the mess that would have caused considerable embarrasement to the Florida Supreme Court so they just denied to hear it, yet again this is a no win for either side. It is strange the court took this course but the Florida Supreme Court appears conflicted with Florida Bar as it is directly under their control and a part of the Supreme Court.
This may be the single greatest threat to the institution of law and all good lawyers, to have a self regulating attorney controlled bar that can be infiltrated by guilty lawyers who handle the complaints against themselves and their firms. Even once caught in conflict and violation these attorneys if they gain control of the highest positions at the bar can then simply deny to accept complaints against those caught violating public office including themselves.
In fact, legal counsel for Florida Bar, John Anthony Boggs, writes in a a letter, (Iviewit Supreme Court Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 265) that although Triggs was in violation of his office post with the Supreme Court of Florida - Florida Bar post, that is could have, would have been ok had he at the time filed a conflict waiver, which he failed to do. Should of, could have, would have, are baseless arguements, and then to clinch it, Boggs sites a reference to proposed law, instead of the law, thinking we and you would be foolish enough to rely on his citing of proposed law which was not enacted at that time. It appears Boggs may have been the officer writing the proposed legislation and changes to bar law.
Was Boggs' authoring such law in attempt to exculpate bar members like Triggs, I will leave this to your interpretation. When this is then brought to the state Supreme Court of Florida, who has liability for the bar officers and the Florida Bar officers, a total miscarriage of justice can and did occur in these matters, whereby the court simply denied a citizens complaints by denying the public a chance to have the bar members prosecuted. An attorney protection agency is thereby devised, not a consumer friendly organization, as our experiences with these attorney country clubs show.
Just how high in the courts and administration did Proskauer and the other law firms plant. How high does Patentgate go?
This refusal of the bar of Florida and the Supreme Court of Florida to accept complaints against their officers in violation of public office led to Iviewit filing a petition with the Supreme Court of the United States to force Florida to prosecute those caught in verified conflicts of interest.
The Supreme Court denied the petition, again the case was not heard and obviously Proskauer cannot claim that as court victory as the case was not heard, again a victory for neither side. None of this is a court victory, obviously that would take a court to hear the matters and then decide after reviewing the facts. Not the case but I would like to hear Proskauer claim that either the Supreme Court of Florida or the United Supreme Court Case was decided in their favor in this matter. This is an untrue statement so I believe they will try to dance versus confront the fact that the case can still be filed and heard in court.
This case scares the Iviewit shareholders, as they were denied rights to file complaints against Supreme Court of Florida bar members who had violated public offices and the bar then refused complaints against those officers caught and verified in conflict by the bar. This means that public officers caught violating office and who have formal written complaints against them, can simply position within the bar to handle the complaints against themselves and refuse docketing of complaints against these matters, quite inapposite the Florida Constitution's intent on setting up a bar.
Bar complaints were filed against all of the following and were refused formal docketing by the bar: Matthew Triggs (violated a public office rule regarding representing anyone before the bar in a blackout period for officers of the bar, he represented Wheeler in such blackout period), Christopher Wheeler (intitial complaint was filed and never heard by Florida Bar so no victory for Proskauer) subsequent complaints were not docketed for formal procedures to take place, Anthony Boggs, Kelly Overstreet Johnson (she was President of Bar and handling the case matters against Wheeler and forgot to tell us she worked directly under Wheeler's brother, James Wheeler, at small real estate firm in Boca) and Eric Turner for violating internal rules of Flabar.
These complaints are of tantamount interest to citizens of the US as no legal power allows the bar to dismiss bar complaints filed by Iviewit shareholders against its members without formal docketing and disposition.
Reminiscent of communist Russia where complaints against public officials were dealt with by "off with your head." Yet this case behooves the question of just how high up this fiasco goes in the administration and within the legal system. Yet in all those bar complaints, including the original Wheeler, all handled by officers caught in conflict, Proskauer cannot say that any of them were heard or decided in their favor by a court of law for this is simply untrue and your review of the matters will so find.
4. In New York same game, different players, but with a big twist. At the same time we found the Florida Bar Proskauer conflicts, we found one in New York. Past President Steven C. Krane (former law clerk for Chief Judge of the New York courts Judith Kaye ), a Proskauer partner and former President of the New York State Bar Association had defended Kenneth Rubenstein his Proskauer partner in his bar complaint at the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division: First Department - Departmental Disciplinary Committee.
Krane while having conflicting posts and an officer of the First Department DDC handled this complaint filed by the Iviewit shareholders.
Krane also is the most prominent member of the disciplinary system in New York, including holding prominent posts at the First Department and he took the case while being excluded under his former position (prohibitions against representation for one year after being NYSBA President) and violation of his active roles at the First Department at the time the complaints were filed. Krane when discovered in conflict then even represented himself in his own complaint while holding positions at the First Department DDC, talk about a conflict, Iviewit Supreme Court Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 215 - Krane suicide note.
Note that Krane attempts to state that he is not conflicted because of his NYSBA role, which is false, but more importantly he fails to disclose his conflicts with his roles at the First Department, yet he was busted by Clerk of the First Department, Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, who disclosed after Krane's suicide note that she served on a First Department Disciplinary Committee with Krane and Cahill (chief counsel of First Dept DDC) and whereby Krane held a role, amongst others, as a referee.
This confession, led to further complaints agaisnt Krane and now against Cahill, for both had tried to cover up this most grand conflict and violation of Supreme Court of New York Disciplnart Department office violations. Prior to Wolfe's confession, Cahill had tried to defend Krane's representation of Rubenstein and himself, Cahill's inquiry is still under investigation by Martin Gold, Exhibit 237 and 323 and inquiry #2004.1122. Mr. Gold has never contacted us regarding the disposition of this inquiry and fails to return calls or letters, perhaps your journalistic efforts will get further with this public inquiry.
Before taking the defense of Rubenstein or himself, Krane failed to seek any waivers or conflict of interest checks from the Bar or First Department DDC and certainly there is cause for concern here. That concern led to a petition with the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division: First Department and after review by five justices, Rubenstein, Krane and Joao were ordered for formal IVESTIGATION by that court, see Iviewit Exhibit Gallery, Exhibit 295.
The matters were transferred to the Second Department Disciplinary Committee who decided to try and dismiss the cases on review and skirt the court ordered investigation. Upon recieving a letter stating that Second Department was not investigating per the five justices court order, we found that the case worker at Second Department DDC had admitted conflicts with Steven Krane and we filed complaints against her.
These complaints were not formally docketed and disposed of in accordance with law, she denied to file complaints against herself, acting as chief counsel for that department. We took the matters to Lawrence DiGiovana the Chairman of Second Department DDC and he refused to file charges against chief counsel for failing to docket the complaints, and a complaint was filed against him. Also, and still under investigation, is a complaint against Thomas Cahill of the Chief Counsel of the First Department DDC for his involvement with Krane that caused the conflicts to go unchecked originally.
At that time, it was learned that Krane who clerked for Judith Kaye (and she is one of the most powerful members of the disciplinary committee)had far more conflict with this relation.
The reason, Judith Kaye whose office refused to even answer the calls after the mess began, although they did take submissions from Iviewit, was found to be married to a Proskauer partner Stephen Krane. Both Krane and Stephen Kaye are members of the newly formed Proskauer intellectual property department and this means from the Chief Judge down through all of the disciplinarydepartments they control, New York cannot hear the matters without bias and prejudice. As Krane, Rubenstein, Stephen Krane (and through marriage Judith Kaye) are all conflicted and in fact Iviewit shareholders, their interest should never have come near these complaints, but instead direct involvement is found.
Judith Kaye also has interest in defending her husband and former law clerk from facing these charges as they could end up serving lengthy federal sentences and total loss of assets, especially if a RICO is brought against Proskauer and those allegations have been made to the proper federal investigators of the matters and are being investigated formally.
Yet, you may ask what happened to the Court ordered investigations of Krane, Rubenstein and Joao, the answer is that they were railroaded by the Second Department DDC and Second Department who tried to dismiss them on review and avoid the formal court ordered investigation of five justices. This will now lead to the next 5 United States Supreme Court petitions to be filed by the Iviewit shareholders.
In New York it is futile to try and get the matters investigated as court ordered because the conflicts rise to the top, so we will beginpetitioning the Supreme Court shortly to force formal investigations and force the Bar to docket complaints against their members caught in the fiasco who refuse to file complaints against themselves.
Again, in New York the only court that has heard the matters has ruled for formal investigation to be completed that has never occured. Even at the Second Department Proskauer cannot claim that a court heard their case and ruled in their favor as this is patently false and I would love to see that in the press.
The Second Department tried to wiggle out with a dismissal on review but this means they never heard the case.
What is outrageous is that all of these lawyers accused fear the court room against one pro-se inventor, so they have to use every dirty legal trick to avoid the court, position in conflicts, abuse public offices, and then try to state that those are court room victories, how weak.
The letters they have from the Florida Bar and New York departments trying to say Proskauer was not patent counsel or the likes are worthless, all tendered by people in conflict who have evaded prosecution through clever court politicking and perhaps payola and the likes. Again, it behooves the question of just how high up in the administration and legal community this crime elevates. Further, they have not been cleared in a single formal investigation by state, federal and international authorities.
Ask Proskauer, if Eliot and Iviewit are wrong or liars, why are thier patents in suspension pending charges that Rubenstein and 8 others have committed fraud on the United States Patent & Trademark Offices. Why are all the other criminal investigations still underway? Why were you not able to win a decisive court room victory in the allegations of crimes (do not let them bore you trying to convince you the billing case they instituted vindicated them from federal, international or state crimes, those matters were never heard in that court).
Please address these issues with Proskauer. As to being told to take down a news story, it appears they fear the press and public disclosure.
I would consult a lawyer as to what they can do but I do not think they can do much other than try to get a court order to take it down. You are astute to note that if they have nothing to worry about...
Yet, they have a lot to worry about as again the truth being told will bring down the house and the crimes if prosecuted by the goverment are so voliminous as to cause federal prison sentences for all involved. They appear to be using the monies stolen from my technologies to buy off government seats, even within esteemed institutions such as Supreme Courts and state bars, to stave off the inevitable court room day where they have to face the evidences against them.
Kudos to them for holding it off this far, yet it has just entangled so many more people and now to hold off the justice department and other investigators or try to derail those, would take cabinet level officers at the Commerce Dept, the Patent Dept, the FBI, the DOJ and others and this would inevitably lead to a Patentgate for those in the administration and courts found to have violated thier public offices or laws. How high did it go is the question asked by Iviewit shareholders and others and until a conflict free court is found Iviewit does not wish to disclose information relating to the elements we are already aware of and our view of how high this goes.
It is interesting to note, the Florida billing case was judged by Jorge Labarga who is the Florida judge who threw the election of Gore v. Bush to the Supreme Court who decided quite unconstitutionally the President, instead of allowing for a recount of the bogus ballots.
The threads are deep, I do not want your life to be jeopardized, one look at my family's car blown up should scare you, knowing that the fire inspectors of FLorida have already determined incinary devices and accelarants to have been used. I was evicted from my house in Florida last year by a court, Labarga's courthouse, W. Palm Beach, where all of our rights were denied in yet another antict to destroy our ability to bring these matters to the public.
Yet, as you have probably read at our site, I fear no evil and so I pursue with all the others who wait for the truth to be told and our inventions returned. Have you called Crossbow Ventures for their story and what has happened after their meetings with the Inspector General of the Small Business Administration.
r
I would love to see the letters Proskauer sent to both you and Erik.
Best regards ~ Eliot "
r
Source of this Post
http://patentgate.blogspot.com/
r
More on this Story at
r
MPEG - Proskauer Stealing Inventions - A fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Eliot I. Bernstein
"MPEG - Proskauer Stealing Inventions - A fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Eliot I. Bernstein on Sunday, January 22nd, 2006 @ 09:21PM www.iviewit.tv My name is Eliot Bernstein and I am one of the inventors of the Iviewit inventions.
Many of the quotes here are from me and the proof for many of these claims can be found at the www.iviewit.tv website. Simply go to left navigation bar and click on the Supreme Court button and then click on either Appendix C or Exhibit Gallery.
Although voluminous in size, the exhibits are chalk full of evidence and information regarding the ongoing investigations. Also, much can be learned at the Iviewit blog at http://patentgate.blogspot.com .
In response to this post, Rubenstein and Proskauer took invention disclosures from Iviewit inventors and patented those concepts into their management referral, Brian Utley's name. Rubenstein also contracted Raymond Joao at the law firm Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolfe & Schlissel to file the applications, while Rubenstein and Proskauer handled all of the other intellectual property work, including Rubenstein acting as a board member and opining to many investors on the inventions.
Joao worked at the law firm that Kenneth Rubenstein was at immediately prior to his learning of theIviewit inventions, MLGWS and then after learning of the inventions,Rubenstein instantly jumped to Proskauer, a firm that had no other intellectual property department to speak of and had been a real estate firm since the 1800's.
Proskauer Rose had already been retained and began work for Iviewit prior to Rubenstein leaving Meltzer. In fact, Kenneth Rubenstein and Joao were initially represented as Proskauer attorneys, although they were still at Meltzer. Joao filed patents into his own name while retained by Iviewit to file patents as Rubenstein’s lackey. Joao’s patents contained many of the ideas he and Kenneth Rubenstein learned from the Iviewit inventors, the disclosures and business plans of Iviewit.
It is absurd to think that a patent attorney could file any patents in his name without a thorough conflict waiver from all clients and approval from the patent bar. History has never had a case where the patent attorney ran out and filed a blizzard of patents all crossing into his clients patent applications. Joao was also part of an elaborate scheme to move the patents out ofIviewit and into companies that Proskauer set up that had similar and identical names to the Iviewit companies.
Yet, the shareholder of those companies appears to be Proskauer and others, not the true Iviewit shareholders or inventors.
Iviewit shareholders, including the SBA were totally unaware that these similar companies had been set up and unawarethat that similar patents were being filed into these companies with the false inventor BrianUtley, false owners and assignees.
Joao was discovered patenting ideas into his name and other dubious behavior and he was fired for his actions. Proskauer and Utley referred William Dick of Foley and Lardner to replace Joao, Utley stated that Dick was the IBM Far East patent attorney and his very close personal friend.
The original Proskauer attorney, Christopher Clarke Wheeler, Esq. (recently arrested in Del Ray Beach, FL for DUI with bodily injury) failed to disclose that he, Utley and Dick were involved in intellectual property crimes from Utley's former employ, Diamond Turf Equipment owned by Monte Freidkin of Boca Raton.
Friedkin discovered that patents were walking out the door to Utley's sole (souless) name and fired him. It was not learned until Wheeler and Utley's deposition and Dick's response to the Virginia Bar that the three of them had been involved in the crime.
Wheeler set up the company, Dick wrote the patents from Utley's employer secretly into Utley's name at home and Utley got in and stole the inventions from his employer.
This is the same type of scam that they instituted on Iviewit and again appear to be failing achieving their ends. Dick was Joao's replacement and since it was never disclosed by any of them, the fact of their prior past patent theft attempt, Iviewit was dumbfounded to find this prior history out after learning they were stealing Iviewit inventions.
Moreover, Wheeler and Proskauer submitted a resume on Utley that claimed that Diamond Turf went on to be a huge success do to Utley's inventions, when the truth was that the company was instantly closed by Friedkin after he found Utley stealing from his company while acting as the President of Friedkin’s company.
Utley failed to disclose this, Wheeler and Proskauer never disclosed this when Iviewit retained them and Dick and Foley failed to inform us of Dick's past with this group.
This is a criminal organization of patent thieves, they have a history and they are a danger to inventors, good lawyers everywhere and the United States and foreign countries patent systems.
I am not against patent attorneys filing patents as long as there is a hefty review by the patent department or the USTPO OED, to investigate if those attorney inventions lay claim on any client inventions they may have represented or as in our case misrepresented.
It is very dangerous for patent attorneys to be patenting inventions for themselves while representing client interests, and the obvious collusion amongst patent attorneys to work together to steal each others clients inventions remains a gaping hole.
Yet these guys filed false oaths on applications in others names for inventions they learned while retained by the Iviewit inventors,no excuse can be had for this, this is plain theft, fraud on the patent office, fraud on the Iviewit inventors, the Iviewit shareholders and all the EPO foreign offices and the history of the world and invention.
This is not even close to a patent attorney having a novel idea (although that seems far fetched as attorneys are not typically inventive) and then patenting it in his name with no client involved. Joao has stated that some of his inventions were prior to ours and that Iviewit was in fact infringing on his inventions (he claimed this to the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee), yet Joao failed to seek waivers or disclose this in writing or verbally to anyone seems absurd.
I find it further disgusting that MPEG patent inclusion is controlled by a single person, Kenneth Rubenstein, where the temptation is all to obvious.
Patent pooling schemes have been killed historically by the Justice Department for the very reasons that Iviewit complains of, anti-competitive monopolistic practices that violate Sherman and Clayton and almost every antitrust practice. Patent pooling schemes created by lawyers to make money as middlemen also seems to violate ethics.
For instance, how canProskauer and Rubenstein profit from MPEG as counsel for MPEG (as Rubenstein discloses in his deposition at the Iviewit Exhibit gallery) and at the same time take invention disclosure as inventors counsel under Proskauer for review when the patent concepts could completely render MPEG useless, as the Iviewit inventions do, destroying Rubenstein and now PRoskauers pooling schemes?
How can Rubenstein review Iviewit patents for MPEG and at the same time give Iviewit unbiased advice on their patents or control their fate by inclusion or exclusion, while Proskauer and Rubenstein are direct benefactors of the MPEGLA pool profits?
The conflict is as wide as the Grand Canyon, no China Wall, in fact an open door for crime to occur, crimes that violate Article 1, Section 8,Clause 8 inventor protections by those entrusted to protect those rights as part of the patent bar. The obvious is happening here, MPEG andProskauer have found a way to review patents as patent counsel and then steal them as patent poolers looking to profit from others inventions.
The first complaint that was filed at the patent office was in an invention format as a joke, not a joke to laugh at, it was appropriately titled, "System and Method for Committing Fraud on the United States Patent & Trademark Office and the Iviewit Inventors". I wonder if the patent department will approve it? lol... This is the only thing that Joao, Proskauer Rose, Kenneth Rubenstein, Dick, Foley and Lardner, Brian Utley and others accused, ever invented.
Please feel free to contact me for further information or an interview.
w
Eliot I. Bernstein
InventorIviewit Technologies, Inc.
iviewit@iviewit.tv
www.iviewit.tv
http://patentgate.blogspot.com "
r
Source of Post
http://patentgate.blogspot.com/
r
Many of the quotes here are from me and the proof for many of these claims can be found at the www.iviewit.tv website. Simply go to left navigation bar and click on the Supreme Court button and then click on either Appendix C or Exhibit Gallery.
Although voluminous in size, the exhibits are chalk full of evidence and information regarding the ongoing investigations. Also, much can be learned at the Iviewit blog at http://patentgate.blogspot.com .
In response to this post, Rubenstein and Proskauer took invention disclosures from Iviewit inventors and patented those concepts into their management referral, Brian Utley's name. Rubenstein also contracted Raymond Joao at the law firm Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolfe & Schlissel to file the applications, while Rubenstein and Proskauer handled all of the other intellectual property work, including Rubenstein acting as a board member and opining to many investors on the inventions.
Joao worked at the law firm that Kenneth Rubenstein was at immediately prior to his learning of theIviewit inventions, MLGWS and then after learning of the inventions,Rubenstein instantly jumped to Proskauer, a firm that had no other intellectual property department to speak of and had been a real estate firm since the 1800's.
Proskauer Rose had already been retained and began work for Iviewit prior to Rubenstein leaving Meltzer. In fact, Kenneth Rubenstein and Joao were initially represented as Proskauer attorneys, although they were still at Meltzer. Joao filed patents into his own name while retained by Iviewit to file patents as Rubenstein’s lackey. Joao’s patents contained many of the ideas he and Kenneth Rubenstein learned from the Iviewit inventors, the disclosures and business plans of Iviewit.
It is absurd to think that a patent attorney could file any patents in his name without a thorough conflict waiver from all clients and approval from the patent bar. History has never had a case where the patent attorney ran out and filed a blizzard of patents all crossing into his clients patent applications. Joao was also part of an elaborate scheme to move the patents out ofIviewit and into companies that Proskauer set up that had similar and identical names to the Iviewit companies.
Yet, the shareholder of those companies appears to be Proskauer and others, not the true Iviewit shareholders or inventors.
Iviewit shareholders, including the SBA were totally unaware that these similar companies had been set up and unawarethat that similar patents were being filed into these companies with the false inventor BrianUtley, false owners and assignees.
Joao was discovered patenting ideas into his name and other dubious behavior and he was fired for his actions. Proskauer and Utley referred William Dick of Foley and Lardner to replace Joao, Utley stated that Dick was the IBM Far East patent attorney and his very close personal friend.
The original Proskauer attorney, Christopher Clarke Wheeler, Esq. (recently arrested in Del Ray Beach, FL for DUI with bodily injury) failed to disclose that he, Utley and Dick were involved in intellectual property crimes from Utley's former employ, Diamond Turf Equipment owned by Monte Freidkin of Boca Raton.
Friedkin discovered that patents were walking out the door to Utley's sole (souless) name and fired him. It was not learned until Wheeler and Utley's deposition and Dick's response to the Virginia Bar that the three of them had been involved in the crime.
Wheeler set up the company, Dick wrote the patents from Utley's employer secretly into Utley's name at home and Utley got in and stole the inventions from his employer.
This is the same type of scam that they instituted on Iviewit and again appear to be failing achieving their ends. Dick was Joao's replacement and since it was never disclosed by any of them, the fact of their prior past patent theft attempt, Iviewit was dumbfounded to find this prior history out after learning they were stealing Iviewit inventions.
Moreover, Wheeler and Proskauer submitted a resume on Utley that claimed that Diamond Turf went on to be a huge success do to Utley's inventions, when the truth was that the company was instantly closed by Friedkin after he found Utley stealing from his company while acting as the President of Friedkin’s company.
Utley failed to disclose this, Wheeler and Proskauer never disclosed this when Iviewit retained them and Dick and Foley failed to inform us of Dick's past with this group.
This is a criminal organization of patent thieves, they have a history and they are a danger to inventors, good lawyers everywhere and the United States and foreign countries patent systems.
I am not against patent attorneys filing patents as long as there is a hefty review by the patent department or the USTPO OED, to investigate if those attorney inventions lay claim on any client inventions they may have represented or as in our case misrepresented.
It is very dangerous for patent attorneys to be patenting inventions for themselves while representing client interests, and the obvious collusion amongst patent attorneys to work together to steal each others clients inventions remains a gaping hole.
Yet these guys filed false oaths on applications in others names for inventions they learned while retained by the Iviewit inventors,no excuse can be had for this, this is plain theft, fraud on the patent office, fraud on the Iviewit inventors, the Iviewit shareholders and all the EPO foreign offices and the history of the world and invention.
This is not even close to a patent attorney having a novel idea (although that seems far fetched as attorneys are not typically inventive) and then patenting it in his name with no client involved. Joao has stated that some of his inventions were prior to ours and that Iviewit was in fact infringing on his inventions (he claimed this to the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee), yet Joao failed to seek waivers or disclose this in writing or verbally to anyone seems absurd.
I find it further disgusting that MPEG patent inclusion is controlled by a single person, Kenneth Rubenstein, where the temptation is all to obvious.
Patent pooling schemes have been killed historically by the Justice Department for the very reasons that Iviewit complains of, anti-competitive monopolistic practices that violate Sherman and Clayton and almost every antitrust practice. Patent pooling schemes created by lawyers to make money as middlemen also seems to violate ethics.
For instance, how canProskauer and Rubenstein profit from MPEG as counsel for MPEG (as Rubenstein discloses in his deposition at the Iviewit Exhibit gallery) and at the same time take invention disclosure as inventors counsel under Proskauer for review when the patent concepts could completely render MPEG useless, as the Iviewit inventions do, destroying Rubenstein and now PRoskauers pooling schemes?
How can Rubenstein review Iviewit patents for MPEG and at the same time give Iviewit unbiased advice on their patents or control their fate by inclusion or exclusion, while Proskauer and Rubenstein are direct benefactors of the MPEGLA pool profits?
The conflict is as wide as the Grand Canyon, no China Wall, in fact an open door for crime to occur, crimes that violate Article 1, Section 8,Clause 8 inventor protections by those entrusted to protect those rights as part of the patent bar. The obvious is happening here, MPEG andProskauer have found a way to review patents as patent counsel and then steal them as patent poolers looking to profit from others inventions.
The first complaint that was filed at the patent office was in an invention format as a joke, not a joke to laugh at, it was appropriately titled, "System and Method for Committing Fraud on the United States Patent & Trademark Office and the Iviewit Inventors". I wonder if the patent department will approve it? lol... This is the only thing that Joao, Proskauer Rose, Kenneth Rubenstein, Dick, Foley and Lardner, Brian Utley and others accused, ever invented.
Please feel free to contact me for further information or an interview.
w
Eliot I. Bernstein
InventorIviewit Technologies, Inc.
iviewit@iviewit.tv
www.iviewit.tv
http://patentgate.blogspot.com "
r
Source of Post
http://patentgate.blogspot.com/
r
Investigating the TheUnited States Patent and Trademark Office - Iviewit Stolen Patent - Eliot Bernstein
"The United States Patent & Trademark Office - Office of Enrollment andDiscipline (OED) Director Harry I. Moatz is now investigating no less than 9 attorneys from several US law firms including Proskauer (main culprit) and Foley & Lardner for fraud upon the United States Patent Office in their signing false oaths on applications.
The attorney Raymond Joao who has the ninety patents in his name (sick) is one of those being investigated, as he was our attorney and was filing the patents for our inventions into his and other false inventors names.
The Commissioner of Patents for the USPTO has suspended several of Iviewit’s applications pending charges of fraud on the US. The FBI is investigating the matter with the USPTO and that is out of their W. Palm Beach office, SpecialAgent Stephen Luchessi. Internationally, the Institute of ProfessionalRepresentatives before the European Patent Office (epi) is now formally investigating the European attorneys involved in filing the foreign applications.
The true inventors were Eliot I. Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee and James F. Armstrong. The main culprit was our attorney, Kenneth Rubenstein who is in charge of the MPEGLA patent pool.
Rubenstein acting as counsel forMPEGLA and Iviewit, never protected the inventors and in fact, seeing that the Iviewit scaling imaging and video inventions trumped his MPEG technologies, decided to attempt to steal the patents with his firm Proskauer Rose, our former law firm. Proskauer and Rubenstein control theMPEG patent pool.
Several other investigations are also under way, including the Small Business Administration, the Inspector General of theSBA is looking into the misuse of SBA funds and the fact that the SBA is the largest investor in our technologies through SBA loans, also leaves them wondering why the inventors and owners of the technologies are falsified.
o
... The MPEG license and the licensor MPEGLA is an anticompetitive monopolistic patent pooling scheme that has misappropriated technology from Iviewit Technologies and therefore acts as a Racketeering and CorruptOrganization.
The primary patent reviewer for MPEG is Kenneth Rubensteinwho is currently under investigation by the United States Patent & Trademark Office for theft of intellectual properties from the Iviewit inventors, including Eliot Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee, James Armstrong, Matthew Mink and Patricia Daniels.
The law firm that Rubenstein works for, Proskauer Rose LLP, has acquired control of MPEG. Rubenstein and Proskauer Rose are under investigation by federal authorities for a host of federal, state and international crimes commissioned in the theft of the Iviewit intellectual properties. Proskauer and Rubenstein were patent counsel for the Iviewit inventors while they were controlling MPEG and acting as its counsel, they then stole the Iviewit technologies from the inventors the represented, bundled them into a anticompetitive pool, constituting a racketeering organization and have tried to consistently destroy Iviewit and inventor Eliot Bernstein and his family and friends.
Rubenstein’s former partner Raymond Anthony Joao, Esq., now has applied for ninety patents in his own name, (yes the patent attorney has patented the inventions in his own name, itshould not even be possible but…) many stolen directly from the inventions he and Rubenstein were supposed to patent for Iviewit.
Foley and Lardner and partners of their firm, including former IBM patent counsel William J. Dick are also involved in perpetrating the crimes against Iviewit and likewise are also federal, state and international investigations for their part in the attempted theft of their client Iviewits’ inventions.Foley and Lardner, a large intellectual property firm should also be regarded as a potential patent law firm involved in theft of patents from inventors. Members of Proskauer, Christopher Wheeler, Esq. and two formerIBM employees, William Dick and Brian Utley formerly had tried to steal inventions from another Florida company, Diamond Turf Equipment, which led to that company being forced out of business, costing the owner millions of dollars in losses.
It appears that many of the patent thieves have worked together in unison to steal other inventions and this should be a stark warning that coincidence is not an element but these are targeted attacks on inventors’ intellectual properties. As with most patent pooling schemes, this MPEG scheme created by Rubenstein and Proskauer to steal inventions from inventors will eventually be exposed and the Justice Departmetn will press charges for criminal actions.
How will our government then return the inventions to the true and proper inventors and close this hole in the system is still up in the air, so stay tuned forIviewit or Patentgate updates.
The Iviewit patents and trademarks have been suspended by the Commissionerof Patents at the United States Patent & Trademark Office and licenses taken for the scaling video and imaging patents paid to MPEG for stolen technologies may result in further licensing costs to those who take MPEG licenses for such technologies when the Iviewit patents are granted. Death threats and an attempted car bombing of inventor Bernstein have recently been executed and several more investigations have resulted.
Is MPEG LA a criminal organization stealing inventions from small inventors and then perpetrating crimes against the inventors to destroy them or put them outof business, it appears so. If you are submitting patents to MPEG and are a small inventor it would be wise to first visit the Iviewit site atwww.iviewit.tv or read of inventor Bernstein’s struggle to regain his technologies from MPEG and it’s accomplices at http://patentgate.blogspot.com .
Without the Iviewit scaling inventions MPEG technology licenses would be worthless, as without scaling technologies for video they would be limited in ability to create new age video for low and high bandwidth applications.
Digital camera’s and other technologies using scaled imaging may also be infringing upon the Iviewit inventions and many companies, including several Fortune 500 companies, have violated their confidentiality agreements with Iviewit.
The Iviewit inventions have been heralded worldwide by leading engineers as Holy Grail inventions that have revolutionized the digital imaging and video world.
If you are appalled by the crimes described at the Iviewit site, please feel free to leave your comments http://patentgate.blogspot.com or send an email to iviewit@iviewit.tv and we will publish your comments and concerns.
The theft is a federal offense and these crimes have constituted charges of fraud not only on Iviewit and the Iviewit shareholders but crimes against the United States and Foreign Nations.
The crimes could lead to a loss of faith in the United States Patent Office and the attorneys that are registered with the patent office to protect inventors. Such degradation of this most esteemed institution could lead inventors to seekprotection of their inventions in other countries. Imagine the United States losing inventions to other countries because inventors fear thatnot only will their inventions be stolen but criminal organizations such as MPEGLA operated by criminals such as Kenneth Rubenstein will then try to kill them for their inventions or destroy their lives and companies. This is truly the greatest patent story ever told and as American citizens we must, must, prevent this type of legal crime, committed by attorneys, to protect the Constitution.
The Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 specifically states that “Congress shall have the power To…promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
Without this right guaranteed to small inventors and further where the very system designed to protect such rights has become embroiled in the violation of such rights, we must demand full investigation of all threads of this crime and the criminal organization cloaked in law that have learned how to usurp this fundamental concept of democracy.
...Thank you ~ Inventor Eliot Bernstein and the Iviewit companies I close with a quip from Mark Twain who also believed strongly in the value of the patent system. In his book, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, Hank Morgan, the Connecticut Yankee, he said “…the very first official thing I did in my administration-and it was on the very first day of it too-was to start a patent office; for I knew that a country without a patent office and good patent laws was just a crab and couldn’t travel anyway but sideways and backwards."
r
More on the Stolen Patents of Eliot I. Bernstein and the IviewIt company
r
The attorney Raymond Joao who has the ninety patents in his name (sick) is one of those being investigated, as he was our attorney and was filing the patents for our inventions into his and other false inventors names.
The Commissioner of Patents for the USPTO has suspended several of Iviewit’s applications pending charges of fraud on the US. The FBI is investigating the matter with the USPTO and that is out of their W. Palm Beach office, SpecialAgent Stephen Luchessi. Internationally, the Institute of ProfessionalRepresentatives before the European Patent Office (epi) is now formally investigating the European attorneys involved in filing the foreign applications.
The true inventors were Eliot I. Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee and James F. Armstrong. The main culprit was our attorney, Kenneth Rubenstein who is in charge of the MPEGLA patent pool.
Rubenstein acting as counsel forMPEGLA and Iviewit, never protected the inventors and in fact, seeing that the Iviewit scaling imaging and video inventions trumped his MPEG technologies, decided to attempt to steal the patents with his firm Proskauer Rose, our former law firm. Proskauer and Rubenstein control theMPEG patent pool.
Several other investigations are also under way, including the Small Business Administration, the Inspector General of theSBA is looking into the misuse of SBA funds and the fact that the SBA is the largest investor in our technologies through SBA loans, also leaves them wondering why the inventors and owners of the technologies are falsified.
o
... The MPEG license and the licensor MPEGLA is an anticompetitive monopolistic patent pooling scheme that has misappropriated technology from Iviewit Technologies and therefore acts as a Racketeering and CorruptOrganization.
The primary patent reviewer for MPEG is Kenneth Rubensteinwho is currently under investigation by the United States Patent & Trademark Office for theft of intellectual properties from the Iviewit inventors, including Eliot Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee, James Armstrong, Matthew Mink and Patricia Daniels.
The law firm that Rubenstein works for, Proskauer Rose LLP, has acquired control of MPEG. Rubenstein and Proskauer Rose are under investigation by federal authorities for a host of federal, state and international crimes commissioned in the theft of the Iviewit intellectual properties. Proskauer and Rubenstein were patent counsel for the Iviewit inventors while they were controlling MPEG and acting as its counsel, they then stole the Iviewit technologies from the inventors the represented, bundled them into a anticompetitive pool, constituting a racketeering organization and have tried to consistently destroy Iviewit and inventor Eliot Bernstein and his family and friends.
Rubenstein’s former partner Raymond Anthony Joao, Esq., now has applied for ninety patents in his own name, (yes the patent attorney has patented the inventions in his own name, itshould not even be possible but…) many stolen directly from the inventions he and Rubenstein were supposed to patent for Iviewit.
Foley and Lardner and partners of their firm, including former IBM patent counsel William J. Dick are also involved in perpetrating the crimes against Iviewit and likewise are also federal, state and international investigations for their part in the attempted theft of their client Iviewits’ inventions.Foley and Lardner, a large intellectual property firm should also be regarded as a potential patent law firm involved in theft of patents from inventors. Members of Proskauer, Christopher Wheeler, Esq. and two formerIBM employees, William Dick and Brian Utley formerly had tried to steal inventions from another Florida company, Diamond Turf Equipment, which led to that company being forced out of business, costing the owner millions of dollars in losses.
It appears that many of the patent thieves have worked together in unison to steal other inventions and this should be a stark warning that coincidence is not an element but these are targeted attacks on inventors’ intellectual properties. As with most patent pooling schemes, this MPEG scheme created by Rubenstein and Proskauer to steal inventions from inventors will eventually be exposed and the Justice Departmetn will press charges for criminal actions.
How will our government then return the inventions to the true and proper inventors and close this hole in the system is still up in the air, so stay tuned forIviewit or Patentgate updates.
The Iviewit patents and trademarks have been suspended by the Commissionerof Patents at the United States Patent & Trademark Office and licenses taken for the scaling video and imaging patents paid to MPEG for stolen technologies may result in further licensing costs to those who take MPEG licenses for such technologies when the Iviewit patents are granted. Death threats and an attempted car bombing of inventor Bernstein have recently been executed and several more investigations have resulted.
Is MPEG LA a criminal organization stealing inventions from small inventors and then perpetrating crimes against the inventors to destroy them or put them outof business, it appears so. If you are submitting patents to MPEG and are a small inventor it would be wise to first visit the Iviewit site atwww.iviewit.tv or read of inventor Bernstein’s struggle to regain his technologies from MPEG and it’s accomplices at http://patentgate.blogspot.com .
Without the Iviewit scaling inventions MPEG technology licenses would be worthless, as without scaling technologies for video they would be limited in ability to create new age video for low and high bandwidth applications.
Digital camera’s and other technologies using scaled imaging may also be infringing upon the Iviewit inventions and many companies, including several Fortune 500 companies, have violated their confidentiality agreements with Iviewit.
The Iviewit inventions have been heralded worldwide by leading engineers as Holy Grail inventions that have revolutionized the digital imaging and video world.
If you are appalled by the crimes described at the Iviewit site, please feel free to leave your comments http://patentgate.blogspot.com or send an email to iviewit@iviewit.tv and we will publish your comments and concerns.
The theft is a federal offense and these crimes have constituted charges of fraud not only on Iviewit and the Iviewit shareholders but crimes against the United States and Foreign Nations.
The crimes could lead to a loss of faith in the United States Patent Office and the attorneys that are registered with the patent office to protect inventors. Such degradation of this most esteemed institution could lead inventors to seekprotection of their inventions in other countries. Imagine the United States losing inventions to other countries because inventors fear thatnot only will their inventions be stolen but criminal organizations such as MPEGLA operated by criminals such as Kenneth Rubenstein will then try to kill them for their inventions or destroy their lives and companies. This is truly the greatest patent story ever told and as American citizens we must, must, prevent this type of legal crime, committed by attorneys, to protect the Constitution.
The Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 specifically states that “Congress shall have the power To…promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
Without this right guaranteed to small inventors and further where the very system designed to protect such rights has become embroiled in the violation of such rights, we must demand full investigation of all threads of this crime and the criminal organization cloaked in law that have learned how to usurp this fundamental concept of democracy.
...Thank you ~ Inventor Eliot Bernstein and the Iviewit companies I close with a quip from Mark Twain who also believed strongly in the value of the patent system. In his book, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, Hank Morgan, the Connecticut Yankee, he said “…the very first official thing I did in my administration-and it was on the very first day of it too-was to start a patent office; for I knew that a country without a patent office and good patent laws was just a crab and couldn’t travel anyway but sideways and backwards."
r
More on the Stolen Patents of Eliot I. Bernstein and the IviewIt company
r
www.DeniedPatent.com r
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
RSS Feed (xml)
