Proskauer Rose Law Firm Knows that Stephen Lamont has NO LEGAL Right to Speak on Behalf of iViewit.
So why is the Corrupt Law Firm of Proskauer Rose Responding to an Illegal Filing by Stephen Lamont on Behalf of Iviewit Technologies?
Could it be that Gregg Mashberg of Proskauer Rose is doing this to deliberately fraud the courts, as Stephen Lamont is VERY Connected to Judith Kaye, ex-supreme court judge who was married to Proskauer Rose Partner Stephen Kaye - and Judith Kaye use to Work at IBM and is connected with William Dick who also use to work at IBM and is connected to the Iviewit Patent Suppression and iViewit Invention Theft.
So it seems to me that New York Attorney Gregg M. Mashberg, Proskauer Rose Law Firm is deliberately frauding the courts and the motive seems to me to be to cause further stalling of the Iviewit Technology patent and to further prolong the Federal RICO Lawsuit against Proskauer Rose, the Criminal Complaint and SEC Complaint Against Proskauer Rose and to Protect the Corrupt MPEG LA to keep making Billions a year on a technology that Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose LLP knew he had stolen for MPEG LA over a Decade Ago.
So why is this all going on Right Now?
What is P. Stephen Lamont up to with Gregg M. Mashberg and the Pro Se Party over there at the Corrupt Proskauer Rose Law Firm?
Eliot Bernstein did Not initiate this at this Time, P. Stephen Lamont did and P. Stephen Lamont has No Legal Right to Speak for Eliot Bernstein, nor does P. Stephen Lamont have a right to speak for the iViewit Investors or the iViewit Inventors.
For Proskauer Rose LLP to Continue in this scam, they are blatantly playing games on Judge Shira Scheindlin and making a mockery out of the New York Courts. Gregg M. Mashberg, Proskauer Rose is Doing This Deliberately to confuse the issue and to keep Stephen Lamont involved somehow. All the Motives here are Unclear, and well it is not like YOU can Complain to the New York Bar - as Proskauer Rose LLP controls the New York Bar.
Stephen Lamont is Under Investigation for Fraudulently Representing iViewit and other Suspected Illegal Activities and though Gregg M. Mashberg and Proskauer Rose LLP KNOW this, still Gregg M. Mashberg files this JOKE on the New York Courts, Why?
Gregg M. Mashberg - Proskauer Rose LLP
Just How Corrupt is Gregg M. Mashberg - I mean Come on Stephen Lamont ILLEGALLY Files a "Bernstein Vs. Appellate Division First Department..." and Even though Gregg Mashberg, Proskauer Rose LLP Attorney KNOWS that P. Stephen Lamont has No Right to Do so, Still Gregg M. Mashberg of Proskauer Rose LLP has a RESPONSE Delivered?
A Hand Delivered Response from Gregg M. Mashberg of Proskauer Rose LLP to Judge Shira A. Scheindlin. Proskauer Rose LLP, Attorney Gregg M. Mashberg RESPONDS to P. Stephen Lamont's Fraudulent Court Filings on Behalf of iViewit when Gregg M. Mashberg - Proskauer Rose LLPAttorrney knows that Stephen Lamont has no Right to be filing anything on behalf of iViewit.
Proskauer Rose LLP, Gregg M. Mashberg Attorneys Pro Se for Proskauer Rose LLP
and Attorneys for Kenneth Rubenstein, Steven C. Krane and and the Estate of Steven Rackow Kaye .. and "Respectfully Submitted" - that is BULL - it is Lies and Cover Ups and no Respect Intended..
The Corrupt Proskauer Rose LLP is Still representing themselves in the Iviewit Stolen Technology Case. Odd that 2 of the Above Attorneys have Died, and they are VERY Guilty of Stealing a 13 Trillion Dollar Patent. And yet still Proskauer Ross LLP seems to Run the New York Justice System and Get Their Way.
There is Tons of Proof on Proskauer Rose's Guilt in the Stealing of the Iviewit Technologies Invention and in Proskauer Roses Law Firm using this to Entice Enron, which led to the Collapse of Enron and Billions Lost to Investors. Which is the Same thing that Will Soon happen at Intel Corp. , Time Warner, Warner Bros., SONY, Lockheed Martin, and More..
So what is Gregg M. Mashberg and the Corrupt Proskauer Rose Law Firm Really Up to with this, the Latest Stunt in the Decade Old Saga of Proskauer Rose Patent Thieves for MPEG LA.
Click Here for Eliot Bernstein iViewit Technology SEC Complaint Against Proskauer Rose, Kenneth Rubenstein, Stephen Kaye, MPEG LA and many others...
Got a Tip on Gregg M. Mashberg or Proskauer Rose LLP ?
eMail me Crystal L. Cox ~ Investigative Blogger
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
Showing newest posts with label Stephen Kaye. Show older posts
Showing newest posts with label Stephen Kaye. Show older posts
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Thursday, October 7, 2010
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
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Top Judge Sets Liberal Course for New York - Jonathan Lippman - Judith Kaye - Proskauer Rose LLP - Iviewit Technologies - Connections and Affiliations
"" Gov. David A. Paterson nominated Jonathan Lippman to head the New York Court of Appeals in January 2009, making him the chief judge of the state.
The choice was a gamble: The judge, a longtime court administrator, did not have a long history of deciding cases, and there was almost no record of his political views.
Judge Jonathan Lippman has helped turn the Court of Appeals into a scrappier, more divided and more liberal panel, its rulings and court statistics show.
Now, a year in, the parameters of the Lippman court are coming into focus. He has helped turn the Court of Appeals into a scrappier, more divided and more liberal panel, its rulings and court statistics show.
To get the rulings he wants, the decisions show, the new chief judge has built alliances case by case with each of the four judges who were nominated by the last Republican governor, George E. Pataki, cracking the conservative majority.
The changes to the culture of the court, New York’s highest — which has sometimes been one of the most influential state courts in the country — are especially striking when Chief Judge Lippman’s approach is compared with the judicial style of his predecessor, Judith S. Kaye. She had prized unanimity.
In the past year, the court has issued a series of sharply divided decisions that have been surprising from a judicial body with a clear 4-to-3 conservative majority. They have included decisions favoring criminal defendants and injured workers, expanding environmental challenges and extolling individual rights against the police.
“The message he is sending is he doesn’t mind fighting for a much more progressive direction at the court,” Vincent M. Bonventre, a professor at Albany Law School who studies the court, said of Judge Lippman.
Though fiscal and political problems have plagued Mr. Paterson, a Democrat, Judge Lippman’s nomination may be one of his most enduring accomplishments in shaping policy. Judge Lippman, 64, does not reach mandatory retirement age until 2015.
Noting that the Supreme Court had yet to rule on questions presented by Global Positioning Systems, for example, the Court of Appeals ruled 4 to 3 that the State Constitution barred the police from placing GPS tracking devices on cars without a warrant.
A different Republican judge joined the three Democratic appointees in another divided ruling, this one striking down a youth curfew in Rochester as unconstitutional, though other courts around the country have approved such laws.
The Lippman court has also shifted ground on worker injury suits, saying that in the past the court too rigidly limited some of them. It has also signaled a new interest in arguments from criminal defendants, sharply increasing, at Judge Lippman’s urging, the number of appeals it is considering.
In an interview, Judge Lippman acknowledged that he had a different approach from that of Judge Kaye, a longtime collaborator in running the courts.
She was also nominated by a Democrat, former Gov. Mario M. Cuomo, but during her nearly 16 years as chief judge, she often worked for unified rulings.
“I am a result-oriented person,” Judge Lippman said, “and the result I am looking for is not necessarily unanimity.”
According to the court, unanimous rulings declined from about 82 percent during 2008, Judge Kaye’s final year, to 69 percent in Judge Lippman’s first year.
During Judge Kaye’s tenure, the court became more conservative partly because of the arrival of the four Pataki judges. Professor Bonventre, the Albany Law School expert, said that divided decisions became more common in Judge Kaye’s final years but that dissents increased further after Judge Lippman arrived.
The rulings indicate that on occasion, Judge Lippman has tailored his arguments to attract one of the four Pataki judges.
In a decision he wrote in September, the court waded into politics by overruling two lower courts that had said Mr. Paterson’s appointment of Richard Ravitch as lieutenant governor was unlawful.
That view, Judge Lippman wrote, would “frustrate the work of the executive branch.”
It was an argument that seemed crafted to appeal to Judge Susan P. Read, a staunch conservative but a former top legal adviser to Governor Pataki, who was not shy about exerting executive authority. It was a party-line vote, except that Judge Read broke with the other Pataki appointees.
In the environmental case, Judge Lippman and the other two Democratic appointees aligned with two of the Republican-appointed judges, Victoria A. Graffeo, a onetime Republican legislative lawyer, and Robert S. Smith, who had sometimes expressed libertarian views.
The decision, written by Judge Smith, appeared to involve tradeoffs.
It tartly noted that the suit sought to kill a proposed hotel to protect obscure species, the Eastern spadefoot toad and the worm snake.
The hotel got a green light. But in the process, the case gave environmentalists one of their most important court victories in New York in nearly 20 years. The majority said a 1991 ruling of the court had been too narrowly applied to limit those who could bring such suits to immediate neighbors.
Stephen F. Downs, the lawyer for Save the Pine Bush, the Albany group that brought the suit, said someone on the bench seemed to be paying for an environmental victory with a defeat for the spadefoot toad. “My impression,” Mr. Downs said, “was there was a certain amount of horse trading that went on.”
That would be vintage Lippman, people who know him say. He was a get-things-done administrator, said a retired judge, Betty Weinberg Ellerin, who has known him throughout his 38-year legal career. ""
Source of Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/nyregion/18lippman.html
New York Court Corruption, Affiliations and Conflicts of Interest. Time for Accountability in the New York Courts. Time Whistleblowers were heard and time Proskauer Rose to be accountable for their actions. The Iviewit Stolen Patent Case has many players, however Proskauer Rose is the Patent Attorney that STOLE the Trillion Dollar Patent and Judge Judith Kaye and Her Connections to Proskauer Rose through her Husband.. Stephen Kaye made a Trillion Dollar Patent Theft such as the Eliot Bernstein and Iviewit Technologies Stolen Patent, seem like a Simple "Standard of Practice"...
Pay Attention Folks as more Unfolds on the Connections, Cronism and Conflicts of Interest of Proskauer Rose LLP - Ex-Judge Judith Kaye, Andrew Cuomo ( whose Father Appointed Judith Kaye) and how this all relates to court corruption in New York...
posted here by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at
www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV
The choice was a gamble: The judge, a longtime court administrator, did not have a long history of deciding cases, and there was almost no record of his political views.
Judge Jonathan Lippman has helped turn the Court of Appeals into a scrappier, more divided and more liberal panel, its rulings and court statistics show.
Now, a year in, the parameters of the Lippman court are coming into focus. He has helped turn the Court of Appeals into a scrappier, more divided and more liberal panel, its rulings and court statistics show.
To get the rulings he wants, the decisions show, the new chief judge has built alliances case by case with each of the four judges who were nominated by the last Republican governor, George E. Pataki, cracking the conservative majority.
The changes to the culture of the court, New York’s highest — which has sometimes been one of the most influential state courts in the country — are especially striking when Chief Judge Lippman’s approach is compared with the judicial style of his predecessor, Judith S. Kaye. She had prized unanimity.
In the past year, the court has issued a series of sharply divided decisions that have been surprising from a judicial body with a clear 4-to-3 conservative majority. They have included decisions favoring criminal defendants and injured workers, expanding environmental challenges and extolling individual rights against the police.
“The message he is sending is he doesn’t mind fighting for a much more progressive direction at the court,” Vincent M. Bonventre, a professor at Albany Law School who studies the court, said of Judge Lippman.
Though fiscal and political problems have plagued Mr. Paterson, a Democrat, Judge Lippman’s nomination may be one of his most enduring accomplishments in shaping policy. Judge Lippman, 64, does not reach mandatory retirement age until 2015.
Noting that the Supreme Court had yet to rule on questions presented by Global Positioning Systems, for example, the Court of Appeals ruled 4 to 3 that the State Constitution barred the police from placing GPS tracking devices on cars without a warrant.
A different Republican judge joined the three Democratic appointees in another divided ruling, this one striking down a youth curfew in Rochester as unconstitutional, though other courts around the country have approved such laws.
The Lippman court has also shifted ground on worker injury suits, saying that in the past the court too rigidly limited some of them. It has also signaled a new interest in arguments from criminal defendants, sharply increasing, at Judge Lippman’s urging, the number of appeals it is considering.
In an interview, Judge Lippman acknowledged that he had a different approach from that of Judge Kaye, a longtime collaborator in running the courts.
She was also nominated by a Democrat, former Gov. Mario M. Cuomo, but during her nearly 16 years as chief judge, she often worked for unified rulings.
“I am a result-oriented person,” Judge Lippman said, “and the result I am looking for is not necessarily unanimity.”
According to the court, unanimous rulings declined from about 82 percent during 2008, Judge Kaye’s final year, to 69 percent in Judge Lippman’s first year.
During Judge Kaye’s tenure, the court became more conservative partly because of the arrival of the four Pataki judges. Professor Bonventre, the Albany Law School expert, said that divided decisions became more common in Judge Kaye’s final years but that dissents increased further after Judge Lippman arrived.
The rulings indicate that on occasion, Judge Lippman has tailored his arguments to attract one of the four Pataki judges.
In a decision he wrote in September, the court waded into politics by overruling two lower courts that had said Mr. Paterson’s appointment of Richard Ravitch as lieutenant governor was unlawful.
That view, Judge Lippman wrote, would “frustrate the work of the executive branch.”
It was an argument that seemed crafted to appeal to Judge Susan P. Read, a staunch conservative but a former top legal adviser to Governor Pataki, who was not shy about exerting executive authority. It was a party-line vote, except that Judge Read broke with the other Pataki appointees.
In the environmental case, Judge Lippman and the other two Democratic appointees aligned with two of the Republican-appointed judges, Victoria A. Graffeo, a onetime Republican legislative lawyer, and Robert S. Smith, who had sometimes expressed libertarian views.
The decision, written by Judge Smith, appeared to involve tradeoffs.
It tartly noted that the suit sought to kill a proposed hotel to protect obscure species, the Eastern spadefoot toad and the worm snake.
The hotel got a green light. But in the process, the case gave environmentalists one of their most important court victories in New York in nearly 20 years. The majority said a 1991 ruling of the court had been too narrowly applied to limit those who could bring such suits to immediate neighbors.
Stephen F. Downs, the lawyer for Save the Pine Bush, the Albany group that brought the suit, said someone on the bench seemed to be paying for an environmental victory with a defeat for the spadefoot toad. “My impression,” Mr. Downs said, “was there was a certain amount of horse trading that went on.”
That would be vintage Lippman, people who know him say. He was a get-things-done administrator, said a retired judge, Betty Weinberg Ellerin, who has known him throughout his 38-year legal career. ""
Source of Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/nyregion/18lippman.html
New York Court Corruption, Affiliations and Conflicts of Interest. Time for Accountability in the New York Courts. Time Whistleblowers were heard and time Proskauer Rose to be accountable for their actions. The Iviewit Stolen Patent Case has many players, however Proskauer Rose is the Patent Attorney that STOLE the Trillion Dollar Patent and Judge Judith Kaye and Her Connections to Proskauer Rose through her Husband.. Stephen Kaye made a Trillion Dollar Patent Theft such as the Eliot Bernstein and Iviewit Technologies Stolen Patent, seem like a Simple "Standard of Practice"...
Pay Attention Folks as more Unfolds on the Connections, Cronism and Conflicts of Interest of Proskauer Rose LLP - Ex-Judge Judith Kaye, Andrew Cuomo ( whose Father Appointed Judith Kaye) and how this all relates to court corruption in New York...
posted here by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at
www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)