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...

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...