Eliot Bernstein, Iviewit Technologies Notifies Governor Charlie Crist of Florida Corruption at Suggestion of Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum

Eliot Bernstein Notifies Florida Governor of Massive Florida Corruption at the Suggestion of Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum.

" Friday, September 03, 2010

Hon. Governor Charlie Crist
Office of Governor Charlie Crist
State of Florida

Dear Honorable Governor Charlie Crist,

Per the Attorney General of the Great State of Florida, I write to you for inclusion into the ongoing Nineteenth Statewide Grand Jury, the Eliot Bernstein and Iviewit companies claims of criminal RICO and ANTITRUST activities by certain members of the Florida Supreme Court, the Florida Bar, the Boca Raton P.D., the law firms Proskauer Rose LLP, Foley & Lardner LLP and more.

The extent of these claims of Public Office Corruption reach the highest levels of Florida government and thus are germane to the Grand Jury’s request for information and stated purpose, “The Office of Statewide Prosecution has established a public corruption hotline for anyone who believes they have information concerning a criminal offense involving public corruption or wishes to suggest issues the Statewide Grand Jury should investigate regarding public corruption.

Below is a communication from Attorney General McCollum in response to my request to his offices for inclusion, whereby he urges me to contact and join your offices of these most serious allegations as well.

I am contacting your offices again, as I have contacted them in the past regarding these matters and am asking that your offices take all actions necessary to have these allegations investigated by the Florida Grand Jury your office has convened, as well as, any other criminal actions you may deem appropriate in investigating these matters and notifying the proper authorities of the allegations alleged herein and in the URL links provided herein.

I am happy to provide additional information or testimony relating to the matters to any investigators you deem appropriate or before the Grand Jury.

Many of these matters have crossed state lines through the law firms accused and in New York, a NY Supreme Court Whistleblower Christine Anderson, Esq. has identified a Racketeering type organization within not only the NY Courts and NY Disciplinary Agencies but the NY prosecutorial offices, including the US Attorney, the NY Attorney General Cuomo’s offices and the NY District Attorneys Office.

The allegations rise to senior members of these public offices acting in conspiracy to deprive due process to citizens’ complaints against them and in fact, a “Cleaner”, Naomi Goldstein of the NY Supreme Court was allegedly according to Anderson Whitewashing attorney complaints for these prosecutors. In addition, Anderson claims “favored lawyers and law firms” had their complaints cleaned as well.

The Anderson case now also involves Federal Obstruction of Justice in a federal Lawsuit, with death threats on Federal Witnesses on their way to testify in Federal Court. Extortion of state employees is also evidenced in Anderson, replete with physical assaults on the 60 yr. female Anderson, to either aid and abet or else by Senior New York Supreme Court Officials.

My Trillion Dollar Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit filed alongside and in support of Anderson’s Historic and Heroic Whistleblower claims, was legally “related” to the Anderson Whistleblower lawsuit by Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin.

Many of the defendants in my Fed RICO and ANTITRUST are located here in Florida, in fact all of my claims began in Florida, as that is where my companies and myself were located at the time the criminal activities were first discovered.

Proskauer partners were ordered for Investigation for Conflicts of Interest and Violations of Public office by the New York Supreme Court, in a unanimous consent of five justices of that court but those investigations are now under investigation for their failure to investigate.

The allegations in NY are almost identical to those I filed in Florida just different players from the same firms often having infiltrated and violated public offices to deny due process to my complaints in violation of law and attorney and judicial conduct codes.

All of my complaints in Florida in the courts and to all state agencies are herein officially requested to be re-opened in light of the revelations of new and damning information revealed in Anderson and new evidence against certain defendants in my lawsuit from Florida.

New evidence includes Defendant Proskauer Rose LLP and Partner Thomas Sjoblom’s involvement in the ExSir Robert Allen Stanford Ponzi scheme, Sjoblom found aiding and abetting Stanford Employees in a Miami Airport Hanger teaching them how to lie to SEC and FBI investigators.

As you know, Proskauer has been sued in a Global Class Action for the entire damages of Stanford, approximately 7 Billion US Dollars. Another thread to Florida is another Defendant in my Fed RICO, now infamous Ponzi schemer, Marc S. Dreier, Esq., who has been sentenced to 20 years for his Ponzi scheme.

Greenberg Traurig law firm, who represents the Florida Bar and Florida Supreme Court in my Fed RICO, acting in conflict as Greenberg Traurig was also former Patent Counsel for my companies and myself, where Greenberg has recently been alleged running a large Ponzi scheme in Florida, more information below. A link too many of the Florida specific crimes can be found at
http://iviewit.tv/supreme%20court/index.htm

and

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/oneofthesedays/index.htm

Complaints filed in Florida with the Florida Bar and Florida Supreme Court are requested to be re-opened by your offices with oversight by your offices to mitigate any further conflicts of interest and violations of Public Offices and law.

Complaints filed with the Florida Bar and Florida Supreme Court against, Florida Bar employees, Florida Supreme Court Public Officials, Proskauer Partners Christopher Clarke Wheeler, Esq. who was convicted of Felony DUI with Injury in Florida and Matthew Triggs who violated Florida Bar Rules in handling Complaints in multiple conflicts and violation of public office of the Florida Bar, are also being requested herein to have formal investigations into the matters reheard entirely based on a plethora of new information and evidence against the defendants in those matters and again instituted with oversight of your offices.

Similarly, we are requesting that your offices investigate the Florida Civil Court Case Civil Case No. 502001CA004671XXCDAB with new evidence showing a complete fraud on the court was orchestrated by Proskauer and Judge Jorge Labarga of the Florida Supreme Court, prior to your appointment of Labarga to the Florida Supreme Court.

I also note that members of your inner staff are formerly with Defendant Foley & Lardner, who acted as Solicitor General to the Florida Supreme Court while my complaints were being reviewed by that Court.

I also note that Justice Jorge Labarga and several of the Florida Supreme Court Justice and Court Officials are Defendants in my Trillion Dollar Fed RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit. I also note that several members or former members of the Florida Bar are Defendants in my Trillion Dollar Fed RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit.

Therefore, I request further that your offices in handling these matters proceed with extreme caution in ferreting out ALL Conflicts of Interest prior to involvement by any party, to preclude further possible charges against members of your office or any other party your offices join into these matters.

I have attached a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form for all parties, including yourself, to sign and return to my office at 2753 NW 34th St. Boca Raton, FL 33434, prior to ANY Actions you take in even considering the matter.

As a mass of Conflicts of Interest have been discovered in these matters already and the Whistleblower further identifying a criminal conspiracy within state agencies, this Conflict form is essential to ensuring fair and impartial due process of law by non conflicted parties. Any conflicts identified may be considered based on full disclosure and agreement by ALL parties involved or new non conflicted parties must be retained prior to disclosure of even the most basic information.

As these matters in New York and Florida are against some of the highest ranking officials in the states, I know that in New York Anderson and now other related cases and witnesses who testified to the New York Senate Judiciary Committee are seeking various forms of witness protection, I similarly would like to know what options for this type of protection are available to those who come forward in Florida.

As a car bombing victim of the RICO Criminal Enterprise, described in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit I feel that certain protections should already have been availed, in fact, I petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for such once already and this Motion is located at the URL

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004_10_07_Supreme_Court_Florida_Motion_Final_Cert_Signed.pdf
as well as, repeated requests since it was determined by Florida Fire Investigator Rick Lee that accelerants’ were the cause of the explosion that blew up three cars next to it, in Boynton Beach Florida. Despite repeated notice to Florida Law Enforcement, as you can see from the previous link they too were involved in the second act that protection from the court was requested for and therefore have never investigated these matters through public office corruption after public office corruption after public office corruption as defined herein and in the attached URL’s.

Please make all exhibits and links fully incorporated by reference herein into this letter for formal docketing in the Florida Grand Jury Request of Eliot Bernstein and the Iviewit Companies, each URL may have several URL’s, also hereby incorporated entirely by reference herein and for further use by the Grand Jury.

As Whistleblower Anderson in a sworn statement has claimed that she witnessed document destruction of investigatory files first hand (Anderson’s Statement to the New York Judiciary Committee attached below), please print each and every url in entirety for inclusion into this document and due to the fact that these matters pertain to US Patent Rights of an inventor, please retain these files and information for a period of no less than 20 yrs.

There are over a thousand documents at the URL http://www.iviewit.tv/ on the homepage under the Evidence Section on the homepage for your review and for docketing with the complaints and for review by investigators or Grand Jurors.

Despite whether the Florida Grand Jury investigates these most serious allegations of corruption at the highest levels of Florida Government, let this letter also serve as a formal request that your offices begin all necessary notices and/or investigations and notify all investigatory bodies necessary to investigate all those persons named in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit from Florida and notify them of the new evidence and requests for an entire review of all prior actions by any Florida Agency listed herein or in the URL’s embedded herein.

Please formally notify the following offices of this submission, including but not limited to, the Florida Inspector General (copied herein), the Florida US Attorney, the necessary Florida District Attorneys and the Florida Attorney General of the allegations and information contained herein, please have all parties sign prior to acceptance of ANY materials a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form, again prior to ANY actions or decisions being rendered or transfer of any confidential information.

Please take this communication as both a request to join the 19th Florida Grand Jury and Request for Formal Investigations of all of the following Florida Defendants in my Fed RICO and ANTITRUST by the Florida Governor and Florida Attorney General’s offices, please docket a separate complaint for each Florida organization and individual listed below;

PROSKAUER ROSE LLP, and, all of its Partners,

Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and
individual capacities,

CHRISTOPHER C. WHEELER, in his professional
and individual capacities,

MATTHEW M. TRIGGS in his official and individual
capacity for The Florida Bar and his professional and
individual capacities as a partner of Proskauer,

ALBERT T. GORTZ, in his professional
and individual capacities,

CHRISTOPHER PRUZASKI, in his professional
and individual capacities,

MARA LERNER ROBBINS, in her professional
and individual capacities,AMENDED

DONALD “ROCKY” THOMPSON, in his COMPLAINT
professional and individual capacities,

GAYLE COLEMAN, in her professional
and individual capacities,

DAVID GEORGE, in his professional
and individual capacities,

GEORGE A. PINCUS, in his professional
and individual capacities,

GREGG REED, in his professional
and individual capacities,

LEON GOLD, in his professional
and individual capacities,

MARCY HAHN-SAPERSTEIN, in her professional
and individual capacities,

KEVIN J. HEALY, in his professional
and individual capacities,

STUART KAPP, in his professional
and individual capacities,

RONALD F. STORETTE, in his professional
and individual capacities,

CHRIS WOLF, in his professional
and individual capacities,

JILL ZAMMAS, in her professional
and individual capacities,

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP, and, all of its Partners,
Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and
individual capacities,

MICHAEL C. GREBE, in his professional
and individual capacities,

WILLIAM J. DICK, in his professional
and individual capacities,

STATE OF FLORIDA,

OFFICE OF THE STATE COURTS ADMINISTRATOR FLORIDA,

HON. JORGE LABARGA in his official and individual capacities,

THE FLORIDA BAR,

JOHN ANTHONY BOGGS in his official and individual capacities,

KELLY OVERSTREET JOHNSON in her official
and individual capacities,

LORRAINE CHRISTINE HOFFMAN in her
official and individual capacities,

ERIC TURNER in his official and individual
capacities,

KENNETH MARVIN in his official and individual
capacities,

JOY A. BARTMON in her official and individual
capacities,

JERALD BEER in his official and individual
capacities,BROAD & CASSEL, and, all of its Partners,

Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and
individual capacities,

JAMES J. WHEELER, in his professional
and individual capacities,

FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,

HON. CHARLES T. WELLS, in his official and
individual capacities,

HON. HARRY LEE ANSTEAD, in his official and
individual capacities

HON. R. FRED LEWIS, in his official and
individual capacities,

HON. PEGGY A. QUINCE, in his official and
individual capacities,

HON. KENNETH B. BELL, in his official and
individual capacities,

THOMAS HALL, in his official and individual
capacities,

DEBORAH YARBOROUGH in her official and
individual capacities,

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION – FLORIDA,

CITY OF BOCA RATON, FLA.

BOCA RATON Police Department

ROBERT FLECHAUS in his official and
individual capacities,

ANDREW SCOTT in his official and individual
capacities,

CROSSBOW VENTURES, INC.,

ALPINE VENTURE CAPITAL PARTNERS LP,

STEPHEN J. WARNER, in his professional
and individual capacities,

RENE P. EICHENBERGER, in his professional
and individual capacities,

H. HICKMAN “HANK” POWELL, in his
professional and individual capacities,

MAURICE BUCHSBAUM, in his professional
and individual capacities,

ERIC CHEN, in his professional
and individual capacities,

AVI HERSH, in his professional
and individual capacities,

MATTHEW SHAW, in his professional
and individual capacities,

BRUCE W. SHEWMAKER, in his professional
and individual capacities,

RAVI M. UGALE, in his professional
and individual capacities,

DIGITAL INTERACTIVE STREAMS, INC.,

ROYAL O’BRIEN, in his professional
and individual capacities,

HUIZENGA HOLDINGS INCORPORATED,

WAYNE HUIZENGA, in his professional
and individual capacities,

WAYNE HUIZENGA, JR., in his professional
and individual capacities,

HOUSTON & SHAHADY, P.A., and any successors, and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,

BART A. HOUSTON, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,

FURR & COHEN, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,

BRADLEY S. SCHRAIBERG, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,

MOSKOWITZ, MANDELL, SALIM & SIMOWITZ, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,

WILLIAM G. SALIM, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,

SACHS SAX & KLEIN, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,

BEN ZUCKERMAN, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,

SPENCER M. SAX, in his professional and individual capacities,

SCHIFFRIN & BARROWAY LLP, and any successors, and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,

RICHARD SCHIFFRIN, in his professional and individual capacities,

ANDREW BARROWAY, in his professional and individual capacities,

KRISHNA NARINE, in his professional and individual capacities,

CHRISTOPHER & WEISBERG, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,

ALAN M. WEISBERG, in his professional and individual capacities,

ALBERTO GONZALES in his official and individual capacities, "


******

Above Letter From Eliot Bernstein Iviewit Technologies Founder and Main Inventor to Florida's Governor Charlie Crist ... AGAIN... What will Governor Charlie Crist of Florida do with this Knowing of Blatant and Widespread Corruption This Time ??


I will Let You Know.

In My Opinion, if Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and if Governor Charlie Crist IGNORES this information, Well Time for a RICO Lawsuit, a Whistleblower Lawsuit AGAINST the STATE of FLORIDA for aiding and abetting Massive Shareholder Fraud, Major Crime and Corruption, Government Corruption and for Hiding Secrets that will Cost Taxpayers - Investors - Shareholders BILLIONS of Dollars.

More on the Massive Corruption in Florida
http://floridagrandjury.blogspot.com/

Posted Here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

got a Tip on Corruption in Florida,
or on Bill McCollum Florida Attorney General,
Or On Governor Charlie Crist ??
eMail me
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Read more...

FBI Coverups, Boca Police Scandals, Major Law Firms Covering Corruption, Enron Collapsing, Attempted Murder, Invention Stolen, Denial of Due Process.

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

What Really Collapsed Enron? Well it was a Proskauer Rose Law Firm Scandal, a Foiled Patent Theft. Proskauer Rose Law Attorney Corruption has ruined countless lives, portfolios and has left an amazing path of Destruction.

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...

Read more...

the Marc Drier / Raymond Joao / Iviewit connection - Formal SEC - FBI Iviewit Complaint

"" Joao’s Dreier & Baritz LLP Bio

“ Raymond A. Joao joined Dreier & Baritz LLP in 2001 as Of Counsel to the Firm's intellectual property department. Mr. Joao brings to the Firm an extensive legal, business and engineering background encompassing virtually all aspects of intellectual property, including prosecution of patent applications; reexaminations; preparation of patent opinions; litigation; and counseling clients in the development, management and exploitation of their intellectual property assets.

Mr. Joao is also currently an intellectual property management consultant for various start-up software, telecommunication, Internet and e-commerce companies.

He regularly directs new business and intellectual property development efforts; negotiates contracts; drafts license agreements; performs due diligence in mergers and acquisitions; assists in the preparation of business plans, executive summaries and other corporate documents; conducts competitive analysis studies; aids in the formulation of litigation strategies; and assists in capital raising efforts.

Notably, Mr. Joao is the inventor of 10 issued U.S. patents and has over 80 patent pending technologies. Mr. Joao was also a founder of Electroship (N.Y.), Inc. which was formed to exploit certain patent pending technologies of which Mr. Joao was a co-inventor.

Electroship (N.Y.), Inc. was acquired by a public company within six months of its formation. Mr. Joao headed Electroship's intellectual property and corporate efforts, as well as the merger and acquisition deal leading up to the merger.

Prior to joining Dreier & Baritz, Mr. Joao was head of the Intellectual Property Department at Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein & Schlissel, P.C. in Mineola, New York.

He was also formerly a partner at Anderson Kill & Olick, P.C. in New York in the Intellectual Property Group. Prior to the commencement of his legal career, Mr. Joao was an electrical engineer with Loral Corporation in the Systems Engineering Group, and prior to that was an engineer with Sperry Corporation.

Mr. Joao obtained a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering in 1982 and a Master of Science in Electrical Engineering in 1984 from Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science.

He received his law degree in 1990 from St. John's University School of Law. Most recently, in 1999, he obtained a Masters in Business Administration in Finance from Baruch College/City University.

Mr. Joao is admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and the New York State and Connecticut Bars. e-mail: rjoao@dreierbaritz.com.

· January 02, 2009 ~ The WallStreet Journal “Former AUSA Selected as Bankruptcy Trustee in Dreier Case”

“For a week, it’d been all quiet on the Marc Dreier front. But now a new lawyer is set to be welcomed to the Dreier Party. The NYLJ reports that Sheila M. Gowan (University of Minnesota, Brooklyn Law) has been selected as the bankruptcy trustee in the case. Dreier, founder and sole owner of the law firm Dreier LLP — for those of you took December off — is alleged to have perpetrated a massive fraud against a group of hedge funds. (Here’s our coverage.) Gowan, a former Proskauer associate [Emphasis Added] and AUSA in the Southern District of New York, is now a partner at Diamond McCarthy…”

Again, the SEC should note Proskauer’s direct involvement in the Dreier matters as trustee Gowan was a former Proskauer associate.

The conflict is absolute in light of the claims herein, now demanding full disclosure by Gowan and conflict waivers from the victims. When viewed in light of the Joao / Proskauer / Dreier connections described and evidenced already herein, these conflicts will preclude Gowan’s continued involvement.

Again, the entire crime depends on continued conflicts of interests that preclude due process and procedure by infiltration of the Criminal Enterprise law firms into Regulatory, Prosecutorial and Court actions against them.

The law firms are also well versed in court-orchestrated schemes and with infiltration into regulatory agencies are alleged to use the courts actually to effectuate further frauds. ""

"" March 03, 2009 ~ USDOJ Letter by Lev L. Dassin, Acting US Attorney to Judge Stuart M. Bernstein. Note that not only Gowan is copied but also Proskauer Attorney Jeffrey W. Levitan, Esq. ( Levitan ) is also copied.

The SEC has absolute cause to investigate if Levitan, Gowan and/or Proskauer failed fully to disclose their involvement with Dreier through Joao and the Iviewit matters. Proskauer and presumably Gowan are fully aware of their alleged involvement in my patent theft through my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit against the Proskauer firm.

Failure to disclose this material fact to the Bankruptcy court is allegedly further fraudulent activity. The SEC should also note that the courts have been notified in my legal actions and have obligations through Judicial Cannons to notify the proper authorities of any possible attorney misconduct they are aware of, or face Misprision of Felony charges and more.

Thus, the courts should have also notified the SEC of the information given them in official court filings in my lawsuit regarding the Dreier lawsuit, including the correlating information in the Stanford case, which would have forced Gowan’s disclosures regarding her involvement with Proskauer and the Dreier matters and her withdrawal as Trustee.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325%20Dreier%20USDOJ%20Letter%20to%20BK%20Judge%20copies%20Proskauer%20and%20former%20Proskauer%20Gowan.pdf

Again, all this new information is cause for the SEC to reinvestigate the Dreier Ponzi in light of these facts and whereby the Dreier Ponzi may be further efforts to launder monies gained from the stolen Intellectual Properties; this would represent possible Fraud Upon a United States Bankruptcy Court.

All asset sales and other distributions should instantly be halted until these material facts can be reviewed to determine if these funds are also relating to the Iviewit stolen patents. ""

Source and Full SEC Complaint
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgvpzjzw_9ghxg4km9

More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at
www.iViewit.TV and www.DeniedPatent.com

Posted Here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

Read more...

Marc S. Dreier SEC Investigation and Conviction - Excerpts from Eliot Bernsteins SEC Complaint.

"" The SEC Indictment and Conviction of Marc S. Dreier as it relates to Proskauer, comes from the connection to Patent Attorney Raymond A. Joao.

Joao initially introduced to Iviewit as a Proskauer partner by Wheeler, along with Rubenstein, when they were actually with Meltzer at that time.

Once investors in Iviewit learned Rubenstein and Joao were not with Proskauer as represented, Proskauer partner Christopher C. Wheeler (“Wheeler”) claimed they were transferring to Proskauer shortly.

Rubenstein then transferred almost overnight and Joao was to follow after he finished work at Meltzer but since he was actually writing the patent applications under Rubenstein’s direction for Iviewit, Iviewit had to take an additional retainer to Proskauer’s with Meltzer until Joao transferred.

However, Joao never transferred to Proskauer Rose and during his first year of work for Iviewit, it was discovered that Joao allegedly was not filing timely and correct patent applications and patenting inventions in his own name.

Joao now under ongoing investigation at the US Patent Office and FBI, ordered for by the First Dept and yet to be completed and more. Wheeler then claimed that Proskauer was beginning an investigation of Joao, ironically, and ignoring the conflicts this presented, as Joao was Proskauer, Wheeler and Rubenstein’s referral.

Christopher Wheeler then suggested his good friend William Dick (“Dick”) of Foley to replace Joao for filing the patents and reviewing Joao’s work, continuing under Rubenstein’s oversight, as described in the Wachovia Private Placement already exhibited herein.

What Christopher Wheeler failed to disclose to Iviewit is that Dick had been involved immediately prior to being retained by Iviewit, with both Wheeler and another Proskauer/Wheeler referral to Iviewit, Brian G. Utley, formerly employed by IBM and working with Dick, Utley then becoming President of Iviewit, in another allegedly failed Intellectual Property theft.

The prior attempted Intellectual Property heist was against another Florida businessperson, Philanthropist Monte Friedkin of Diamond Turf Equipment Co. and whereby all those addressed herein should take note of the Prior History of these alleged patent thieves, clearly indicating that this is an organized and repeated crime against inventors.

The SEC should note that Wheeler presented a falsified resume for his friend Utley to Iviewit that not only failed to disclose the attempted theft but also failed to disclose, and in fact materially falsified Utley’s resume concealing the facts by claiming Utley left the company Diamond Turf a success due to his innovations.

Factually, the attempted IP theft, according to Friedkin, led to the firing of Utley by Friedkin and Friedkin’s immediately closing the business and taking a multimillion-dollar loss directly due to the scheme perpetrated by Utley, Dick and Wheeler. Dick also failed to disclose this fact when joining Iviewit.

In both Utley and Wheeler’s depositions, already exhibited herein, both Utley and Wheeler contradict each other’s statements when confronted with the Friedkin information and Dick in his Virginia Bar Response to a complaint filed against him further contradicts both Wheeler and Utley regarding the Friedkin events. Supplementary evidence confirming these claims can be found on the Iviewit homepage at www.iviewit.tv .

When Dick replaced Joao, the press reported that Joao claimed he now had 90+ patents in his own name, many allegedly directly lifted from Iviewit.

Joao then joined the Marc S. Dreier law firm of Dreier & Baritz. This new information should be cause for the SEC to reanalyze the entire Dreier Ponzi Scheme in light of this new evidence, and in fact, the monies of the Dreier Ponzi allegedly directly relate to royalties from sales and licensing of Joao’s stolen Intellectual Properties.

The Dreier Ponzi is alleged to be another money-laundering scheme concocted by the Defendants in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit.

The SEC should also cease distribution of assets in the Dreier Ponzi, especially where the Trustee appears conflicted with Proskauer and again the court actions may be further attempts by these all too clever law firms to abscond with funds in further illegal legal actions and Fraud on the Court. ""

Where is the SEC and Mary Schapiro In All This ?

Click Here for Full SEC Complaint by Iviewit Technologies, Eliot I. Bernstein.

posted here by
investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

Read more...

Intel - IBM - Proskauer Rose - Foley and Lardner - Iviewit Stolen Patent - Public Hearing Senator John L. Sampson in New York September 2009

"" « September 24, 2009 Public Hearing: Standing Committee On The Judiciary New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Chairman – Testimony of Eliot Bernstein, Inventor, Iviewit Technologies re Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner
Prepared Statement of Eliot I. Bernstein of Iviewit to New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Regarding Trillion Dollar Iviewit Federal Lawsuit Naming Proskauer Rose, Foley & Larnder, IBM, Intel, SGI, Lockheed and More »

September 24, 2009 Public Hearing Senator John L. Sampson NY: Standing Committee On The Judiciary New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Chairman – Testimony of Eliot Bernstein, Inventor, Iviewit Technologies re Trillion Dollar Lawsuit Naming Proskauer Rose, Foley & Lardner, Intel, IBM, SGI & Lockheed Martin.

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Senator John Sampson Chairman

SUBJECT: The Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts and the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct

PURPOSE: This hearing will review the mission, procedures and level of public satisfaction with the Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts as well as the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct

Monday June 8, 2009
NYC
250 Broadway
NY NY
10 A.M.
19th Floor

ORAL TESTIMONY BY INVITATION ONLY
Witness List for Judiciary Hearing 9/24/09
The Judicial & Attorney Disciplinary Process in the State of New York

1. Richard Kuse of New City, NY
2. Victor Kovner of the Fund for Modem Courts
3. Douglas Higbee of Mamaroneck, NY
4. Judith Herskowitz of Miami Beach, FL

5. Peter Gonzalez of Troy, NY
6. Andrea Wilkinson of Rensselaer, NY
7. Maria Gkanios of Mahopac, NY

8. Dominic Lieto of Mahopac, NY
9. Regina Felton Esq of Brooklyn, NY
10. Kathryn Malarkey of Purchase, NY

11. Nora Renzuli, Esq. of Staten Island, NY
12. Stephanie Klein of Long Beach, NY
13. Ike Aruti of Rosedale, NY

14. Terrence Finnan of Keene, NY
15. Gizella Weisshaus, NY
16. Eliot I. Bernstein of Boca Raton, FL
17. Suzanne McCormick & Patrick Handley of NY

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court is the entity that is legally responsible for enforcing the Rules of Professional Conduct governing the conduct of attorneys in New York State. The Appellate Division Departments have created grievance committees that are charged with the investigation of complaints against attorneys.

Within the First Judicial Department the Departmental Disciplinary Committee of the Appellate Division investigates complaints against attorneys.

The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct was created by the State Constitution and is charged with investigating complaints against Judges and Justices of the Unified Court System.

According to the 2009 Report of the Commission on Judicial Conduct, there were 1,923 complaints filed in 2008. Yet of these complaints only 262 were investigated and of those, 173 were dismissed.

This hearing will examine the processes and procedures that are followed by the various agencies charged with the responsibility of enforcing the rules and regulations that must be followed by the Judiciary and the Bar in the State of New York. It will also evaluate public satisfaction with the disciplinary process. ""

Full Article, Source of Post and VIDEO Click Below
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=159

posted HERE by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger

Read more...

Raymond Joao Opposition in STOLEN Iviewit Patent Case - Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se

Where is Raymond Joao's Counsel?

It seems that Raymond A. Joao is Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se. So who is Representing Raymond Anthony Joao on that AT&T Patent Infringement Lawsuits he has Launched?

Was Raymond A. Joao's Counsel Removed ?

Raymond Joao seems to be his own lawyer, his own patent lawyer and a patent thief

Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se ?

Where is John Walter Fried Esq. and Fried and Epstein?

Click Here for Raymond Joao Opposition in Iviewit Case

Eliot Bernstein, Iviewit Patent Theft, iViewIt Technologies, Joao Opposition Iviewit, John Walter Fried Esq., Patent Attorney Corruption, Raymond A. Joao

Read more...

MPEG - Proskauer Stealing Inventions - by Eliot I. Bernstein. Proskauer Rose Patent Fraud.

"My name is Eliot Bernstein and I am one of the inventors of the Iviewit inventions. Many of the quotes here are from me and the proof for many of these claims can be found at the iviewit.tv website. Simply go to left navigation bar and click on the Supreme Court button and then click on either Appendix C or Exhibit Gallery.

Although voluminous in size, the exhibits are chalk full of evidence and information regarding the ongoing investigations. Also, much can be learned at the Iviewit blog at http://patentgate.blogspot.com .

In response to this post, Rubenstein and Proskauer took invention disclosures from Iviewit inventors and patented those concepts into their management referral, Brian Utley's name. Rubenstein also contracted Raymond Joao at the law firm Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolfe & Schlissel to file the applications, while Rubenstein and Proskauer handled all of the other intellectual property work, including Rubenstein acting as a board member and opining to many investors on the inventions.

Raymond Joao worked at the law firm that Kenneth Rubenstein was at immediately prior to his learning of the Iviewit inventions, MLGWS and then after learning of the inventions, Rubenstein instantly jumped to Proskauer, a firm that had no other intellectual property department to speak of and had been a real estate firm since the 1800's. Proskauer had already been retained and began work for Iviewit prior to Kenneth Rubenstein leaving Meltzer and in fact, Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao were initially represented as Proskauer Rose attorneys, although they were still at Meltzer.

Joao filed patents into his own name while retained by Iviewit to file patents as Kenneth Rubenstein's lackey.

Raymond A. Joao's patents contained many of the ideas he and Kenneth Rubenstein learned from the Iviewit inventors, the disclosures and business plans of Iviewit.

It is absurd to think that a patent attorney could file any patents in his name without a thorough conflict waiver from all clients and approval from the patent bar. History has never had a case where the patent attorney ran out and filed a blizzard of patents all crossing into his clients patent applications.

Raymond Joao was also part of an elaborate scheme to move the patents out of Iviewit and into companies that Proskauer Rose Set up that had similar and identical names to the Iviewit companies.

Yet, the shareholder of those companies appears to be Proskauer and others, not the true Iviewit shareholders or inventors.

Iviewit shareholders, including the SBA were totally unaware that these similar companies had been set up and unaware that that similar patents were being filed into these companies with the false inventor Utley, false owners and assignees.

Raymond Joao was discovered patenting ideas into his name and other dubious behavior and he was fired for his actions.

Proskauer Rose and Brian Utley referred William Dick of Foley and Lardner to replace Raymond Joao, Brian Utley stated that William Dick was the IBM Far East patent attorney and his very close personal friend.

The original Proskauer attorney, Christopher Clarke Wheeler, Esq. (recently arrested in Del Ray Beach, FL for DUI with bodily injury) failed to disclose that he, Utley and Dick were involved in intellectual property crimes from Utley's former employ, Diamond Turf Equipment owned by Monte Freidkin of Boca Raton.

Alan Friedkin discovered that patents were walking out the door to Brian Utley's sole name and fired him. It was not learned until Christopher C. Wheeler and Brian tley's deposition and William ick's response to the Virginia Bar that the three of them had been involved in the crime.

Christopher Wheeler set up the company, William Dick wrote the patents from Brian Utley's employer secretly into Utley's name at home and Brian Utley got in and stole the inventions from his employer. This is the same type of scam that they instituted on Iviewit and again appear to be failing achieving their ends.

William Dick was Raymond Joao's replacement and since it was never disclosed by any of them the fact of their prior past patent theft attempt, Iviewit was dumbfounded to find this prior history out after learning they were stealing Iviewit inventions.

Moreover, Christopher Wheeler and Proskauer Rose submitted a resume on Brian Utley that claimed that Diamond Turf went on to be a huge success do to Utley's inventions, when the truth was that the company was instantly closed by Friedkin after he found Utley stealing from his company while acting as the President of Friedkins company.

Brian Utley failed to disclose this, Christopher Wheeler and Proskauer Rose never disclosed this when Iviewit retained them and Dick and Foley failed to inform us of Dick's past with this group. This is a criminal organization of patent thieves, they have a history and they are a danger to inventors, good lawyers everywhere and the United States and foreign countries patent systems.

I am not against patent attorneys filing patents as long as there is a hefty review by the patent department or the USTPO OED, to investigate if those attorney inventions lay claim on any client inventions they may have represented or as in our case misrepresented. It is very dangerous for patent attorneys to be patenting inventions for themselves while representing client interests, and the obvious collusion amongst patent attorneys to work together to steal each others clients inventions remains a gaping hole.

Yet these guys filed false oaths on applications in others names for inventions they learned while retained by the Iviewit inventors, no excuse can be had for this, this is plain theft, fraud on the patent office, fraud on the Iviewit inventors, the Iviewit shareholders and all the EPO foreign offices and the history of the world and invention. This is not even close to a patent attorney having a novel idea (although that seems far fetched as attorneys are not typically inventive) and then patenting it in his name with no client involved.

Raymond Joao has stated that some of his inventions were prior to ours and that Iviewit was in fact infringing on his inventions (he claimed this to the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee), yet Joao failed to seek waivers or disclose this in writing or verbally to anyone seems absurd.

I find it further disgusting that MPEG patent inclusion is controlled by a single person, Rubenstein, where the temptation is all to obvious. Patent pooling schemes have been killed historically by the Justice Department for the very reasons that Iviewit complains of, anti-competitive monopolistic practices that violate Sherman and Clayton and almost every antitrust practice.

Patent pooling schemes created by lawyers to make money as middlemen also seems to violate ethics.

For instance, how can Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein profit from MPEG as counsel for MPEG, as Kenneth Rubenstein discloses in his deposition at the Iviewit Exhibit gallery and at the same time taking invention disclosure as counsel under Proskauer Rose for review from the inventors for patent concepts that could completely render MPEG useless, as the Iviewit inventions do?

How can Kenneth Rubenstein review Iviewit patents for MPEG and at the same time give Iviewit unbiased advice on their patents or control their fate by inclusion or exclusion.

The conflict is as wide as the Grand Canyon, no China Wall, in fact an open door for crime to occur, crimes that violate Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 inventor protections by those entrusted to protect those rights as part of the patent bar.

The obvious is happening here, MPEG and Proskauer ROSE have found a way to review patents as patent counsel and then steal them as patent poolers looking to profit from others inventions.

The first complaint that was filed at the patent office was in an invention format as a joke, not a joke to laugh at, it was appropriately titled, "System and Method for Committing Fraud on the United States Patent Office and the Iviewit Inventors".


Eliot I. Bernstein
Inventor
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
iviewit@iviewit.tv

Source
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060119/1225216.shtml
p
p

Read more...

Patent Theft, Background on the Iviewit Stolen Technology.

"A Background of the Iviewit Inventions

By way of introduction, I am P. Stephen Lamont, former Acting CEO of Iviewit (counsel advised all Iviewit executives to resign their posts and work along side Iviewit rather than within Iviewit, as the former Board of Directors, Counsel and Accountants, disbanded without requisite notice to Shareholders in violation of law, thereby leaving massive liability and exposure) and a significant shareholder in Iviewit.

With more than a fifteen year track record as a multimedia technology and consumer electronics licensing executive and holder of a J.D. in Intellectual Property Law from Columbia University, an M.B.A in Finance, and a B.S. in Industrial Engineering, I appallingly write at the cross current, by and between parties described herein, pattern of frauds, deceits, and misrepresentations that run so wide and so deep that it tears at the very fabric of what has become to be know as free commerce in this country, and, in the fact that it pertains to inventors rights, tears at the very fabric of the Constitution of the United States more fully described below.

I write to you with, Eliot I. Bernstein, who was factually present throughout all of these events and so has contributed to assure the veracity of the statements herein and provide credible witness to the events described herein prior to my joining Iviewit.

Mr. Bernstein is the main inventor of the technologies, inventions which he claims to have come from divine origin with a divine purpose.

On or about 1997, Iviewit’s founder, Eliot I. Bernstein and other inventors, came upon inventions pertaining to what industry experts have heretofore described as profound shifts from traditional techniques in video and imaging then overlooked in the annals of digital video and imaging technologies.

Factually, the main video technology is one of capturing a video frame at a, including but not limited to, 320 by 240 frame size (roughly, ¼ of a display device) at a frame rate of one (1) to infinity frames per second (“fps” and at the twenty four (24) to thirty (30) range commonly referred to as “full frame rates” to those skilled in the art).

Moreover, once captured, and in its simplest terms, the scaled frames are then digitized (if necessary), filtered, encoded, and delivered to an agnostic display device and then scaled to a full frame size of, including but not limited to, 1280 by 960 at the full frame rates of 24 to 30 fps. The result is, when combined with other proprietary technologies, high quality video at bandwidths of 56 or more Kbps to 6 Mbps per second, at a surprising seventy five percent (75%!) savings in throughput/bandwidth on any digital delivery system such as digital terrestrial, cable, satellite, multipoint-multichannel delivery system, or the Internet, and a similar 75%! savings in storage on mediums such as digital video discs “DVD’s” and the hard drives of many consumer electronic devices.

Also, these savings result in a 75%! decrease in the necessary processing power to encode the video, making old school concepts of parallel processors obsolete and allowing the process of encoding to occur on even a laptop.

Therefore, the video technology opened new markets therefore in both low bandwidth video as is found on cell phones and the Internet to the other end of the spectrum to high end video such as HDDVD, etc. changing even the way television was created, transmitted and viewed, a change from interlacing to the new Iviewit scaling processes, allowing cable companies to increase channel throughput by 75%!

Moreover, on the imaging side, the Iviewit inventions are used on almost every digital camera and present screen design and other devices that utilize the feature of “digital zoom”, whereby the imaging technology provided a way to zoom almost infinitely on a low resolution file with clarity, solving for pixilation that was inherent in the prior art.

Furthermore, industry observers who benefited from the Iviewit disclosures have gone on to claim "you could have put 10,000 engineers in a room for 10,000 years and they would never have come up with these ideas…”

These engineers similarly claimed, to a broad audience, that the technologies were "priceless", the "Holy Grail" of the digital imaging and video world.

Still further, it should be clear, as it relates to the inventions, that we are not talking about some rudimentary software that will be rendered obsolete as newer versions emerge, but that the Iviewit video scaling and image overlay systems are THE backbone, enabling technologies for the transmission of video and images across all transmission networks and viewable on all display devices, where the inventors went back to square one to create a wholly novel elegant upstream solution (towards the content creator) of reconfiguring video and image frames to unlock former bandwidth constraints, led to new processing and storage capabilities and took the video and imaging worlds to a new dimension.

Moreover, if these inventions become the subject of say a court ordered injunction while investigations are ongoing, it would preclude the use of the technologies while the courts resolve these matters, similar to the recent case almost brought in the RIM/Blackberry matter.

Although dwarfed in comparison, that injunction would have shut Blackberry down to users had the parties not settled the matters, by way of tremendous pressure from the Court, the courts being on of the biggest users of the technology.

The results of an injunction of the Iviewit technologies would be catastrophic to the country in that the product recall alone would be devastating to commerce, shutting down video across the Internet, recalling low bandwidth cell phones, recalling digital camera’s with digital zoom, halting the transmission of 75% of cable channels, recalling medical devices that use scaled zoom, recalling technologies on the Hubble Space Telescope and other government uses, such as flight and space simulators, advanced weapons systems, etc.

These matters are of tantamount importance to federal and international commerce in countless ways, making the job of resolving the crimes against Iviewit a matter of national security concern unprecedented in the history of invention and law.

Furthermore, initially, and early in my tenure, rumors began swirling around the company with finger pointing and all from Florida to Los Angeles wherein it caught the jet stream and arrived very soon in New York of alleged breaches of confidentiality pertaining to Iviewit technology, transfers of trade secrets, and, even in certain circumstances, the knowing and willful invention fraud by the outright switching of signature pages of patent filings by early patent counsels.

Additionally, during my tenure, I was in possession of an executed patent application pertaining to Iviewit’s core imaging technology with the inventors of Bernstein and Shirajee, when, out of thin air, and just prior to filing, with no notice or authorization, such patent application witnesses the addition of a one Brian G. Utley as an inventor, and an individual who could not have been farther from the heat of the inventive stage of the imaging technology.

Still further, I submit that at the first disclosures of the inventions, patent counsel, including Kenneth Rubenstein (also sole patent evaluator and legal counsel to MPEG LA), who had spent half a lifetime attempting and failing to procure technologies for the transmission of full screen, full frame rate video across a variety of transmission networks, and who during the Iviewit disclosures had been known to state

“[I] missed that,”

and
“[I] never thought of that,”

and
“[This] changes everything,”

or words to those effects, Kenneth Rubenstein was perhaps so fearful that Iviewit would partner with other proprietary technologies across the video value chain that it could wipe his carefully crafted patent pools off the face of the map, therefore, the Iviewit inventions HAD to be converted to MPEGLA, LLC to preserve those pools and convert his client Iviewit's technologies to his pools, of course blocking Iviewit at the same time from market using typical anti-trust tactics commonly associated with patent pools of the past and the reason the Justice Department has typically broken such pools up, as they are anti-competitive, monopolistic in nature.

That was the first step, with the second step, through the direct and indirect introductions of Iviewit, with executed confidentiality agreements (“NDA’s”), to some five hundred potential licensees by colleagues of counsel, being the proliferation of Iviewit disclosures across a wide array of potential licensees and competitors.

In addition to tying and bundling the technologies into his patent pool licensing scheme, again in violation of most of the anti-trust laws.

Following along, we arrive at the point in the past when Iviewit had thought the Iviewit inventions had been filed at the United States Patent & Trademark Office and the United States Copyright Office and that everyone had begun to use it, when past management in Iviewit and patent counsel were found writing patents in patent counsels name and other non-inventor management names, in addition to the intentional unauthorized changes of inventors, owners and assignees.

Later, as Arthur Andersen conducted an audit on behalf of investor Crossbow Ventures whose funds were 2/3 Small Business Administration loans, evidence emerged of a corporate shell game involving multiple, unauthorized, similarly named corporate formations, unauthorized stock swaps and unauthorized asset transfers that resulted in the core patent applications assigned to entities that may have only one shareholder, perhaps the limited liability partnership of Proskauer Rose or other unauthorized holders, including the alleged perpetrating patent counsel, perhaps, with a view towards resurrecting the backbone technologies at some future point only converted illegally as their own.

Moreover, in a September 2006 letter to Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY 18th) I wrote that in the above series of allegations, Iviewit is confident that your Office will find a reasonable certainty that Messrs.

Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. of Proskauer, Raymond A. Joao, Esq. of Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolfe and Schlissel and William J. Dick, Esq., Steven Becker, Esq., and Douglas Boehm, Esq. of Foley and Lardner, all Iviewit Patent Counsel and present or former members of the distinguished Bar of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, designed and executed, either for themselves or others similarly situated, the deceptions, improprieties, and, even in certain circumstances, outright misappropriation by the disingenuous redirection of the disclosed Iviewit techniques by:

(i) burying the critical elements of the inventions in patent applications filed on behalf of the true Iviewit Shareholders & Inventors;

(ii) allowing the unauthorized use of Iviewit’s inventions under NDA’s without enforcement of said NDA’s;

(III) filing patent applications of their own or others based on the Iviewit inventions into false inventors names and illegally set up corporations;

(IV) submitting knowingly false statements and falsified documents done with intent to commit fraud on the USPTO (a federal offense), Iviewit’s shareholders, and the Iviewit Inventors.

[It should be noted here that these attorneys and others are now under formal investigation by patent offices worldwide that have been ongoing for several years].

Furthermore, in that same Rep. Lowey letter, that as a result of the series of allegations enclosed, and although it is clear to Iviewit that the role of Congress is to make law not to enforce law, Iviewit finds it reasonable that your Office:

(i) shall find the requisite merit to initiate Congressional investigations;

(ii) shall pass these allegations to a Congressional staff attorney in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, or other appropriate committee, for further investigation;

(iii) shall instruct said staff attorney to institute a formal Congressional investigation, including questioning, requests for records, and other information from all parties involved;

(iv) shall refer said attorney’s findings back to you as a Representative in the Congress of the United States;

(v) shall present such findings to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, or other appropriate committee, for determinative review; and finally

(vi) shall witness said Congressional committee to urge disciplinary action against the alleged offending attorneys by the U.S. Attorney’s Office or other organization, agency, or court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Lastly, Iviewit often asks itself, among other things, “Why did the Hon. Jorge LaBarga of the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial District, Florida deny Iviewit’s Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to Assert Counterclaim for Damages (concerning the aforementioned allegations)” and “Why did the Supreme Court of Florida - The Florida Bar (‘TFB’) dismiss the complaint against Christopher C. Wheeler, Esq. (‘Wheeler’ and, a non-patent attorney, a main protagonist of the above referenced allegations) despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary” and “Why did the Supreme Court of Florida deny Iviewit’s Petition to begin the immediate investigation of the Christopher Wheeler complaint (when The Florida Bar admitted in writing that the answer to the Wheeler complaint was authored by an attorney, Matthew Triggs of Proskauer Rose, in flagrant violation of his public office obligations)” and

“Why did the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department - Departmental Disciplinary Committee stall Iviewit’s complaint against Rubenstein and Joao despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary” and

“Why, despite the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department’s Court Order (unanimously voted on by five Justices) to begin the immediate investigation of Kenneth Rubenstein, Steven C. Krane (former NYSBA President & Proskauer partner who handled complaints against Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein while maintaining undisclosed roles at the First Department) and Raymond Joao, for conflicts and violations of New York Supreme Court public offices, did the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department - Departmental Disciplinary Committee charged with conducting an immediate investigation dismiss on review the Rubenstein and Joao complaints and stating that they were ‘not under the jurisdiction’ of the First Department Court” [thus no witnesses were contacted, no evidence was tested and the attorneys did not even have to respond formally or informally to the charges against them]

and "When conflicts were discovered at the Second Department with Krane why were complaints refused by the Second Department to be formally docketed against their members caught in conflict, those members denying complaints against themselves???"

and “Why did the Virginia Bar Association dismiss the William Dick complaint despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary and the fact that the United States Patent Office had suspended the Iviewit patents based on a Foley and Lardner intellectual property docket submitted to the VBA that had factually false and misleading information regarding patent inventors, owners and assignees” and

“Why did the Supreme Court of the United States decline to hear Iviewit’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court to overturn the Florida Court’s decision, which acted to block Iviewit from filing complaints against Florida Supreme Court officers caught in conflicts of interest and violations of public offices”

and “why did John Doll & Jon Dudas, Commissioners' of Patents at the USPTO, fail to correct the inventors, and refuse to take or return Iviewit’s call or respond to formal office filings, including a petition filed more than three years ago by Iviewit and its lead investor Crossbow Ventures/SBA, which led to the suspending of patent applications pending ongoing investigations” and Iviewit finds itself answering

“THAT IT IS ALL PART AND PARCEL OF THE TOTAL DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS IN THE PATTERN OF FRAUDS, DECEITS, AND MISREPRESENTATIONS THAT RUN SO WIDE AND SO DEEP THAT IT TEARS AT THE VERY FABRIC OF WHAT HAS BECOME TO BE KNOW AS FREE COMMERCE IN THIS COUNTRY, AND, IN THE FACT THAT IT PERTAINS TO INVENTORS RIGHTS, TEARS AT THE VERY FABRIC OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.”

Lastly, take to heart this following series of events that, from Tokyo to Munich and all places in between, has been commonly described as THE GREATEST PATENT STORY EVER TOLD while at the same time becoming one of the most bungled crimes in history, perhaps the largest crime ever perpetrated in the history of crime itself;

crimes constituting further a treasonous series of actions to rob the United States Commerce Department, the country's greatest jewel, the United States Patent & Trademark Offices, usurping Free Commerce as we know it in America in the process!

The cover-up, well to say the least, constitutes violation after violation of sworn oaths by government officials entrusted to uphold justice, elevating perhaps throughout the Legislative, the Executive and the Judicial branches, creating a government of criminal activity, a "Culture of Corruption" (paralleling the reality you now live in) all to deny due process and procedure, evade prosecution of the complaints filed against them and stave off the inevitable federal prison time for their actions, as further described herein.

Source:
www.Iviewit.TV
video tech news

Read more...

Steven C. Krane, Esq. - Proskaur Rose Affiliations, Connections - Judith Kaye

NEW YORK SUPREME COURT FIRST DEPARTMENT COURT ORDER FOR INVESTIGATION OF KRANE

KRANE COMPLAINT TO NEW YORK SUPREME COURT FIRST DEPARTMENT

Steven Krane - the Attorney's Attorney Providing Legal Advice to the Proskaur Rose Law Firm.

Proskaur.com Bio in Part..
"Steven Krane is a Partner in the Litigation & Dispute Resolution Department, co-head of the Law Firm Practice Group, concentrating in the field of legal ethics and professional responsibility, and is Proskauer's General Counsel, responsible for providing professional legal advice to the firm.

Steven represents law firms and individual lawyers in a variety of professional matters, including rendering opinions and counseling them on a daily basis on a broad range of professional matters including conflicts of interest, client confidentiality, cross-border legal practice issues, partnership disputes, internal investigations, ancillary businesses and alternative business structures for law firms. In addition, he defends law firms in litigated proceedings involving legal malpractice and other civil claims, represents individual lawyers before grievance and disciplinary committees and assists lawyers in disputes concerning admission to the Bar.

He has served as a litigation consultant and expert witness testifying on a variety of issues such as conflicts of interest, litigation conduct, legal malpractice, billing disputes, and solicitation of clients by lawyers leaving a law firm.

Steven is among the nation’s leaders in developing and interpreting the rules governing the professional conduct of lawyers. He is the immediate past chair of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, on which he served since 2004.

For 14 years, he has led the New York State Bar Association committee that is responsible for formulating the ethical rules governing New York lawyers. In 2007, he was appointed by Chief Judge Kaye to be co-chair of the New York Judicial Institute on Professionalism in the Law. He served as vice-chair of the NYSBA Special Committee on the Law Governing Firm Structure and Operation (the “MacCrate Committee”), chaired the successor to that committee, the Special Committee on Multidisciplinary Practice, and was recently named Vice-Chair of the International Bar Association Committee on Multidisciplinary Practices. "

More Gibberish at Source of Link
http://www.proskauer.com/professionals/steven-krane/

Below From
www.Iviewit.TV

Former New York State Bar President and member of Disciplinary Committees and Ethics boards nationwide. Ordered for investigation of conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety by the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division: First Department.

The investigation has so far been thwarted, through further conflicts in New York, typical New York crooked politics but being from the Windy City, so named for corrupt politics, this will be New York's Greylord.

It was learned that conflict in New York led all the way to Chief Judge Judith Kaye, you guessed it, married to a Proskauer partner, a partner like Krane, Stephen Kaye, G0d now prancing upon his recently departed soul although he was soulless while living towards the end, a partner who was instantly added to newly formed Proskauer intellectual property department (formed instantly after learning of my inventions), although he had no history in IP law, hmmm.

Judge Judy Kaye is also conflicted up the butt with Krane, as he was her former whipping boy, serving as her lapdog clerk.



Krane attempts to use influence peddling like never before seen in Gotham to earn his Proskauer intellectual property partnership wings by blocking Iviewit never revealing his conflicts, until two years into the complaints when news of his conflicts surfaced.

Steven Krane and Judith Kaye (Judge Judy is now the proud conflicted owner of her dead husband Stephen Kaye's Proskauer shares of Iviewit) then had to bury the New York Supreme Court ordered investigation against them and the Proskauer partners, and in a feat unsurpassed in the annals or anals of New York, he ass kisses or offers it for the taking widely, to evade the investigation without even having to give a statement in his defense.

After five Supreme Court Justices unanimously voted for an INVESTIGATION, Stephen Krane, Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Anthony Joao, did not even have to provide a response to that court, nor provide one to the department charged with the investigations.

Instead those disciplinary departments wrote little old me how they were going to dismiss it without investigation based on that he was a nice guy basically. It was as if the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department, was actually doing his defense, as they tendered all letters on his behalf, he did not answer a single question or put forth a statement in his defense. You guessed it, the First Department and the Second Department are controlled by Proskauer attorneys, those charged with investigating the conflicts, upon a little scratch of the surface were also found in conflict with the matters, Krane and Kaye, and yet they continued handling the complaints against Proskauer and its partners. So assured that top down control of the courts could never be penetrated with Judith Kaye and Stephen Krane controlling them that they acted as if they were above the law.





Perhaps they are above the law, in crime festered New York but they are not above the law of G0d.


Of course I did not order the investigation, a bunch of judges did.

So it begs one to ask why they confronted me to try and evade the investigations and not the court that ordered it. The answer, they could not answer the court with the results of the investigation, as no investigation was ever done and they tried to claim dismissing the case on review was equal to an investigation.

No witnesses were called, no evidence submitted tested, these guys did not even have to tender a response.

How much payola do you think that it costs to buy off three court ordered investigations? With the help of Judge Judy Kaye and some very large illegal gains from the stolen technologies to make people obfuscate their public office duties, they have succeeded but for the moment at evading charges.

Steven Krane stands as the most despicable man in the history of legal ethics, currently found trying to amend laws to protect him and others from prosecution. Perhaps Ken Lay hired him to write some laws to prevent loss of his estate from death or the Bush group has him rewriting war codes to justify torture and protect from prosecution.

Either way, there may soon be a lot of Proskauer and other corrupted lawyers cited herein, wishing for an artery to pop to the brain, with Krane's obese gluttony, he will be first. (I was wrong here, Judy's husband Stephen Krane, G0d unrest his soul, was the first to leave this earthly world for hell for his actions.)




Krane Complaint First Department Exposing Conflicts and Violations of Public Office. Krane then goes on to really fuck himself when he writes his own defense of his bar complaint, failing to disclose his conflicting positions at the disciplinary department and further concealing them in an effort to deny he was caught, this little lie cost him orders for investigation.

Krane Suicide Letter

Steven Krane was busted immediately following that letter, after Clerk of the Court, Catherine O’Hagan Wolf identified that Steven Krane was in fact a member of the disciplinary committee that his letter denied, in fact she sat on several committee’s with Steven Krane and was stunned that he would be handling a complaint against himself or his partners, she suggested Iviewit file the Motion with the Court that led to the unanimous ruling for investigation.

OK breaking news in November 2007 comes in the form of Krane's buddy at the First Department, Thomas Cahill, former Chief Counsel of the Supreme Court of New York First Department, DDC. Thomas Cahill is busted for burying and whitewashing complaints against attorneys that he is charged with investigating.

Oh, shit gets really bad as the informant is an insider, a 62 yr old black female attorney, who is victimized, physically assaulted and terminated for her bravery to stand up to wrongdoings at the Department. In a $100M Federal Lawsuit, she names Iviewit in P. 97 of the complaint, as a cause of termination.



Oh shit, Thomas Cahill and Steven Krane and their scam exposed from the inside, Holy Cow Batman, Gotham Uppy Ups are going down, The New York Law Journal writes a story exposing Cahill and others for derailing complaints against attorneys, exactly what Iviewit is claiming to the Feds.

Holy Big Shit Batman, The New York Times follows with an even more devastating article and now New York is on fire, Kerik, the whole criminal political crime family composed of scumbag lawyers, judges and politicians is flaming downward, hell awaits, my smiling face to greet them.

All this shit started by an investigative reporter at Expose Corrupt Courts, a one ballsy Frank Brady, in a time of journalistic lack of integrity and complacency with the corruptions read by propaganda readers like Blitzer (whose his daddy), Sanchez (where did this guy get his journalistic wings) and other script readers, Brady emerges as something of a Ben Bradlee, a Woodward, a Bernstein.

My kudos also go to Dan Wise of the New York Law Journal and Paul Vitello of the New York Times for having the balls to expose corruption New York's Heart of Darkness."



Source:
http://www.iviewit.tv/
Eliot Bernstein Site on the Iviewit Stolent Patent


R

Read more...