Raymond Anthony Joao – Misrepresented Proskauer Partner and Convicted Felon Marc Dreier Partner

2004 08 11 Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department Orders the complaints against Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer, Raymond Joao, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolf & Schlissel and Steven C. Krane to be moved for immediate investigation due to the appearance of impropriety and conflicts. The case was then transferred to the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division Second Department where further conflicts with Krane were discovered that derailed the investigation and caused a flurry of further complaints against the Second Department members.

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

2004 07 12 Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s, Chief Counsel, Thomas Cahill’s Motion to move the complaints of Steven C. Krane and Proskauer, note this comes after Cahill has a filed complaint against him, making this further reason for another complaint against him.

2004 07 28 Cahill to move Krane.

2004 07 08 Iviewit Motion to the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department regarding the conflicts and violations of public offices of Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose, Steven C. Krane, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolf & Schlissel and Raymond A. Joao and requesting immediate investigation and to move the complaints.

2003 05 26 Iviewit Rebuttal to Raymond Joao attorney misconduct complaint. 1753 Pages BOOKMARKED

2003 04 16 Supreme Court of New York First Department Disciplinary Committee regarding reply to Raymond Joao complaint.

2003 09 02 Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee response regarding Raymond Joao, Proskauer Rose, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolf & Schlissel and Kenneth Rubenstein bar complaints which comes way late as it was lost in the mail. The document is probably fraudulent and tries to dismiss the complaints as a civil matter, although they ignore the state, federal and international crimes against the government and foreign nations exposed in the complaints.

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

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

Raymond Anthony Joao

my Blog about Raymond A. Joao - to do with the Trillion Dollar Stolen Patent - Iviewit - www.DeniedPatent.com

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Raymond A. Joao Complaint

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Specifics of General Complaint

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

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

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

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

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

t

0 comments:

About This Blog

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP