Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Testimony at New York Senate Judiciary on Patent Corruption, Inventors Rights ...

Eliot Bernstein Testimony NY Senate Judiciary Part 1
Trillion Dollar Lawsuit, Attempted Murder, Court Corruption
Patent Attorney Corruption, and Mass Fraud on the Courts in ALL
Judicial Branches, the USPTO and Multiple Supreme Courts.



Eliot Bernstein Testimony NY Senate Judiciary Part 2
Iviewit Technologies - Eliot Bernstein Testifies on
Massive Corruption Surrounding
the Stealing of the Iviewit Technology.



More on the Massive Shareholder Fraud and Major Corruption in the
Iviewit Stolen Intellectual Property Scandal ... Go to..

www.DeniedPatent.com

www.Iviewit.TV

www.KennethRubenstein.com

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

Lockheed Martin Corruption, Foley-Lardner Corruption, Proskauer Rose Corruption, Intel Corp. Corruption, Time Warner Inc. Corruption,

Foley and Larder Patent Attorney Committ Massive Fraud and is Protected by US Courts

"William J. Dick - foley and lardner - Virginia state bar rebuttal - it is interesting to note that dick in his response to the the vsb sends a portfolio patent docket that the united states patent & trademark office says has some false & misleading information contained in - such as certain patents that the company has no rights, title or interests in. the vsb refuses phone calls to re-investigate based on this information that has led to uspto and federal investigations of the matters.

in the dick exhibits you will see how iviewit got dicked around as the evidence appears that there are two sets of patents with similar names and different inventors. iviewit does not attest to these documents as factual representations of the original filings as much document tampering has occurred on the patent documents. "

Source and Lots More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm

Judith Kaye - Ex. Supreme Court Judge who Protected Proskauer Rose Law Firm for Her Special Interests and her Husband WAS a partner (Stephen Kaye) - and her formoer Clerk and Co-Concpirator Steven Kaye WAS also at Proskauer Rose LLP. Well Judith Kaye USE to Work with William Dick at IBM... the Conflicts of Interest KEEP Rolling out on the Iviewt Stolen Patent.

Foley & Lardner – Doug Boehm, Steven Becker Bill Dick + Brain Utley Patent Crimes

Exhibit 1 – Case of inventor fraud perpetrated with I View It Counsel and Brian Utley

Exhibit 2 – How to claim others ideas as your own

Exhibit 7 – Case of Switching Inventors

Exhibit 9 – More on the Case of Walking Patents out of I View It and to your home

Exhibit 10 – Case of the Mismatched File Numbers on filed patent documents aka the cover-up

Exhibit 11 – Case of the changing patent titley

Exhibit 12 – Smudges & Fudges on 57013-112 and how to add your name to inventions that were invented without you

Exhibit 14 – Case of changing fonts again

Exhibit 16 – Case of bad math from an “engineer” and two certified engineers at Foley and Lardner, this is hours before filing, and the inventors have never seen these documents

Exhibit 20 – Cleaning up the mess of Utley Folly’s with Foley

Exhibit 22 – Another case of adding oneself to inventions one did not invent

Exhibit 33 – What happens to 57103/101

SEC Complaint AGAINST Time Warner, Warner Bros. - Jeffrey Bewkes, Curtis Lu - Massive Shareholder Fraud. Still NOT Disclosed to Shareholders.

Jeffrey Bewkes CEO of Time Warner Inc. Continues to NOT Disclose Massive Shareholder Liability over the Iviewit Stolen Technology and the Blatant NOT HONORED contracts with Time Warner Inc. and Iviewit.

Curtis Lu - Time Warner General Counsel Talks to iViewit in 2010 then Leaves Time Warner Inc. to be the General Counsel for Philip Falcones - Harbinger Capital Partner 's - Lightsquared - Click here for Curtis Lu Conversation with iViewit over the Stolen Technology, the Liability to Time Warner Inc. and More.

" 2009-2010 Recent Communications with Warner Bros et al.

The SEC should note that while there is a long gap in time between the prior Iviewit and Warner Bros et al. communications and contracts, that during the gap I was nevertheless actively pursuing my rights contrary to Smith’s claim that nothing has been done.

Factually, I have given similar information to several state, federal and international investigators, House and Senate Judiciary Committees, the New York Senate Judiciary Committee, many state and federal courts and more over the last several years.

During the gap in time, I was also forced to flee my home several times for my family’s safety, including from death threats from Mr. Brian Utley on behalf of the law firms Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner and then from actual Attempted Murder of my family.

Attempted Murder through a Car Bombing of my family minivan in Del Ray Beach, FL., images of the Car Bombing can be found on the www.iViewit.tv homepage.

· March 17, 2009 ~ Hall and I left a message for John Rogovin (“Rogovin”) ~ Executive Vice President and General Counsel @ Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. with his assistant Ginger Tipton (“Tipton”) to arrange a business meeting to discuss the lawsuit liabilities, patent infringement liabilities, FASB NO. 5 accounting liabilities and regulatory issues that would likely result in Massive Shareholder Liabilities if not quelled, if possible.

· April 23, 2009 ~ Hall and I left a second message for Rogovin with assistant Tipton, as the March 17, 2009 call was not returned although Tipton was aware that urgent time frames were involved.

· April 28, 2009 ~ Hall and I spoke to Rogovin’s office that referred us to Smith. The referral to Smith coming despite his conflicts resulting from his previous involvement in the alleged fraud, the fact that he is a central witness in the matters and the fact that as a lawyer he has multiple legal conflicts of interest, as well as, corporate conflicts in handling the matters he is central too. Yet, these conflicts would not matter unless Smith directly handled the matters, which he then did.

· April 30, 2009 ~ Bernstein spoke to Smith’s assistant Yolanda who claimed that Smith was now tied up in litigation for two weeks and that he would get back with an answer shortly. This delay was despite pressing the need with Yolanda for urgent action on Smith’s part due to the MASSIVE Shareholder liabilities and the need for a twenty-four hour response.

· May 28, 2009 ~ Time Warner Inc. Announces Plan to Separate AOL

http://bx.businessweek.com/america-online/view?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedeal.com%2Fcorporatedealmaker%2F2009%2F05%2Ftime_warner_aol_timeline.php

o The SEC should note the timing of this announcement with the delays in response by Warner Bros et al.’s Smith to the Iviewit notice of IP infringement liabilities and their involvement in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit.

o The SEC should instantly ascertain if Warner Bros et al. notified Shareholders and Auditors during these corporate restructurings of the impending and absolute liabilities, to determine if Shareholders were formally noticed of the massive Twelve Count Twelve Trillion Dollar Lawsuit liability and additional patent infringement liabilities.

Further, the SEC must determine if full disclosure by Counsel was concealed, including but not limited to, Smith and Rogovin. Finally, the question further arises of if the liabilities were properly accounted for in the Audited Financials for the separation transactions, where it does not appear to have been.

Obviously, if these material facts regarding massive liabilities were omitted from financial reporting, Shareholders would have Rescissory Rights from the securities fraud by the Officers. As evidenced in the following series of communications, not only is counsel notified and fails to disclose the liabilities but Officers, Directors and Auditors of the companies when contacted regarding the liabilities, all fail to handle the issues as fiducially required by law.

· October 07, 2009 ~ Eliot Bernstein letter to Wayne Smith regarding setting up meeting to discuss matters that could have Catastrophic effect on the Shareholders. Smith already advised by Tipton, per confirmation with Tipton, of the Time Sensitive Nature and the seriousness of the liabilities in relation to their Shareholders.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091007%20Eliot%20Bernstein%20letter%20to%20Wayne%20Smith%20re%20Warner%20Bros%20AOL%20meeting%20request.pdf

· November 23, 2009 ~ Hall spoke directly with Smith, who claimed to Hall that he was not the best person to handle the matters but that he instead was assembling a team from Warner Bros et al. to discuss the matters and would get back to Hall. Yet, instead of putting a team together, Smith continued handling the matters despite the multiple conflicts.

· November 30, 2009 ~ Hall sent a letter to Smith reviewing their call @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20091201%20Wayne%20Smith%20Fax%20Email%20Demand%20Receipt%20of%20Kevin%20Hall%20Confirmation%20Letter.pdf

· December 02, 2009 ~ Smith response to Hall request for meeting @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091202%20Wayne%20Smith%20Response%20Warner%20Bros%20to%20Iviewit%20letter%2012-2-09.pdf

o It should be noted by the SEC here, that the above linked exhibit has two attachments from February and March 2002.

Whereby, despite the previously exhibited evidence herein, including but not limited to, Signed NDA’s, Admission of Use and Violation of NDA’s by a Warner Bros. employee and a SIGNED LICENSING AGREEMENT, the letter and the attached letters all attempt to deny these material incontestable facts, facts omitted in annual reports as well.

· December 09, 2009 ~ AOL Time Warner completes split.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/business/8403302.stm

· December 18, 2009 ~ Hall and Bernstein response to December 02, 2009 Warner Bros. letter @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091218%20FINAL%20Wayne%20Smith%20Warner%20Bros%20Demand%20Letter36889%20SIGNED%20KRHEIB%20fax.pdf

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091218%20FINAL%20Wayne%20Smith%20Warner%20Bros%20Demand%20Letter%20Cover%20Email.pdf

· December 23, 2009 ~ Warner Bros. Letter from Smith to Iviewit and Bernstein.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091223%20Warner%20Bros%20Wayne%20Smith%20to%20Bernstein%20Response.pdf

o Note that in this letter Smith claims that,

“Your time-barred claims hinge almost entirely on an internal email written by David Colter on January 15, 2002 - an email he subsequently disavowed and admitted that he had written (and improperly provided you with a copy) only as a personal favor to you.”

This statement attempts to deny that liability claims were based on Multiple Signed NDA’s, Admission of Use by Warner Employees, Admission of Violation of NDA’s by Warner Bros. employees, a SIGNED LICENSING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT, correspondences and notices of an ongoing Federal Lawsuit, etc.

The SEC should not that in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit both Smith and Calkins are central witnesses and actors directly involved, again conflicting Smith’s involvement in the matter.

Note that Wayne Smith is a licensed and practicing attorney and therefore has additional conflicts of interest and ethical violations under the Attorney Conduct Code, in addition to the Corporate Conflicts of Interest in handling the matters, again where he is directly involved in the alleged crimes described herein.

· December 29, 2009 ~ Hall and I, unclear if Smith had notified Senior Executives and Auditors or concealed the matters in an attempt to bury them despite our letters demand for him to copy all companies Executives, Board, Counsel and Auditors, contacted Warner Bros et al. Officers, Directors and Auditors directly.

The first AOL Inc. spokesperson, returning our call to determine if Smith had contacted them was a one Jerry McKinley (“McKinley”) ~ Sr. Liaison of Executive Escalation at AOL Inc. calling to follow up on earlier messages to Tim Armstrong (“Armstrong”) ~ Chairman and CEO of AOL Inc. and others. A follow up letter to our call with McKinley can be found @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091231%20Jerry%20McKinley%20AOL%20Inc%20letter%20Re%20Wayne%20Smith%20Warner%20Bros%20response.pdf

o McKinley was then given critical documents expressing the urgent nature of these matters and McKinley was to get back to Hall and me instantly with confirmation that the named Executives, Officers and Auditors from the companies had received the URGENT TIME SENSITIVE documents regarding the liabilities.

McKinley then took a vacation the next day and was unavailable to answer calls despite knowing that the documents had a 24-hour period before we would be notifying the SEC and others of the liabilities, if resolution could not be achieved through sound business discussions and practices.

· December 29, 2009 ~ Hall and Bernstein calls to Time Warner Inc. and Warner Bros. executives.

o Further, I hereby complain that such recent elusive conduct involves the CEO, CFO and General Counsel at Time Warner, Inc., even hiding and dodging professional phone calls, in fact wholly ignoring them, simply to confirm messages and communications were received and seeking responsibly to address the mass of liabilities described herein.

Instead, quite shockingly, both Hall and I were intentionally passed along to extensions whereby the employees refused to give their names and several times just hung up on us.

Then, unidentified employees transferred us to Security personnel, personnel who would claim to be proper members of the company to receive and deliver messages to the Senior Executives regarding the massive potential Shareholder liabilities, yet they too would offer no confirmation of the delivery of the matters to the Executives and several refused to give their proper names or oversight.

o Security for Time Warner instead then took messages with a promise only to deliver the message and since there has been absolutely no call back from Senior Management, Counsel, Outside Counsel or an Auditor since those calls, we presume that avoidance equals concealment.

This stands as additional cause for the SEC to investigate and find out more information regarding the failure to return these calls and address liabilities properly by either Officers, Directors, Auditors, Outside Counsel, etc. and further determine if they have reported the liabilities their offices have been notified about to Auditors and Shareholders.

· January 06, 2010 ~ Phone conversation with Day

o Most amazingly, Wednesday Jan. 6, 2010, I had a Direct Phone conversation with Christopher Day (“Day”) who claimed to be an Assistant General Counsel at AOL, Inc.

The call also involved my business consultant Kevin Hall, Esq. Mr. Day was calling back after Hall and I left urgent voicemails for AOL CEO & COB Armstrong, after McKinley failed to return calls as promised. Mr. Day apparently is also Licensing and Patent counsel for AOL Inc., yet it was unclear on whose behalf Day was acting, as we had left messages for several key officers, including Armstrong and General Counsel Ira Parker (“Parker”) and Day refused to tell us.

o Day also refused to tell us not only who sent him the information and gave him orders to call us back but also refused to disclose what documentation he was mysteriously and anonymously sent and referring to, making it impossible to even confirm the documents he referenced receiving.

o This was most bizarre conduct from an alleged Assistant General Counsel who refused to describe how, who or why the documents and business matters came to him. Yet, it appeared that Day was returning my calls to CEO Armstrong at AOL and stated that he was a direct report to the key management persons we were attempting to reach and assuming liability for the matters.

o Efforts to avoid the liabilities involve actual dodging and hiding by Senior Executives, Officers and Directors from these matters, including but not limited to, the brand new CEO Armstrong and General Counsel at AOL Inc., Parker.

Upon leaving messages for Ira Parker, his assistant returned the call and stated that Parker was on vacation, could not be disturbed despite the PRIORITY situation and would return the call upon his return.

As of this date, I have received no call back from Parker; perhaps he is on extended vacation.

· January 07, 2010 ~ Letter out to AOL Management Regarding Evasive Tactics of Management from Shareholder Liabilities.

o Sent to: Tim Armstrong ~ Chairman and Chief Executive Officer @ AOL Inc. ( tim.armstrong@corp.aol.com ); Artie Minson ~ Chief Financial Officer @ AOL Inc. ( arthur.minson@corp.aol.com ); Jerry McKinley @ AOL Inc. ( mackinleyj@aol.com ); Ira Parker ~ General Counsel and Executive Vice President, Corporate Development @ AOL Inc ( ira.parker@corp.aol.com ); Christopher Day ~ Assistant General Counsel - Patent Litigation, Prosecution, and Licensing @ AOL Inc ( christopherday@corp.aol.com )

January 07, 2010 Letter to CEO, Armstrong at AOL Inc. @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100110%20Kevin%20Hall%20Letter%20sent%20to%20Tim%20Armstrong%20AOL%20re%20Christopher%20Day%20calls%20to%20eib.pdf

· January 08, 2010 ~ Additional Offer made to AOL Inc. CEO Armstrong thru Assistant General Counsel Christopher Day and Summarizing Notes of Jan. 6, 2010 conversation @

January 08, 2010 Letter of Hall to Bernstein copied to Tim Armstrong, CEO at AOL Inc. and others.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100108%20Letter%20to%20Tim%20Armstrong%20AOL%20Warner%20Bros.pdf

· January 2010 ~ Calls were again placed to CEO Armstrong and Day by Iviewit and Eliot Bernstein’s Counsel, Marc R. Garber, Esq. (“Garber”) of Flaster Greenberg PC (“Flaster”), Kevin Hall, Esq. and Eliot Bernstein. Counsel Garber left the messages with his personal and business phone numbers for AOL Counsel, Officers, Directors or Auditors to return his call.

Again, not even a return call from AOL to Iviewit Counsel Garber, whereby the failure of Warner Bros. et al. to return calls to our Counsel should send additional red flags to the SEC.

This failure to return calls to Counsel Garber by Warner Bros. et al. counsel and executives regarding matters as serious as this to Shareholders is unheard of, indicating further cause for the SEC to investigate all named parties herein and in the attached Exhibit 1. Investigations by the SEC should include all personal and corporate stock transactions from1999 to Present for all of these executives, including the recent corporate splits.

o Counsel Garber of Flaster left messages with both Armstrong and Day, giving them both a chance to return the calls, as it was already established that Armstrong had direct actual and constructive receipt of correspondences via email and therefore direct knowledge of the impending liabilities to AOL, Inc.

The calls to contact Counsel Garber were not returned as of this date, leading to the filing of this Formal Complaint against Warner Bros et al. The failure of Warner Bros et al. to resolve the issues through sound business discussions and licensing of the technologies with the true and proper inventors, and in fact, instead exhibiting a continued pattern attempting to conceal the liabilities from Shareholders and others with potential liabilities, through establishing materially false record of fact, while transacting volumes of individual and corporate securities, prompted this action to the SEC and others addressed herein.

The timeline and supplementary evidence herein should establish for the SEC and others addressed herein that Smith’s recent claim in his December 23, 2009 communication, already exhibited herein, claiming, “Your time-barred claims hinge almost entirely on an internal email written by David Colter on January 15, 2002 - an email he subsequently disavowed and admitted that he had written (and improperly provided you with a copy) only as a personal favor to you” is both False and Misleading.

False and Misleading in light of the substantial evidence refuting this claim presented and exhibited herein regarding the Binding Contractual relations between Warner Bros et al. and Iviewit. Smith’s statements attempt to dismiss the liabilities as based on a single letter from a Warner Bros. employee and that the claims are somehow time barred.

The SEC and other investigators addressed herein however are presented with a far more complete and truthful picture of the long and contractual relationship between Iviewit and Warner Bros et al.

A relationship based on thousands of pages of documented evidence and legal binding contracts, many with Smith center stage.

The need to DENY the extensively documented and binding contractual relationship that Smith is aware of obviously is an effort to cover up why he and Warner Bros et al. have failed properly to report to Shareholders, Regulators and Auditors these material facts.

Facts that will likely result in Catastrophic Liabilities triggering Rescissory Rights of Shareholders due to fraud, concealment, securities fraud and other violations of law.

The SEC should also note that there are no time-barred claims on patent infringement, especially where the patents remain suspended by the US Patent Office and that the matter of time for Iviewit to file actions for infringement will remain open for Twenty years from the time the patents issue and from time of filing in 1998-2001. "

Source and Full SEC Complaint Against Curtis Lu, Time Warner Inc., Warner Bros., AOL, Intel Corp., Proskauer Rose LLP, MPEG LA and More Click Here.

Donald D. Stone - Plaintiff Requests an Investigation into Alleged attorney Misconduct - Motion for Investigation of Law Firms

"" ... the Maryland RICO calling for an investigation into allegations of attorney misconduct (this was struck from the record, in my opinion because the judge may not have wanted the criminal misconduct at the Maryland bar subject to public disclosure).

The courts have a duty, obligation, and responsibility to protect the integrity of the judicial system but refuse to do it, because it reflects badly on their buddies in the Bar association.

All the motions by the attorneys to dismiss this motion would still be part of the public record .....

Melvin Blecher and Foley & Lardner mentioned on page 5.

Click Here For Source and Full Document

Do you have a Tip on Corruption at or within the Law Firm Foley and Lardner? If so email me at Crystal@CrystalCox.com and we will post your tip...

for More on Foley and Lardner Alleged Corruption Click Here.

What Really Collapsed Enron? Well it was a Proskauer Rose Law Firm Scandal, a Foiled Patent Theft. Proskauer Rose Law Attorney Corruption.

In America only Certain People have rights to Protection from the Law - Most All are just Collateral Damage to Protect Corrupt Attorneys, Judges, DOJ Officials, Corrupt FBI agents, Billionaire Tech Companies, Major Media Companies and Mega Law Firms.

Judical Coverups, Attorneys and Judges Protecting Each Other, Illegal Behavior among judges, attorneys and clerks .. well this is American Justice.. not based in TRUTH or Law but Based in who you know and what your willing to pay them to cover your Dirty Deeds...

******

"" KernelOfTruth says:

There is a case in which any one of you might be interested. It involves the theft of patents worth at least one trillion dollars, and has already paid out billions in royalties that have never been received by the inventor or the company (with no report of where that much looted money has disappeared).


The reason you may be interested is that it is a Florida case with ties to places in New York, and the inventor seems to have run into problems similar to those discussed by individuals who have posted on the subject of public corruption in the Scott Rothstein case.


The shenanigans are unbelievable, including, but certainly not limited to, a Keystone Cop like investigation by the Boca Raton Police Department and an ostensible Office of the FBI [in West Palm Beach]. How much do you think it cost the taxpayers to set up that [rented FBI] Office, which acted as though an investigation was being run when nothing was done to examine the complicity of lawyers, public officials, and investigating agencies and a car bombing.

If you are interested, you can go to http://www.iviewit.tv and listen to certain testimony relating to the crimes that were allowed to occur through the Courts, both a Civil Division State Court and U.S. Bankruptcy Court, in West Palm Beach, Florida.

If you prefer, you can read certain documents at
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2007%2004%2020%20Iviewit%20Request%20for%20FBI%20IA%20and%20OIG%20investigation%20of%20FBI%20case%20downlow.pdf

The inventor and main person being abused, Eliot L. Bernstein, discusses the matter in the State Hearings held in New York, involving public corruption. One case brought up concerns a Monty Friedkin case, which he says is cloaked as lawyers and law firms acting as a criminal enterprise stealing inventions from inventors.


He identifies William J. Dick of the Foley and Lardner law firm and Brian Utley as working with Christopher Clarke Wheeler to steal inventions from Monte Friedkin, of Diamond Turf Equipment, a Florida corporation.

The criminal enterprise against Mr. Friedkin was explained as Utley (operating as the President of the company) contracting former IBM patent attorney William Dick to write Friedkin’s patents in his name and place them into a company incorporated by Christopher C.Wheeler of Proskauer Rose.

According to [page 15 of] the Complaint found at that web site, a lawyer that had subsequently been convicted in Florida of Felony Driving Under the Influence with Injury is identified as the instigator or ringleader. Then, this ringleader, Christopher Clarke Wheeler, is identified as a lawyer with the law firm of Proskauer Rose.

This scam is identified by Eliot Bernstein (in testimony and also by Stephen Lamont in the Complaint) as being perpetrated in a same fashion [as that run against Diamond Turf] when involving his Iviewit Company, wherein certain individuals performed in the enterprise, to walk the patents and intellectual properties [Utley] worked on, out of the business and into a company that these co-adventurers owned, in which the true owner [in this case, one can replace Friedkin with Bernstein] had no interest or idea of it’s existence.

Scroll down to pages 16 - 18 of the 43 page Complaint, and you can read about how both intrinsic and extrinsic fraud were further perpetrated before a Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, in the State of Florida, with what would appear a Circuit Court Judge’s willingness to grant an allowance for continual acts of perjury, intentional fraud, and criminal acts of conversion.


For instance, the Judge [Jorge Labarga] is said to have stated that the prior counsel that the parties did not know or hire had been representing them so that the right to file almost anything in the case had been waived by the counsel that had no authority to file the case or act in the case.

Further on, at page 21 [after explaining the reasons for starting File number 402-2-59-1799-339, on May 13th, 2002, with the County of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, at the behest of the Long Beach, California FBI], is the explanation “Bernstein, upon discovering further that the companies were involved in a federal bankruptcy in Florida (Case No. 01-33407-BKC-SHF Inv Chap 11 in the Southern District of Florida) and the law suit in civil court in Proskauer Rose v. Iviewit discussed above, both previously unbeknownst to exist by shareholders or management of the legitimate companies, built his case from California and then moved to Florida to the lions den or Labarga’s court and the Bankruptcy Court, believing that justice would be had.

Both actions filed in Florida were instigated by Proskauer Rose and Proskauer Rose referred management Utley, Michael Reale and an entity RYJO, Inc. (“RYJO”).

RYJO a subcontractor under a strategic alliance structured by Proskauer Rose, between Iviewit and Real 3D, Inc. (“R3D”) a client of theirs, R3D owned 70% by Lockheed Martin, 20% by Silicon Graphics Inc., and 10% by Intel, later wholly acquired by Intel and a third party necessary with management to file an involuntary.

With new counsel relieving dirty counsel, those acting without authority, now replaced by counsel retained by the legitimate companies, Bernstein went back to Florida to pursue his rights. It is presumed that once Proskauer Rose to instantly get rid of the evidence of the fraudulent companies but first had a plan to get the stolen intellectual properties out.


Thus, when combined, the billing case that they thought nobody would ever discover was in court and bankruptcy, the companies could do the following:

(i) Proskauer Rose would sue fraudulent companies ABC which harbored the stolen patents with a large unpaid bill

(ii) this would make them the largest creditor and thus entitled in a bankruptcy to majority of the company and the stolen patents and

(iii) with Utley, RYJO and Reale instigating the bankruptcy they would be the remaining benefactors, it would all look clean to the Courts, almost invisible and they would walk off with the stolen assets. They never figured that Bernstein would be tipped off to this in the midst of the process”.

It was related that one of the counsel [Kenneth Rubenstein] “was so brazen that the Court was in his pocket, that he wrote [Judge] Jorge Labarga a sworn statement claiming he never heard of Eliot Bernstein, the Iviewit companies and was being harassed”.

Also related to the case was a declaration of a showing to Warner Brothers of entries with investor H. Wayne Huizenga, in regards to the Iviewit inventions and multiple billings.

The kicker in the last paragraph [on page 18] is the obvious dereliction of duty in regards to what passes for FBI Agents in the network [of the ol’ south Good Ole Boys] and compromised Office of the US Attorney with the Southern District of Florida, when it is written “one asks, why later those same crimes exposed in mass against the government to the West Palm Beach Office of the FBI, were not prosecuted when taken by the FBI to the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, along with all the other crimes they were apprised of and given evidence in support of and which they then led Iviewit to believe they were investigating until April 17, 2007”.

Page 20 holds a critical piece of information, which is “Another part of the immediate problem was that evidence surfaced of a deal between the fraudulent Iviewit companies and Enron’s Broadband Division, in the now infamous Enron/Blockbuster Deal which due to Enron’s booking of hundreds of millions of dollars ahead of earning it, on a new technology for broadband internet distribution of movies, based on technologies almost stolen from Iviewit which are the true cause of the collapse of Enron.

All evidence of this had to be destroyed by the law firms who had perpetrated the crimes and this may have been the cause of the massive shredding party”.

For a story about the “Specific Involvement by the Federal Bureau of Investigation -- West Palm Beach Office: January 2003 to March 2007”, scroll down to page 23.

The tale involves accusations regarding lawyers submitting false statements and falsified documents (including to a Court of Law), money made or laundered under the use of Non-Disclosure Agreements, conflicts of interest and appearances of impropriety that involved Public Office corruption cases before the Florida Supreme Court, denial of due process and procedure in the Civil Courts as the criminal lawyers legal and political power have been able to position [without disclosure] through conflict to avoid prosecution by infiltrating Public Offices where Complaints have been filed, the infiltration of the attorney discipline process [both in New York and Florida],

..the possibility that the [Democrat-controlled] Proskauer Rose law firm is controlling certain of the Florida Courts and Disciplinary Departments when the New York law firm has one small Office in Boca Raton, cases at the Boca Raton Police Department that were derailed [with the Officer disappearing without Notice],

...the possibility that the [Republican-controlled] Foley and Lardner Law Firm is controlling a certain tier of the Florida Courts and the Governor’s Office when the Wisconsin law firm had virtually no presence in Florida, a subterfuge of a deferral of a Department of Business and Professional Regulation Complaint that falls under another conflict due to the fact that Governor Charlie Crist had appointed [Iviewit’s former patent counsel] Foley and Lardner, special Office positions favorably given to lawyers like George Lemieux [a managing shareholder where the ringleader (Christopher Wheeler) worked in the Fort Lauderdale Office of the Gunster, Yoakley, & Stewart law firm].

The behavior of the President of The Florida Bar [Kelly Overstreet Johnson] who worked for the brother [James Wheeler] of the ringleader lawyer, the infiltration of federal investigations, an FBI Agent [Stephen Lucchesi] who acted as though the problem was one that was civil in nature without need for FBI involvement, Special Agent Joseph Sconzo’s denial that there was any file concerning Iviewit in the FBI’s [rented] West Palm Beach Office.


Special Agent in Charge John McVie’s denial of any history of Iviewit or Eliot Bernstein with any FBI investigation after years of investigation, a non-existent Securities and Exchange Commission investigation jointly run with the Boca Raton Police Department, denial of any oversight responsibilities pertaining to action taken by the FBI by the Inspector General of the Department of Justice [Glenn Fine],

.... the dismissal of a need for an audit when the Small Business Administration is the largest investor and shareholder through SBIC loans, the lack of oversight by the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, the lack of investigation by the Department of Justice into the Iraqi-style car bombing of the family vehicle belonging to Mr. Bernstein his wife and three children, possible terminations of US Attorneys for political reasons and retirements of Special Agents for political reasons,

... an admittance of no power or authority held by either the House Judiciary Committee or the Senate Judiciary Committee, harm to international relations through violations of international treatises, the failure of former Commissioner of Patents [John Doll] and his successor Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property [Jon W. Dudas] to follow the law, and possible influence wielded by Michael Grebe [the former Chairman of the Foley and Lardner law firm and former Chairman of the Republican National Committee who is currently under investigation for other violations]

The gist of the Complaint can be boiled down to the request contained on page 22, which is “With the revenues from the technologies converted to their pools and already generating profits in billions of dollars since invention, it would take either a continuous corruption of any legal or prosecutorial agency the complaints went or easier that with a Presidential top down denial of due process and procedure, through various Presidential appointments in key positions to block it top down.

We are asking the DOJ OIG to investigate for any possible connection to election fraud or payola to politicians capable of planting individuals to block Iviewit at each of these agencies”.

Moreover, on page 7 of a succeeding formal request to the Office of Internal Affairs for the Federal Bureau of Investigations, the inventor and President & Founder of Iviewit Technologies, Inc./Iviewit [Iviewit Holdings, Inc.], Eliot Bernstein, further concluded his ordeal and exasperation and concern for others, in his summation: “Please contact me immediately regarding these matters, as I fear for not only the life of my family but those who had volunteered to act as witnesses and others, that presumed they were doing so with the FBI investigating the matters.


I am in grave concern that the FBI has taken no actions to protect a citizen whose life has been threatened repeatedly, whose car has been blown up and confirmed as committed with intent by fire investigators.

A group of citizens who have followed all the rules of making complaints to all the proper authorities, to find that no one is protecting their rights to life, as well as, the rights guaranteed through the Constitution under Article I, Sec 8, Clause 8 pertaining to protection of inventors with the full weight of the Constitution, in the event of just such attempts to steal such inventions and murder inventors.

In fact, in a RICO case the FBI typically offers protection to witnesses against corruption from small or large mobsters when witnesses’ lives may be in danger.

Where a group of citizens have brought allegations of corruption that may yield a Patentgate, with attempted murders already occurring in the US and threats already effectuated against ones life, it is stunning that FBI officers who have been fully apprised of the matters and tendered evidence and witnesses against the accused, have not granted an iota of protection to those who are in danger, all indicating a top down control of the government and its regulatory agencies.

Control by those at the top to aid and abet those alleged to have committed such atrocities, through violation of public offices of these federal and state investigatory agencies. Most disturbing though is that it now appears that no one is protecting the United States and foreign nations from a group of criminals cloaked as lawyers, politicians and judicial members!”. ""

Posted Here by
Investigative Blogger

Crystal L. Cox

Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Can Enron Victims Sue Proskauer Rose Law Firm for their Loss, Suffering and Hardship.. well if they had the TRUTH .. maybe? But wait.. Proskauer Rose controls US Courts, Judges, Attorney Ethics Committees .. so Nevermind...

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC and FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro, against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Intel, SGI, and .

Proskauer Rose and More named in SEC Complaint.

SEC Complaint Filed, is the SEC Listening .. It Does not sound like it. The SEC must be covering up for Favors owed, covering and protecting billionair tech companies and Above the Law Law Firms Like Foley and Lardner and Proskauer Rose.

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC & FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro & Others against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Intel, SGI, Lockheed Martin, Proskauer Rose, Foley & Lardner.

"" March 14, 2010 --

FORMAL CRIMINAL COMPLAINT TO SEC & FBI
RE SHAREHOLDER FRAUD BY LEADING BLUE CHIPS

Corp Management of Time Warner (NYSE: TWX), Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., AOL Inc. (NYSE: AOL), Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC), Silicon Graphics, Inc. (delisted NYSE: SGI) & successor Silicon Graphics International (NASDAQ: SGI), Sony Corporation (NYSE/ADR: SNE) , Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT), Ernst & Young Global Limited have known about the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Liabilities for years & allegedly have concealed the liabilities from Shareholders & in some instances reorganized to the detriment of Shareholders in alleged fraudulent transactions, which may lead to Shareholder Rescissory Rights & catastrophic damage to the companies as complained of to Fed Officials.FEB 12, 2010 CRIMINAL COMPLAINTThe SEC Complaint filed Feb 12, 2010,

“Iviewit & Eliot I. Bernstein Official Formal Complaint…against Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., AOL Inc. & Time Warner, regarding Trillion Dollar alleged Fraud on Shareholders; FASB No. 5 & other SEC accounting violations & violations of State, Federal & Int’l Laws; Rescissory Rights of Shareholders; Evidence & Important Info for the SEC regarding ongoing SEC Investigations of Bernard L. Madoff, Marc S. Dreier, Sir Robert Allen Stanford, Proskauer Rose, Galleon, Enron Broadband, Enron, Arthur Andersen & more”

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=274

and

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf

SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGIA SEC complaint also was filed by Iviewit against Intel, SGI & Lockheed & similar allegations were levied against these corps for Patent Theft, knowing infringement & Shareholder Fraud.

The March 29th 2009 SEC Complaint to Shapiro titled “Complaint Regarding Intel Corp & Possible Trillion Dollar Fraud on Intel Shareholders & Others”http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090325%20FINAL%20Intel%20SEC%20Complaint%20SIGNED2073.pdf

12 COUNT 12 TRILLION DOLLAR FED RICO & ANTITRUST SUIT LEGALLY MARKED “RELATED” TO NY SUPREME COURT WHISTLEBLOWER SUIT

Liabilities for the complained of companies centers on both knowing technology infringements & liabilities from failure to report the Fed RICO & ANTITRUST filed by Iviewit & now legally marked “RELATED” to the Whistleblower suit of Christine C. Anderson, a former staff attorney for the NY Supreme Court Appellate Division. Anderson gave riveting testimony of systemic corruption to the NY State Senate Judiciary & in sworn testimony in before Judge Shira Scheindlin of Whitewashing & Criminal Obstruction by Court Officials for “Favored Lawyers & Law Firms, the US Attorney in New York, the DA and Asst DA” or words to that effect. Anderson further fingered one of the “CLEANERS” of ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT COMPLAINTS at the NY Supreme Court as Naomi Goldstein.A “CLEANER” at the ETHICS department of NY responsible for attorney regulation in Manhattan & the WallStreet financial district, perhaps the reason the country is suffering from a lack of attorney regulation in the heart of the financial district that has led to lax or complicit regulators and prosecutors and a worldwide economic meltdown.

Anderson’s testimony http://www.iviewit.tv/20090608nysjudiciaryhearing/index.htmhttp://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=205

Bernstein testimony before the NY Senate Judiciary of systemic corruption that has blocked due process & procedure via corrupt infiltration of the NY Courts @http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=189http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=165

HOUSE OF CARD COLLAPSING ON NY CRIME SYNDICATE INSIDE NY COURTS, ETHICS DEPARTMENTS, PUBLIC OFFICES & REGULATORY AGENCIES BY CRIMINAL LAW FIRMS & LAWYERSThe House of Cards is Crumbling on Key Players in the Iviewit Scandal as the NY Corruption Scandal Elevates to Senior NY Political Figures including Cuomo & members of the NY Supreme Court & US Fed Courts in NY. Proskauer Rose.

Proskauer, mastermind of the bungled attempt to steal the Iviewit patents through Fraud on the US Patent Office & further bungled attempts to cover up the crimes in the NY Courts is under further scrutiny with Proskauer’s direct involvement in the Stanford Financial Ponzi & subsequent resignation of partner Thomas Sjoblom, a former SEC enforcement officer, allegedly found coaching Stanford employees on how to lie to SEC & FBI investigators at a Miami Airport Hanger preceding the arrest of Stanford & his employees.

Proskauer also sued in a Class Action suit for the entire 7 billion dollar Stanford losses & sued by an arrested Stanford employee. Proskauer has further direct ties to both the Madoff & Dreier Ponzis.NY Attorney General CuomoFollowing the illegal representation by the NY AG in the Iviewit RICO & ANTITRUST suit & Anderson’s Whistleblower suit under Spitzer as NY AG, the Cuomo Admin continues to represent illegally State Defendants in both cases left over by Spitzer (a named Defendant in the RICO and Antitrust).

As the Iviewit & Anderson claims are further investigated & litigated these present the largest liability to Cuomo’s run for any office as the largest scandal brewing in NY begins to unravel with his offices dead center.

Anderson’s filing http://www.frankbrady.org/TammanyHall/Documents_files/Anderson%20111609%20Filing.pdf

Iviewit filings of Illegal rep by Cuomo @http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080305%20Final%20Plaintiff%20Oposition%20to%20AG%20Cuomo%20letter%20email%20copy.pdfhttp://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090129%20Final%20Extension%20of%20Time%202%20SIGNED%20low.pdf

The US District CourtWith Anderson’s revelations in the US District Court & the Jury finding that her 1st Amendment Rights to Free Speech regarding Whistleblower Allegations had been violated, the whole case has been called into question & further questioned due to the ILLEGAL REPRESENTATION of the NY AG Cuomo’s office. Based on Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Officials, Anderson filed for an entirely new hearing based on the Cuomo’s mass conflicts. Iviewit alleges that NY AG Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Defendants, Officially & Personally, violates his office duties & obligations of honest services to NY, public office rules and violates state & federal laws, whereby the Conflicts of Interest act to block investigation of the State Defendants fingered by Whistleblower Anderson & in Iviewit’s suit, causing Obstruction of Justice through Fraud on the Court. Serious allegations for Cuomo who continues to illegally represent State Officials on public funds, while failing to investigate those same public officials, including former NY Chief Judge Judith Kaye.

Also of concern is if these massive liabilities have been reported to State Auditors by Cuomo?The US 2nd CircuitIn the US Second Circuit, Iviewit filed a “Motion to Compel” compelling that court to follow law, as with Anderson’s revelations exposing court members, that court has tried to ILLEGALLY Dismiss all the legally “related” cases to Anderson in attempts to bury them & keep the lids on the scandal that may lead them to exchange their legal robes for prison garb. Motion to Compel

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=78http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf ""

"Addressed to:
SEC Chair Mary Shapiro
SEC IG, H. David Kotz
IG OF THE US DOJ, Glenn Fine
FBI
HOUSE & SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
NY SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
US AG, Eric Holder

Treasury IG, David Gouvaia
SBA IG, Peggy Gustafson & Daniel O’Rourke

US DEP OF COMMERCE IG, Todd Zinser
Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Dir of the USPTO, David Kappos
Deputy Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Deputy Dir of the USPTO, Sharon Barner

USPTO - OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT & DISCIPLINE DIR, Harry I. Moatz
US PRESIDENT, Hon President of the US, Barack H. Obama II
FILED AGAINST
Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Barry Meyer

Pres & COO: Alan Horn
EVP & CFO: Edward Romano
VP & Chief Patent Counsel: Wayne Smith
AOL, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Tim Armstrong
GC & EVP: Ira Parker
Counsel - Patent Lit, Prosecution & Licensing: Christopher Day
Exec Escalation Team: Jerry McKinley

Time Warner, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Jeffrey Bewkes
EVP & GC: Paul Cappuccio
MARCH 29, 2009 SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGI "

Press Release for Immediate Release

Joan Brown Kearney v Foley and Lardner et al - RICO Pattern and History

Foley and Lardner RICO Complaint

1983 Civil Rights Case

Foley & Lardner San Diego re Eminent Domain

Illegal Land Taken from Private Citizen ?

More Coming Soon... on Foley and Lardner's
Decades of Illegal, Immoral Terror on US Citizens.

Link to Some Research on this Foley and Lardner Victim
http://blog.hinshawlaw.com/theethicalquandary/?p=959

posted by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
Got a Tip ???
Are you a Foley and Lardner VICTIM...??
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
industry whistleblower

Is Stephen Lamont, Former Alleged CEO, of Iviewit Conspiring with Foley and Lardner, the USPTO and other Players in the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case ???

It is Simply To Hard for Me to Wrap my Brain around the Actions of Stephen Lamont.

I Could not Figure out what possible Motive Stephen Lamont could have to Attempt to Discredit My Blog Postings and to Discredit Eliot Bernstein, when the Information on the Web from those two sources would only benefit P. Stephen Lamont up until he Threatened Me.

I just could not understand why Stephen Lamont would DEMAND that I remove Posts with his name, when those Posts were information from the www.Iviewit.TV Website that he links to in his every email, seemingly. and in which he seems to promote on the Internet with his my Space page and other online outlets of promotion.

So Why in the World would Stephen Lamont Threaten Me and Tell me to get My Affairs in order while I still can.. ?? and demand that I change my Blogs.. ?? when the Facts of the Story came from www.Iviewit.TV in which he promotes ?

It Simply Did not Make Sense to me.

In trying to figure out Why P. Stephen Lamont is Aggressively Demanding and Threatening me Now after 2 months of Blogging about the Iviewit Stolen Patent, and after the information has seemingly been on the Internet for over 8 years... I just had to Look Deeper...

I found myself needing to know more, and asking myself who is Stephen Lamont working with, why NOW?, what changed?

Did someone contact him and tell him to play big shot CEO and try and scare me with Demanding and Threatening Emails?

Did Stephen Lamont get orders from the USPTO - Foley and Lardner or some other Play in the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case?

P. Stephen Lamont is obviously a very smart man and surely saw me covering this story for around 2 months so far. Right ?

A guy who claims he wants to take over video.. blah .. blah .. blah.. online and the world this and that.. Surely he saw my Blogs, surely he looked into who and what I am about.. and Surely Stephen Lamont did not all of the Sudden wake up to my Righteous Stance on the Behalf of the Iviewit Shareholders, and the Iviewit Inventors ... On February 4th 2010, The day he was in Such a Stir about the email that Eliot Bernstein Sent out.

So Why did Stephen Lamont launch Demands and Threats on Crystal L. Cox, Investigative Blogger - when I was and have been for two months... out to Defend HIM, the company he was supposedly CEO of, and him getting his rightful compensation for the Iviewit Shares in which he deserves, Along with the Inventors and other Shareholders of the Iviewit Technologies Inc. ????

It seems to me that Stephen Lamont is running a Bluff at me, possibly for Someone Else. It Seems to Me that P. Stephen Lamont wants this "Hillbilly Blogger" to believe he has powers that he does not have in a Company which he is no longer a part of other then being a Shareholder as many other Shareholders....

Kind of makes you wonder who P. Stephen Lamont is Really Working for... could it be one of the Billionaire Tech Companies - Billionaire Law Firms or ?

I mean if the Tech companies can afford Millions on Top of Millions - in Anti-Trust Violation fines every year, often every Quarter and the Law Firms such as Proskauer Rose can pay 1.5 million as a minimum a month in rent in once location and they are Global..

These Companies involved in this Trillion Dollar Stolen patent.. they have some serious money.. why not use some of it to try and Run a Bluff on some Woman.. by sending in someone with a big Fancy CEO Title of the Company your Talking about to discredit the very people you have been defending for 2 months so far.. Why not Send in someone I may think is the CEO - or somehow I may think is in Charge of the Iviewit Company?

Surely this will Shut me UP.. Right?

and If that don't Work well Stephen Lamont
will just Threat to End my Affairs...

So Again Why NOW.. ???

this information on my Investigative Blogs
is Public Knowledge, it is in the Courts, in the News,
and all over the www.Iviewit.TV website.. so why now?
Why Me?

Maybe, Possibly, Just speculating here .. maybe the Super Power Elite told P. Stephen Lamont that the Iviewit Inventors would NEVER get their rights and the SHAREHOLDERS will never get paid, however maybe he could get something out of the deal.. just speculating here..

Maybe .. just maybe someone offered P. Stephen Lamont Money to work on the other side and make it look like he was working for the best interest of the Iviewit Shareholders and the REAL Iviewit Inventors.

But anyone with a brain can see that currently Eliot Bernstein and P. Stephen Lamont are not quite on the same page, so why would I think that P. Stephen Lamont could speak for Eliot Bernstein or the Iviewit Technologies Company.

If P. Stephen Lamont is disputing the information I posted, and that in which contains his name then why does every email to every person he emails and his resume, and his My Space Page contain the www.Iviewit.TV website ... as if it is his site, he is proud of it and Well ... Gee.. Hmmm... I got the information from that site and linked to the source...

So What is Really Going on with P. Stephen Lamont? Who is P. Stephen Lamont Talking to and on Whose Authority his he Demanding anything of me?

Well I can Tell you that Right After I posted this post.

http://www.industrywhistleblower.com/
2010/02/p-stephen-lamont-friend-or-foe-of_05.html

A Story of Intrigue and Suspense Unfolded Before my Eyes.. and Not Just the Threats and Demands from P. Stephen Lamont, but also of Who he Told, where they were and What Connections and Fingerprints he left along the way..

Well .. My Stat Counter Told me a Story .. that I feel I must Share..

I feel from My Own Personal Experience in Analyzing my Stats over the Years, and in my Opinion that once P. Stephen Lamont Seen the Above Post... he then Contacted the USPTO, Foley and Lardner, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, Duval & Stachenfeld, Steven C. Becker and
"Crystal L. Cox" Lamont
Well Click Here and Read the Story...

posted by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

More information on the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Stolen Patent
at www.DeniedPatent.com and at www.Iviewit.TV
Lamont Iviewit
Crystal L. Cox
Crystal Cox

Declaratory Judgment, Fish and Richardson, Foley and Lardner, Foley and Lardner Llp, Foley Lardner, Kyocera, Patent Infringement, Patent Rights...

Foley and Lardner Disclosed Confidential Information?
Foley Lardner LLP
"" Suit Claims Foley & Lardner Disclosed Confidential Patent Information

A patent holding company has sued Foley and Lardner, claiming that the law firm disclosed confidential patent information learned during settlement talks.

The suit claims Foley and Lardner used the information to file a lawsuit on behalf of its client, Japanese electronics manufacturer Kyocera, according to The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times and the Am Law Litigation Daily. The Kyocera suit sought a declaratory judgment that it did not infringe the patents of the holding company, SPH America.

SPH America had earlier sued Kyocera for infringement of a different patent used in cell phone technology. The new suit says SPH disclosed in confidence during settlement negotiations that it also held patent rights for 3G wireless technology, but it did not plan to sue Kyocera over those patents. Kyocera’s discovery judgment action concerned the 3G technology, but was not filed under seal, according to the BLT summary of the SPH suit.

The SPH suit was filed Friday in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. SPH America was formed in 2008 by a former associate at Fish & Richardson.""

Source of Post:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/
article/suit_claims_foley_lardner_disclosed_confidential_patent_information/

Foley and Lardner Seem to have their Own Special Foley and Lardner Brand of STOMPING on Inventors and rightfully Patent Holders.
Foley & Lardner, Foley Lardner, Foley and Lardner LLP...

Rico Complaint - Pattern and History - How Many Inventors has Foley and Lardner Committed Crimes Against?

If you are an Inventor that has EVER been Taken Advantage of, Threatened, Bullied, had your Car Bombed or been set up in any way by Foley and Lardner Please Email me at Crystal@CrystalCox.com - I am a Blogger, an Investigative Journalist and I am Investigating Stolen Patent Cases to Write about on my Stolen Patent Blog Network and my Industry Whistleblower Network.

My intention is simply to Get the Inventor's Story Told and Expose Corrupt Patent Attorneys in the hopes that inventors rights will be defender by the Courts of the United States of America.

If your Patent was Flat OUT Stolen by your Patent Attorney or connected Patent Attorneys they recommended, email me your Story - Crystal@CrystalCox.com - a link to your blogs or videos on your story and Let's Get you Heard.

If Foley and Larder or Connected parties have been in any way involved in you NOT getting Legal Rights or Compensation to your Patent - Email me your Story.

Foley and Larder is NOT above the Law, Not Above a RICO Lawsuit and NOT above the Truth. You are NOT alone. Foley and Lardner Patent Attorneys have done this to Others, Step Up - Tell your Foley and Lardner Story and Get Heard.

Foley and Lardner have no Moral, Ethical or Legal Right to Do this to YOU. Email your Story, your Blog, your Documents, or post yourself at www.DeniedPatent.ning.com and get your Foley and Lardner Patent Theft Story Told.

If you have experienced Patent Infringement, Stolen Patents, Stolen Technology, Corrupt Patent Attorneys, Patent Fraud or a Disclosure of Confidential Patent Information by Foley and Lardner and anyone associated with Foley and Lardner EMAIL me and Get your Story Told.

Crystal@CrystalCox.com
Crystal L. Cox
Industry Whistleblower
Truth Seeker
Blogger
Investigative Journalist
Crystal Cox

Foley and Lardner a Motto of High Integrity. Have Foley and Lardner LLP Employees and Attorneys Read the Iviewit Story, the thousands of Documents..

"Foley & Lardner LLP is one of the nation's largest and most reputable law firms. " of Course this by Foley and Lardner themselves. Yet a Thinking person can see that from www.Iviewit.tv and the Thousands of Documents on that Stolen Patent Site, Foley and Lardner are Far from "Reputable" when it comes to Helping or Representing inventors on their patents.

Now I cannot speak for Foley and Lardner LLP on other Legal Issues, however it is pretty clear from the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case and from the Donald Stone Stolen Technology case at www.MarylandCorruption.com that Foley and Lardner are certainly not a "Reputable Law Firm" when it comes to assisting inventors in their Patent Rights.

We have also heard that Foley and Lardner have stolen other smaller inventions, and by smaller I mean from inventors not necessarily with million backing them, it is Reported that Foley and Lardner LLP have Stolen inventions over and over again.

Please Email your Foley and Lardner Stolen Patent Story to me Crystal@CrystalCox.com - I am an Investigative Journalist and my Intention is to Tell YOUR Story.

Email me your court case, documents,evidence, proof of your Stolen Technology and share your Stolen Patent Case with the World.

Foley and Lardner and the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case

Crystal L. Cox
Whistleblower
Investigative Journalist..

Foley and Lardner LLP Seem to Be In the Business of Patent Thefts.

The Tactic is to Bully, Harass and Financially Ruin Inventors in order to Steal Their Patent. Story after Story since the 80's of Foley & Lardner Bullying Inventors to take their patens, many have given up over the years and they see the Iviewit Stolen Patent Story and the Donald Stone Stolen Technology and they reach out and tell their stories. Many of whom gave up long ago because this Mega-Law Firm beat them down, took their invention and left them with no hope.

The Foley and Lardner story seems to be the same over and over, the Same "Patented" invention stealing scheme by a Foley and Lardner LLP Patent Attorney over and over. How does a Mega Law Firm Like Foley and Lardner get away with This Kind of Mass Patent Theft? Well the Inventors that the Foley and Lardner Patent Attorney represents do not have hundreds of millions of dollars and the Inventors that Foley and Lardner represent do not have Political Connections that Go all the way to The Supreme Courts, Connection in the USPTO Office and Connections in the Republican National Committee (RNC).

So if your going to hire Foley and Lardner to "Help You" patent your Invention, your Technology well Then Do so at your own risk. I am not asking you to believe me, I am simply telling the Victims stories and asking that you do your homework before you turn your invention over to Foley and Lardner, you may be sorry - you may never have rights to your invention and your life will certainly never be the same....

Also Check Out..

www.Iviewit.TV

www.DeniedPatent.com

www.MarylandCorruption.com



Crystal L. Cox
Truth Seeker...
Whistleblower

Obama was Informed on the Criminal Who Were involved in the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Stolen Patent

Obama was informed of Foley And Lardner and IBM's role in the Trillion Dollar iviewit stolen patent case and yet in October of 2009 Obama put TWO iviewit stolen patent defendents in to clean up the patent house, the USTPO... are you kidding. So David Kappos formerly of IBM running the Show at the USPTO - and Sharon Barner who formerly was chair of Foley's intellectual property department from the firm's Chicago office... so Foley and Lardner is definately in the Stolen Patent Business, simply look at their record, and Obama puts a Foley and Lardner Attorney in at the USPTO, this really is a SERIOUS Conflict of Interest and bad for inventor's rights and patent holders EVERYWHERE.

Here is the Article I am Yammering about...

""Foley lawyer Barner to help restructure U.S. Patent office

By John Schmid of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Oct. 5, 2009

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has hired a senior attorney from the Milwaukee-based law firm Foley & Lardner LLP to help restructure the agency.

Sharon Barner, who chairs Foley's intellectual property department from the firm's Chicago office, will become the deputy director of the patent office. Barner steps into the No. 2 role immediately under David Kappos, who previously oversaw IBM's patent portfolio. The Senate confirmed Kappos in August as the Obama administration's nominee as the agency's director.

"I have directed the USPTO to significantly reduce the time it takes to process patent applications," U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said in announcing Barner's appointment.

In a series of stories in August, the Journal Sentinel examined the problems that beset the agency, which lies at the heart of America's innovation economy. Although inventors have relied on the patent system to promote and protect new technologies, the agency has been unable to keep pace with the torrent and complexity of applications it receives.

As it has struggled to keep pace, the office in recent years added hurdles, delays and improper rejections that have handicapped start-ups and entrepreneurs. Locke has said the agency's performance impedes the nation's economic recovery.

The appointment of Barner is important for Foley, which touts its global patent and intellectual property division. Foley and Lardner has nearly 240 attorneys that specialize in patents and intellectual property, ranking the firm among the nation's top 10 patent litigation and patent procurement law firms.

In February, Foley hired Jon Dudas, who ran the patent office under former President George W. Bush and was the immediate predecessor to Kappos in the agency's top position.

In a telephone interview, Barner said she knows President Barack Obama personally, with ties that extend through much of his political career in Illinois. She said she helped him raise funds for an Illinois state senate race; worked on a voter registration effort; and had him speak several times at symposiums that she organized.

While Barner said she has not helped write patent applications, she is an experienced litigator of patent cases. She also helped Foley expand its intellectual property practice in Japan and China.

Over the past 10 years, Barner has been featured as a top intellectual property lawyer in The National Law Journal, Black Enterprise Magazine, Diversity and the Bar and IP Law & Business and was recognized in the Illinois Super Lawyers for her intellectual property litigation work.

Barner plans to "telecommute" and
work from Chicago without moving to Washington. ""

Link to Source of this post..
http://www.jsonline.com/business/63531222.html

Crystal L. Cox
Industry Whistleblower
www.DeniedPatent.com

Crystal Cox Blogger

Roy L. Reardon, DRAFT Response to Roy Reardon - New York Supreme Court Appellate Division - Chairman

DRAFT Response to Roy Reardon, New York Supreme Court
How Long Can This Guy handle Complaints against Himself, be involved Coverups, Conspiracies, and the Stealing of a Trillion Dollar Patent by way of ignoring complaints and DOING Nothing?
r
Here is the Responce to Roy L. Reardon NY Supreme Court
from Eliot Bernstein.
r
Monday, December 14, 2009
I-VIEW-IT HOLDINGS, INC.
I-VIEW-IT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Eliot I. Bernstein
Founder & Inventor
TO: Roy L. Reardon
Chairman
New York Supreme Court
Appellate Division First
Judicial Department Departmental
Disciplinary Committee
61 Broadway
New York, NY 10006
(212) 401-0800
also Partner @
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
425 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10017-3954

Regarding: Your Continued Insanity in handling complaints against YOURSELF, Alan W. Friedberg and Other Defendents in a Twelve Count - Twelve Trillion Dollar Lawsuit Legally Related to a Whistleblower Causing Mass Liablity, you are Concealing from the State of New York and the People of New York.
roy reardon
Dear Mr. Reardon,
I. Response to Your Letter Dated December 07, 2009.
Your audacity bemuses me and allow me to retort to your and Mr. Friedberg’s
insanity and again put forth some basic realities regarding your misconduct and criminal
acts.

First, my seventy-eight page complaint against Mr. Friedberg and YOU, if you
have read it, is also a RE-FILED complaint against you, this letter shall serve as a third
and a bit more severe complaint.

Your letter is in response to the earlier complaints against Mr. Friedberg and yourself that you buried since February 2009, until sequestered by the NEW YORK STATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, which requested that you provide information regarding the CONCEALED complaints to them, not me.

Nevertheless, in delusion, you responded to me regarding your complaints and tried to
dismiss complaints against yourself and your partner in crime, Mr. Friedberg, while your
department is in a lawsuit with me. In that lawsuit, your department has representative
ILLEGALLY retained counsel, the New York Attorney General and yet you continue to
pester me with your continued handling of your own and Mr. Friedberg’s complaints, as well as, attempting ILLEGALLY to dismiss complaints against other defendants in the
lawsuit.

Let me dissect your letters errors one by one before I begin my further FORMAL
COMPLAINT against you in addition to the one you have buried for months and now try
to dismiss:

1. First, you state, “Your 78 page fax dated December 3, 2009 labeled as a
complaint against Chief Counsel Alan W. Friedberg has been referred to me.”
The problem in this statement is that you fail to see that the 78 Page Fax
Complaint, is a re-filing of the complaint you have admitted to concealing
since February 2009 against both YOU and Mr. Friedberg.

The FORMAL COMPLAINT is actually against you and Mr. Friedberg, so had you really
read the Complaint, you would see it would be impossible for it to be referred to you, as you are a Main Character in the Complaint. I resubmitted that complaint due ONLY to your prior CONCEALMENT of OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS.

I have attached herein, that same complaint but have individually broke it out for you with your very own cover page. By the by, your inappropriate letter that defies ethics again has NO FORMAL DOCKETING number for the Friedberg case, so I wonder how to appeal it or
if it has been CONCEALED again.

2. Next, you claim laughably, “Among other things, the document contains
copies of letters from you to State Senator John L. Sampson of the New York
Senate Judiciary Committee alleging that the DDC has engaged in conflicts of
interest, corruption and other wrongful acts. We find no merit in those
accusations.”

The silliness of your statement here, although criminal in
nature, is very telling of your cognizance of the allegations contained in the
FORMAL COMPLAINT that was CONCEALED and further stands as
ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF YOUR CONTINUED CRIMINAL
CONDUCT in trying to dismiss complaints you and your whole department
are conflicted in, Mr. Friedberg and yourself especially, since you have
FORMAL COMPLAINTS LODGED AGAINST BOTH OF YOU.

Now it becomes a bit dicey for you, as your RULES AND REGULATIONS OF YOUR DEPARTMENT CLAIM § 605.6 Investigations and Informal Proceedings

(g) Preliminary Screening of Complaints. Any complaint
received by the Office of Chief Counsel against a member
of the Committee or Staff counsel involving alleged
misconduct shall be transmitted forthwith to the Committee
Chairperson, who shall assign it either to the Office of
Chief Counsel or to special counsel who shall conduct or
direct the appropriate investigation, and give a written
recommendation as to the disposition of the Complaint to
the Committee Chairperson, who shall determine the
appropriate disposition of the Complaint.

Any such Complaint which relates to the Committee Chairperson shall, in the first instance, be transmitted to a Hearing Panel Chairperson, who shall conduct the appropriate investigation and determine the appropriate disposition of the Complaint.

My complaint Mr. Roy Reardon is a twofold problem for you as the FORMAL COMPLAINTS YOU HAVE CONCEALED SINCE FEBRUARY 2009, are against YOU, acting as the Chair of the DDC and your partner in crime, Mr. Alan Friedberg, acting as Chief Counsel.

It is clever how in your SELF DISMISSING LETTER which defies ethics, you try and CONCEAL that Friedberg’s complaint has been transferred to you, which according to your own rules would be a violation, as the COMPLAINT is also against YOU.

Thus, you are AGAIN violating your OWN rules by trying to hide that you
also are knowingly COMPLAINED of FORMALLY, by way of the Sampson
Letters you have received several times now and the ORIGINAL
COMPLAINT I re-filed. Nice try, though, “desperate men…”

3. Amazingly, your letter continues “In any event, your new "complaint" against
Mr. Friedberg provides no basis on which the Committee should pursue
action.” First, there is NO NEW COMPLAINT, this is merely a re-filing of
the ORIGINAL COMPLAINT you have ILLEGALLY CONCEALED in
violation of LAW against both you and Mr. Alan W. Friedberg and now your trying to
make it as a new complaint is both ridiculous and further criminal and will so
be reported to ALL appropriate oversight authorities and criminal
investigators of your continued violations and further attempt at CRIMINAL
CONCEALMENT.

Second, since you should not be handling complaints against yourself or your partner in crime Mr. Friedberg, it defies logic and law how you claim there is no basis in a complaint against yourself and where you should have already turned the matter over, per your rules you would have to turn the matter over to a Hearing Panel Chair, which obviously you fail to do in regard to the FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST YOU AND MR.
FRIEDBERG.

Again serving as prima facie evidence of your CONTINUED
CRIMINAL CONDUCT, this statement will also be forwarded to all
appropriate oversight of your continued CRIMINAL CONDUCT.

4. The next statement truly shows your detachment from both reality and the
rules and regulations that define ETHICS. I quote your insanity, “Indeed, you
appear to be arguing that anyone associated with the Committee is precluded
from considering the merits of your complaint.” Yes indeed Mr. Reardon I do
make the claim that NOBODY in your department can handle these
complaints and for several factual reasons.

First, your department is a DEFENDANT in a 12-COUNT, 12-TRILLION dollar LAWSUIT, which I am certain you are not concealing from state auditors, well, perhaps you could clarify that for me in writing, as I am sure you are reporting the liability on
your and the states books, liabilities directly related to your CRIMINAL
CONDUCT and CONTINUED CRIMINAL CONDUCT.

As DEFENDANT’S in the ONGOING LEGAL ACTION the whole First
Department is precluded from involvement due to CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST and THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY this creates.
Next, the CONFLICTS and APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY also act
together to create CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION OF OFFICIAL
PROCEEDINGS. This CRIMINAL ACT, also will be reported to your
oversight and CRIMINAL INVESTIGATORS.

As the First Department DDC is a DEFENDANT in the LAWSUIT, the DDC
also has representative ILLEGAL counsel, the New York Attorney General
and Monica Connell of their offices.

Upon filing the complaints against other DEFENDANTS in the same LAWSUIT, Ms. Connell advised me as YOUR COUNSEL to file the complaints with your offices against the Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner attorneys (as the attorneys complained of are licensed
there) but that they would be moved instantly to a NON CONFLICTED
THIRD PARTY.

Moved to avoid the OBVIOUS CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND APPEARANCES OF IMPROPRIETY your handling of the complaints creates.

Yet, somehow, you sneaky dog, you and your partner in
crime, Mr. Friedberg, interceded and attempted to DISMISS COMPLAINTS
AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS IN THE LAWSUIT YOUR
DEPARTMENT IS A NAMED DEFENDANT IN.

Again, these CONFLICTS act to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE and will duly be noted to all
oversight of the DDC and CRIMINAL INVESTIGATORS.

Therefore, your question asks if I think anyone in your department can handle
these complaints and the answer is NO THEY CANNOT and I advise YOU,
Mr. Friedberg and any other department official that each act on these
complaints will result in further FORMAL COMPLAINTS to your oversight
and CRIMINAL INVESTIGATORS.

5. Your letter continues insanely “On October 7, 2009 I wrote to you advising that your previous complaints against Mr. Friedberg and other attorneys have been closed.” Now here your sneakiness is better than a proverbial “snake in the grass” as you attempt to state that my previous complaints filed against you and Mr. Friedberg for dismissing complaints against other DEFENDANTS are closed. Mixing apples and oranges while hiding the beef.

First, my previous complaints against other attorneys, resulted in you and Mr.
Friedberg handling them, leading to separate complaints against both you and
Mr. Friedberg.

Love how you refer to “other attorneys” in a third person voice, versus
identifying that YOU Mr. Reardon, are one of the “other” attorneys you
reference. Do you often refer to yourself in the third person; this is a very
symbolic sign of pathological behavior indicating delusion. Perhaps you
could have written more accurately, something like – your complaints against
Mr. Friedberg, MYSELF and other attorneys.

Again, you CONCEAL MATERIAL FACTS, which creates further CRIMINAL CONDUCT.
Finally, I am not sure how the FORMAL COMPLAINTS can be closed when they have not been opened formally with Complaint Numbers for me to even respond too, as demanded in my complaint and as part of the RULES and REGULATIONS of your department that you psychotically continue to ignore, ah, “desperate men…”

6. Finally, this my favorite act of your insanity, I quote, “You may wish to
consider consulting with counsel regarding the matters raised in your
submissions.” To be clear, I have consulted counsel, YOUR COUNSEL the
New York Attorney General and it was determined that you are conflicted and
cannot handle complaints against other Defendants nor yourself and Mr.
Friedberg, per your own departmental Rules and Regulation, Part 600, per the
Attorney Code of Conduct and Law. The result, was to have the complaints moved to a NON CONFLICTED THIRD PARTY.

I advise you therefore to consider consulting with YOUR COUNSEL regarding the matters raised against you CRIMINALLY and then CIVIL charges against you and your
department in the civil complaint.

I advise you to consult your counsel as to further pestering me directly, where
as you know, I represent myself Pro Se, so it is highly unethical and against
the Attorney Conduct Code for you, an attorney, to be contacting me directly
when you have representative counsel.

I find teaching your ethics at this point to be an utter waste of my time, as you seem not be able to discern realistically what your own ethical obligations are, nor what the Rules
you are charged with oversighting state and finally the Law.

I therefore highly recommend that you discontinue with contacting me directly and have
your attorney handle these matters going forward.

Of course, your attorney, the New York Attorney General, is also a DEFENDANT in my LAWSUIT and his representation is therefore suspect as aiding and abetting illegally your department through CONFLICTED representation that VIOLATES the NYAG Rules Public Office Rule 17 for one and that ILLEGAL REPRESENTATION also compounds to cause
Obstruction of Justice as the Conflict precludes the NYAG from doing his public duty of investigating dirty rotten Public Officials, like yourself and Mr. Friedberg.

As my LAWSUIT has been marked legally “RELATED” by Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin to that of the First Department DDC Whistleblower case of Christine C. Anderson, we see that Anderson similarly is complaining that the NYAG illegal representation of State Defendants from your offices, is a Violation of the NYAG Rules and Regulations and Law, whereby you can get a gander for her position at the following URL, incorporated by reference in entirety herein @ ____________

The allegations in the FORMAL COMPLAINTS against Mr. Friedberg and yourself are replete with concrete evidence of crimes you are committing by violating the very ethics laws you and Mr. Friedberg are in charge of upholding. Conflicts like your department and several of the First Department Judges are direct defendants in a TWELVE COUNT, TWELVE TRILLION DOLLAR FEDERAL LAWSUIT that of course, I know you are not too delusional to have reported this liability and your involvement to any state auditors, state agencies and others who have liability resulting from your continued criminal conduct.

The very fact that you attempt to ignore the conflicts and continue to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE in violation of FEDERAL and STATE CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION LAWS, ATTORNEY ETHICS CODES and more will be formally reported to your oversight and criminal authorities.

Yet, while your letter attempts to claim no conflict, almost, you failed to sign and
return the CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE FORM attached to the
COMPLAINT. This failure serves as further evidence of your CRIMINAL
OBSTRUCTION through CONFLICT OF INTEREST, which now will be formulated
along with this letter, to several of your oversight authorities, as a FORMAL AFFIRMED
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST YOU.

Under the laws of NEW YORK and the UNITED STATES, in the interim until authorities can arrest you for your felonious acts, I place you under CITIZENS ARREST and I advise you not only to seek independent counsel but also to turn yourself in to the proper authorities for processing for FELONY charges both state and federal.

I remind you that I have sent the JUDICIARY COMMITTEE OF NEW YORK
and FEDERAL AUTHORITIES information regarding your involvement in RICO
related crimes, along with many in your department.

Quite contrary to your claim, I do not think anyone in your CORRUPT COMMITTEE or DEPARTMENT can handle these complaints without conflict and if you are so confident in your meritorious good work on behalf of the Good People of New York, you should welcome a NON CONFLICTED THIRD PARTY review, as certainly you have nothing to hide.

Nothing to hide but everything, including the complaint against yourself that you keep concealing, even in your recent reply trying to dismiss the FORMAL COMPLAINT
against Mr. Friedberg while failing to state that you are also complained of since February of 2009, making your handling of any complaints, including your own, not only conflicted but criminal. Your attached letter, mentions other attorneys complained of but
fails to mention that YOU sir are one of those complained of and therefore are certainly
conflicted.

II. Actions to be Taken
• Please see 78 Page Complaint Against You filed for a Second Time since
February 2009 after you concealed those complaints

• This complaint is a refilling of that complaint and submission to the
Judiciary Committee for Oversight of Your Office and pursuing criminal investigations
within their scope of power over your Department, as part of the ONGOING
INVESTIGATION BY THE NEW YORK SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
ABOUT YOUR and YOUR DEPARTMENTS FAILURE IN TOTO.

• Note that we are attaching copy of a SWORN AFFIRMED CRIMINAL
COMPLAINT to all of the following, including but not limited to,
o Blah
o Blah

III. Conclusion
According to Whistleblower Christine Anderson under sworn oath in a Federal
Court and many others who have come forth to expose the ongoing Whitewashing of
Complaints, your offices are alleged to be involved in criminal obstruction of official
proceedings and threatening federal witnesses.

Nice reputation for an ETHICS department but we will get to that in a moment.

Not only are your offices accused of obstructing proceedings against “Favored Law Firms and Lawyers” but further criminal Whitewashing of Complaints was also alleged in regard to Whitewashing disciplinary complaints for the US Attorney, District Attorney and Assistant District Attorney by the “Cleaner”.

The “Cleaner” aka Naomi Goldstein of your offices, so named by your former Staff Attorney, Whistleblower Christine C. Anderson your offices should be under not only internal investigation but external.

Again, solid reasons for you and your entire department’s recusal from further involvement, other than turning yourself in and getting non-conflicted counsel to represent you.

Further, and most importantly, your failure to regulate the misconducts of the lawyers in your department according to well established rules and regulations of your department, you have failed this great nation and the People of the Great State of New York in your obfuscations of regulation.

For example, had you done your job investigating Proskauer Rose for example when I first complained, your department could have saved many peoples losses in the Sir Allan Stanford affairs, where Proskauer Rose and Partner Thomas Sjoblom ( a former SEC Enforcement Employee ) were involved in teaching employees how to lie to Federal Authorities and have been sued for the entire amount of the Ponzi losses in a Global Class Action lawsuit.

My recommendation will be for any unrecoverable losses that those VICTIMS sue you and
your department for failure to regulate and possible conspiratorial roles in the cover up of
the crimes.

Had you investigated Proskauer Rose when I first informed you of their misconducts
and crimes, you also could have prevented many people over the 7 seven years from
losing their lives savings in the Bernard Madoff affair and saved the hundreds of charities
destroyed by Madoff and lives ruined.

Yes, you are the oversight that could have prevented these calamities and are responsible for your failures to the victims. In fact, since Proskauer appears to have senior partners basically running the First Department and the Ethics Department from Steven C. Krane, a Proskauer partner caught handling his own and his firms complaints while an officer of the First Department DDC, to recently deceased DDC officer Stephen Rakowe Kaye, a Proskauer partner and married to former Chief Judge Judith Kaye who had ultimate control over the department with her husband and Krane her former clerk, no wonder complaints bounced off them into your trash can.

Yet and personally more tragic, is the fact that had you done your job regulating
the attorneys, your “favored law firms and lawyers” most likely a BOMB would not have
been placed in my family minivan ( images at www.iviewit.tv ) allowing someone to
ATTEMPT to MURDER us.

It is strange to note how the timing of that event coincided with discovery that STEVEN C. KRANE of Proskauer and Thomas Cahill ( former Chief Counsel of the DDC ) where found violating First Department DDC Rules and Regulations, Attorney Conduct Codes and Law leading to the First Department Court, in inanimous consent, transferring complaints against Krane of PROSKAUER and also a FIRST DEPARTMENT OFFICER, Krane’s Proskauer partners he was representing ILLEGALLY in complaints while a DDC OFFICER and even Krane representing himself while an officer ( sounds familiar ).

Thomas Cahill also was transferred for Special Inquiry at that time and your recent handling of that complaint, with Mr. Stephen Lamont and attempting to dismiss that complaint, again while really clever, will also be further evidence of your CRIMINAL ACTS filed with CRIMINAL AUTHORITIES.

Lest us not forget to remind those judging your actions of the fact that your
department is supposed to regulate Wall Street lawyers and we can all see what your lax
regulations have produced.

I also remind you that your department appears to be the regulator for several fine attorneys in the Justice Department and Office of Legal Counsel who are being accused of war crimes for their violations of ethics and law that have allowed the torture and murder of innocent untried people, quite similar to Nazi Extermination Camps where habeas rights similarly were removed by dirty rotten lawyers, who were actually criminals with legal degrees who made concentration camps and murder legal for undesirables.

I remind you of the Judges Trial so that today while you feel elevated above the law, enough so to first conceal and then attempt to dismiss complaints against yourself, in drunken and high delusions of grandeur, that one day you will be tried for these crimes as Justice is restored and even the Nazi lawyers and judges had their day in the infamous Judges Trial at the Nuremberg Trials. I await hearing your defenses from behind the glass.

Truly, and I mean this FIGURATIVELY not LITERALLY, I hope this letter feels
like a bomb in your car and you may live with your family in similar trepidation that one
day your world will end, when your scam ends and you are tried in a fair and impartial
court, free of conflict ( you know the thing your supposed to be protecting ) where
hopefully you will serve the remainder of your life contemplating the magnanimity of the
damage you have done to my family, my shareholders, those you have embroiled in your
crimes like Ms. Anderson, those victims of your crimes that appear lining up with each
new Judiciary Committee, all those who lost homes or 401k’s from lawyers schemes in
an unregulated capacity free to commit financial crimes, as the REGULATOR, YOU was
naught more than a criminal in on the crimes.

Most DisRespectfully Yours,

Eliot I. Bernstein
Founder & Inventor

Iviewit Holdings, Inc. – DL
Iviewit Holdings, Inc. – DL
Iviewit Holdings, Inc. – FL
Iviewit Technologies, Inc. – DL
Uview.com, Inc. – DL
Iviewit.com, Inc. – FL
Iviewit.com, Inc. – DL
I.C., Inc. – FL
Iviewit.com LLC – DL
Iviewit LLC – DL
Iviewit Corporation – FL
Iviewit, Inc. – FL
Iviewit, Inc. – DL
Iviewit Corporation
cc/ec:

Roy L. Reardon
Chairman Monday, December 14, 2009
New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
First Judicial Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee

Re: YOUR CONTINUED INSANITY IN HANDLING COMPLAINTS AGAINST YOURSELF,
ALAN W. FRIEDBERG AND OTHER DEFENDANTS IN A TWELVE COUNT TWELVE
TRILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT LEGALLY RELATED TO A WHISTLEBLOWER
CAUSING MASS LIABILITY YOU ARE CONCEALING FROM THE STATE AND
PEOPLE OF NEW YORK DIRECTLY RESULTING FROM YOUR CONTINUED
CRIMINAL CONDUCT
roy reardon
Iviewit Holdings , Inc.
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.


Source:
www.iviewit.tv
r
Much More on Roy L. Reardon Coming Soon.
r