Showing posts with label Raymond Joao. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Raymond Joao. Show all posts

Thursday, December 29, 2011

What Does Joseph Leccese at Proskauer Rose Law Firm have to say about Raymond Joao and connections to Proskauer Rose over the Iviewit Scandal ? Joseph Leccese


2004 09 07 Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s, Chief Counsel, Thomas Cahill’s cover letter transferring the complaints of Steven C. Krane, Proskauer, Kenneth Rubenstein, Raymond Joao & Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolf & Schlissel due to the unanimous decision by five justices of the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department. Very interesting that Cahill handles this as he is part of an ongoing investigation for his part in the crimes at the court and thus acts in conflict and violation of his public office. What is damning is that Cahill tries to impart to the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division Second Department that they are do as they please with the cases, which is not what the justices ordered, they ordered IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION, yet Cahill tries to help himself and his buddies out of the mess again.


Raymond Anthony Joao


Originally Posted at Link Below in an ongoing effort by Crystal Cox Blogger to expose corruption in our courts and to fight for the rights of Inventors and victims of the protection of Elite Law Firms such as Proskauer Rose and Foley &; Lardner.
http://www.massiveshareholderfraud.com/2011/07/what-does-head-guy-at-proskauer-rose.html


Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney for MPEG LA - Involves Attorney Raymond Anthony Joao.

Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney for MPEG LA - Involves Attorney Raymond Anthony Joao.

Kenneth Rubenstein 's lackey, attorney Raymond Anthony Joao, who was a patent attorney working DIRECTLY under Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein 's direction.

Raymond Joao now claims 90 patents in his own name and Iviewit gives him kudos as the greatest slime ball inventor and patent attorney.

No really, Iviewit considers our former counselors Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein to be nothing more than co-inventors of a system and method to defraud shareholders and inventors of their inventions and commit fraud upon worldwide patent intellectual property organizations, an invention that should carry some stiff federal sentences.

Click here for a press article on the amazing inventiveness of Joao

Raymond Joao was so non-inventive that many of these patents resemble ideas and concepts lifted straight from the Iviewit business plan and invention disclosures and ideas that he was supposed to be patenting for the inventors and shareholders.

More on Raymond Joao Click Here

Source of Above and LOTS More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm


More on Iviewit Massive Shareholder Fraud

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

http://www.paulotellini.info/

http://intelcorruption.blogspot.com/

www.iviewit.TV

www.DeniedPatent.com

posted here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
Crystal@CrystalCox.com "

Friday, October 8, 2010

Raymond Joao Corruption and Cover UPs over STEALING of Iviewit Inventions. Proskauer Rose Corruption.

2003 04 08 Raymond Joao’s response to the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee. Joao actually tries to accuse Iviewit of stealing his inventions. Coocoo.

2003 02 25 Raymond Joao 9th district original attorney misconduct complaint - somehow gets transferred to the wrong district, the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee for prosecution with the Proskauer attorney misconduct complaints, although Joao is registered elsewhere.

Supreme Court Corruption over Iviewit Scandal. Proskauer Rose Corruption. Thomas Cahill Corrupiton

2004 09 07 Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s, Chief Counsel, Thomas Cahill’s cover letter transferring the complaints of Steven C. Krane, Proskauer, Kenneth Rubenstein, Raymond Joao & Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolf & Schlissel due to the unanimous decision by five justices of the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department. Very interesting that Cahill handles this as he is part of an ongoing investigation for his part in the crimes at the court and thus acts in conflict and violation of his public office. What is damning is that Cahill tries to impart to the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division Second Department that they are do as they please with the cases, which is not what the justices ordered, they ordered IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION, yet Cahill tries to help himself and his buddies out of the mess again.

Click Anywhere Above to Read Full Document.

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

The Marc S. Dreier Financial Fraud and Ties to the Proskauer Law Firm - in Relations to the Iviewit Stolen Patent Lawsuit

"Another defendant in the Iviewit Lawsuit, convicted felon Marc S. Dreier, found orchestrating yet another bizarre Ponzi and in the Dreier scheme, we find yet again another former Proskauer Partner, Sheila M. Gowan, now acting as bankruptcy trustee in the suit as reported by the Wall Street Journal, attached to my Prepared Statement.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/01/02/former-ausa-selected-as-bankruptcy-trustee-in-dreier-case

As already mentioned herein, Raymond Joao, the rival to Edison with patent applications dated in 1900, perhaps even claiming he invented electricity prior to Edison, then left Meltzer to Dreier, impersonating me as the inventor of my technologies.

It is fitting to note, or joke, here that Marc Dreier was also caught in his scheme using fake and fraudulent names and representations of himself fraudulently impersonating others while trying to Launder stolen money into Canada.

It is known that during that time Raymond Joao made several deals and sales regarding inventions in his name, although details remain sketchy and under investigation."
Rose
Source of Post
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:ktIVkVh6K68J:www.iviewit.tv/20091005%2520NY%2520Judiciary%2520Committee%2520Prepared%2520Statement.doc+site://www.iviewit.tv+Reardon&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
marc
www.ProskauerSucks.com
For More on Proskauer Rose LLP
Rose
www.DeniedPatent.com
for More on the Trillion Dollar Stolen Iviewit Patent
Crystal L. Cox

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Enter William Dick of Foley to Replace Raymond Joao - Misrepresentation, Fraud, Lies, Deceit, IBM Connections

"Once Raymond Joao was under “investigation” by Proskauer Rose he was then terminated from service by them, Proskauer instantly found an old friend of Christopher Wheeler’s, a one William Dick of Foley and Christopher Wheeler vouched for his friend William Dick to the Board of Directors.

William Dick, according to Christopher C. Wheeler was IBM’s Patent Counsel for IBM’s far eastern patent pool.

William Dick was also friends and former coworker at IBM and then again with Friedkin with another of Christopher Wheeler’s referrals to the Iviewit companies, Brian G. Utley, who was appointed President of the Iviewit companies whereby Christopher Wheeler had presented a falsified resume for Brian Utley to the Board, Shareholders and Investors, a falsified resume in several key ways.

First, the resume presented to the Board by Christopher Wheeler and Proskauer Rose claimed Brian Utley was a college graduate, in deposition Brian Utley utterly denies ever graduating.

The most important fraud on the resume though was on the point of his past employment whereby it stated that due to Brian Utley’s innovations for the company, Diamond Turf Equipment, owned by Monte Friedkin had grown to be one of the best and largest companies of its kind due to Brian Utley’s running that company.

Per Monte Friedkin, it was more like ruining the company, as when Monte Friedkin found Brian Utley, William Dick and Christopher Wheeler stealing Inventions from him, he fired Utley and closed the shop entirely down taking a several million dollar loss.

Major misrepresentation of Brian Utley by Proskauer’s Christopher C. Wheeler but even more astonishing is that the same crew of Brian Utley, Christopher Wheeler and William Dick were involved in the Monte Friedkin frauds.

Many perjured statements regarding these events were submitted to official investigatory bodies and courts and evidence of these perjurious statements have been included in the Exhibit and Linkage Section under the individuals names.

Prior to learning of their seedy past, which had been misrepresented to the Board, Investors and Shareholders, as neither Williamm Dick nor Christopher Wheeler disclosed their past history together at Friedkin’s with Brian G. Utley, nor did they share the information of the failed invention theft with anyone else.

Of course, if they did disclose the attempted theft, nobody would have retained them; everyone was in the dark as they handed out falsified resumes and financials to Investment Bankers, Iviewit Investors, Iviewit Shareholders, including the SBA and more.

Foley entered the scene under similar false pretenses with Christopher Wheeler vouching for William Dick’s integrity and again failing to notify anyone of their prior failed invention theft.

Instantly, Foley identified a mass of problems with Raymond Joao’s filing but claimed they could correct everything, such as missing assignments, missing inventors, missing patent disclosure information, etc.

Again, I myself and the Iviewit Board and Shareholders trusted yet another large law firm in the IP field referred again by Proskauer Rose and this time Foley assured Investors, Investment Banks and Shareholders that they could and would fix the problems with Raymond Joao’s filing and so they were retained, again, Proskauer’s Kenneth Rubenstein as oversight.

After several months, Brian Utley came to me and asked me to sign blank patent applications for filings the inventors had not reviewed, Brian Utley claiming they needed to be filed that day, which again was false, as they were not due for several days, Brian Utley persisting that the Inventors had no time for review and that he did not have the IP filing applications to review before signing and could not get them.

Noticing several large patent binders on his desk I went to pick them up with another founder and inventor of the Iviewit technologies, James Frazier Armstrong, and what was discovered inside them was both astonishing and criminal.

Inside the binders were intellectual property filings with now Brian Utley as sole inventor of technologies including for example an application titled “Zoom and Pan on a Digital Camera” and another “Zoom Image Design Applet” both inventions of which Brian Utley was not even employed at the time of invention.

Further, Brian Utley replaced original inventors on original patent filings, those filed incorrectly by Raymond Joao, Foley fraudulently replacing inventors Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario with Brian Utley on filings, again Brian Utley was nowhere near the scene of invention.

Foley now found continuing the Joao fraud it appeared although at the time hard for almost anyone to believe.

Further, there were now two or more sets of patents, which almost were identical but were wholly different, as one set missed the inventions entirely and was fraught with bad math and major errors, the others with Utley’s name seemed to be the broader and more correct filings.

In fact, some of the IP found in the binders taken from Brian Utley were for Intellectual Properties already filed at US Patent Office without anyone’s knowledge, including the Inventors, Shareholders or the Board of Directors, patents that were solely ( or soullessly ) in Utley’s name, being sent to his home address, not Iviewit’s and more.

Almost identical to the Monte Friedkin theft whereby William Dick wrote Friedkin’s inventions into Brian Utley’s name and filed them into a corporation incorporated by Proskauer Rose and Christopher Wheeler, outside Friedkin’s employ and without Friedkin’s knowledge or consent.

These fraudulent applications led to immediate taped meetings regarding the fraudulent IP with Foley and Proskauer Partners, Board Members and Shareholders where it was further learned that assignments were missing, inventors were wrong and the patent applications remained filled with errors, I submit to the Committee under the Exhibits and Linkage section of the prepared statement a sample of the IP errors, contained in William Dick’s Virginia Bar Complaint Rebuttal.

Foley was to correct everything in time for the filings, the inventors then corrected the patents, and yet Foley still filed the fraudulent patents with the bad math and other fraudulent information, discarding the inventors’ changes and continuing the fraud. The cat was almost out of the bag at that time, yet it was almost impossible to believe that these were crimes and not some type of mistakes versus part of an organized criminal syndicate of lawyers and law firms attempting to steal inventions, which only later and still today are being unraveled. At the same time, other information indicating fraud began to surface.

The Arthur Andersen Audit, The Enron Broadband Attempted Technology Transfers, the Collapse of both Enron and Arthur Andersen and the Ties to the Iviewit Inventions:
Another hidden and fraudulent set of events within the Iviewit companies links to Enron Broadband discovered at the same time that Arthur Andersen began a required Audit of the Iviewit Companies performed on behalf of Crossbow Ventures and their corresponding interests of the SBA on their SBIC loans. Andersen’s Audit discovered identically and similarly named Corporate Shell companies and other misdeeds, as Iviewit also became aware of unauthorized technology transfers taking place by Utley, Dick and Wheeler that included one with Enron Broadband and Blockbuster Video.

Enron Broadband had booked Hundreds of Millions of Dollars in revenue on a future deal with Blockbuster Video to stream full screen full frame video over the Internet, that once the crimes at Iviewit were beginning to be discovered, fell apart overnight. Many of those who fully understand the Enron fraud understand that the Broadband division’s fraud was the “straw that broke the camels back.” As soon as no technology was to transfer in backdoor secret deals to stream or download the videos due to the investigations, and the scandal was unraveling quickly from the audits findings, everything Enron Broadband and Enron had done had to become extinct overnight. Problem, they already had booked the revenue having forgotten the age-old proverb, “Don't count your chickens before they are hatched”, as greed often blinds the best and brightest too.

I note as an aside that the founder of Blockbuster, Wayne Huizenga and his Son, were the seed investors in the Iviewit companies brought to Iviewit by Proskauer and now named Defendants in my Federal Lawsuit. Instantly, almost overnight, with discovery of the Iviewit fraud, both Andersen who was in the midst of the Iviewit audit that was revealing fraud and Enron vanished in scandal, in a trail of criminal document shredding to cover their tracks. Seeing the danger they were in from the exposure of the crimes, our trusted advisors, our retained lawyers and accountants, then began a document shredding of the Iviewit files to rid the evidence of the illegal technology transfers and other evidence revealing their criminal acts.

Similar to what Anderson now describes taking place in the First Department regarding the Cover-Up crimes alleged. According to Iviewit Employees stolen briefcases of cash of investor monies, including the SBA’s money, then used to bribe and attempt to bribe employees to steal proprietary equipment and trade secrets as indicated in one employees written statement contained in the referenced link in my Prepared Statement Submitted to this Committee @ http://Iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/SHAREHOLDER%20STATEMENTS%20BOOKMARKED.pdf

Witness testimony on page 10 or found on the Iviewit Homepage under Evidence Link 784. "


Source of Post
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:ktIVkVh6K68J:www.iviewit.tv/20091005%2520NY%2520Judiciary%2520Committee%2520Prepared%2520Statement.doc+site://www.iviewit.tv+Reardon&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Proskauer Sucks
Also Check Out www.Iviewit.TV for More on this Proskauer Rose Deceit...
Kenneth Rubenstein
The William Dick Bar Rebuttal from Eliot Bernsten is at the Link Below.

William Dick submitted documents which the patent office claimed where fraudulent which led to suspension and investigation.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2003%2012%20William%20Dick%20Virginia%20Bar%20Complaint%20Response%20BOOKM.pdf
Proskauer

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Raymond A. Joao Complaint

" Raymond A. Joao, (hereinafter "Joao"), believed to be a resident of the State of New
York, and who at various times relevant hereto was initially misrepresented to the
Company as a partner of Proskauer Rose LLP (hereinafter “Proskauer”) and was factually
a partner of Meltzer Lippe Goldstein and Schlissel, and who provided legal services to
the Company.

Moreover, beginning on or about September of 1998, the Company, through its agent and
principal, Eliot I. Bernstein ("Bernstein"), began negotiations with Proskauer with regard
to Proskauer providing legal services to the Company the purpose of which was to
develop and market specific technologies developed by Bernstein and two others, which
technologies allowed for the scaling, enlargement, panning and zooming of digital
images and video without degradation to the quality of the digital image due to what is
commonly referred to as “pixelation”, the delivery of digital video using proprietary

scaling techniques, a combination of the image pan and zoom techniques and video
scaling techniques, and the remote control of video and image applications.

Furthermore, Bernstein engaged the services of Proskauer and in turn Joao, among
others, through an engagement letter a true copy of which I attach herein as Exhibit “A”,
to obtain multiple patents and oversee US and foreign filings for such technologies
including the provisional filings for the technologies as described above, and such other
activities as were necessary to protect the intellectual property.

Additionally, upon information and belief, Raymond Joao upon viewing the technologies developed by Eliot Bernstein and the Iviewit Company, and held by the Company, realized the significance of the technologies, its various applications to communication networks for distributing video data and images and for existing digital processes, including, but not limited to digital cameras, digital video disks (DVD), digital imaging technologies for medical purposes and digital video.

And that Kenneth Rubenstein designed and executed, sometimes for himself or others similarly situated, deceptions, improprieties, and, even in certain circumstances, outright malfeasances by the disingenuous insertion of his own interests or the interests of third parties, who were other clients of Proskauer Rose and/or Meltzer Lippe Goldstein and Schlissel, between the Company, as his client and together with its disclosed techniques, and the ultimate end users of its future OEM and other licensees, to the detriment and
damage of the Company.

Many of the malfeasances against the Company have also
involved fraud against the US Patent and Trademark Office.


Specifics of General Complaint

Where the Company employed Raymond Joao, Proskauer Rose and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel for purposes of representing the Company to obtain multiple patents and oversee foreign filings for such technologies including the provisional filings for the technologies as
described above, and that pursuant to such employment, Raymond Anthony Joao, Proskauer Rose and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel owed a duty to ensure that the rights and interests of the Company were protected, Raymond Joao, Proskauer Rose LLP and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel neglected that reasonable duty of care in the performance of legal services in that they:
r
a. Failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the intellectual property of the Company
was protected; and,
r
b. Failed to and/or inadequately completed work regarding patents, copyrights and
trademarks; and,
r
c. Failed to list proper inventors of the technologies based on improper legal advise by
Proskauer, and in turn Joao in his lead technological role, that foreign inventors could not
be listed until their immigration status was adjusted leading to further erroneous billings
by Proskauer for frivolous immigration work. This resulted in the failure of the patents to
include their rightful and lawful inventors; and,
r

d. Failed to ensure that the patent applications for the technologies, contained all
necessary and pertinent information relevant to the technologies and as required by law;
and,
r

e. Falsified billing statements and transmitted documents, and,
r
f. Falsified patent documents and changed the contents of patents prior to filing so as to
make the Company patents weak and inaccurate, so as to file patents in his own name
that would succeed upon the Companies patents failing. That Mr. Joao who was
contracted to procure patents for the Company has now applied for 70+ patents in his
own name, many of which appear to be ideas learned while representing the Company.
r
g. That due to the discovery of many of the above described events the Company’s lead
investor Crossbow Ventures (a referral of Proskauer Rose) of West Palm Beach, Fla.,
pulled funding on the Company.
e
Lastly, the negligent actions of Raymond Anthony Joao, MLGS and Proskauer Rose resulted in and were the proximate cause of loss to the Company; today, the Company’s processes are believed to be on digital camera’s, DVD’s and virtually all Internet and Broadcast streams of video; true copies of exhibits and witnesses are available on request and/or I will, on behalf of the Company, present them according to proof at commencement of investigation into
this General Complaint.

Due to the highly sensitive nature of the patent and copyright materials, exhibits and
witnesses will be provided once formal protections have been established in regard to this
complaint. "
r
Eliot Bernstein
Iviewit.com, Inc

Source of Post
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2003%2002%2025%20Joao%209th%20district%20original%20complaint.pdf

t

www.DeniedPatent.com

r

r