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

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

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

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

2004 07 28 Cahill to move Krane.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Raymond Anthony Joao

my Blog about Raymond A. Joao - to do with the Trillion Dollar Stolen Patent - Iviewit - www.DeniedPatent.com
Showing posts with label Kenneth Rubenstein. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kenneth Rubenstein. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

MPEG LA, LLC - Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Proskauer Rose Attorney - MPEG LA Stole iViewit Technology and Illegally Patent Pooled the Technology.

Kenneth Rubenstein to this day, covers up the FACT that he helped MPEG LA get control of the Iviewit Technology and illegally put this Patent into patent pools.

Kenneth Rubenstein is So Far above the LAW as protected by Judicial Corruption in New York. Kenneth Rubenstein was long since protected by Corrupt Supreme Court Judge Judith Kaye who protected her then husband Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose Partner.

Here are Some Documents on Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose.

1999 09 20 Meeting with Kenneth Rubenstein, Raymond Joao, Brian Utley, Steven Filipek of Fish & Richardson PC. The meeting was in New York at Rubenstein's Office, yet Rubenstein denies even knowing us other than to refer Joao in his deposition. Filipek had questions regarding the patents he viewed, claiming they appeared to miss the invention.

Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose Law Firm will Soon have his Licensed Suspended, Will Be Indicted for Trillions in Fraud. And Proskauer Rose LLP Law Firm and their Liability Insurance Carriers will pay Billions to Shareholders of Major Tech and Media Companies.

Below is Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose LLP Perjured Deposition
Part 2 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rodS_EjIO6M
Part 3 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz58XzqDIOQ
Part 4 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIuERbs40c8
Part 5 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQbmAwr-oto
Part 6 @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0_bN7IzaGA


November 20, 2002 Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose and MPEG LA's Deposition. Rubenstein perjures himself repeatedly regarding acting as Iviewit Patent Counsel, contradicts Christopher Wheeler Deposition Statements and statements made to Judge Jorge Labarga. Labarga had evidence of Perjured statements of Rubenstein and threw the lawsuit as he threw the Bush v. Gore Presidential Election and ended Democracy in the USA.

Posted here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Read more...

Saturday, February 20, 2010

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...

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

NY TIMES REPORTS 80M SUIT CLAIMING WHITEWASHING IVIEWIT COMPLAINTS V. PROSKAUER & NY SUPREME COURT

"NY TIMES & LAW JOURNAL REPORT $80M SUIT CLAIMING WHITEWASHING OF IVIEWIT COMPLAINTS v. PROSKAUER, STEVEN KRANE PAST NYSBA PRES, FOLEY LARDNER & NY COURT OFFICERS, REVEALED BY ATTY INSIDE WHISTLEBLOWER

For_Immediate_Release:

United States of America (Press Release) November 23, 2007 -- In an explosive $80M federal lawsuit @ http://www.iviewit.tv/CCA-2-amended.pdf a staff attorney at the New York Supreme Court claims officials whitewashed Iviewit complaints against Proskauer Rose, Steven C. Krane, Esq. (former NYSBA Pres & clerk to Chief Judge Judith Kaye) & other high ranking NY Supreme Court officers.

The inside whistleblower also claims she was physically assaulted & then terminated to keep Iviewit claims of fraud on the US Patent Office and other government agencies buried.

The New York Law Journal
@ http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1193648632218 and The New York Times @ http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/nyregion/01suit.html?ref=nyregion reported on a federal lawsuit claiming high ranking members on the New York Supreme Court, purposely and with intent to cover-up for other high ranking court officials, caused the whitewashing of complaints against attorneys and senior court officials who committed hosts of state, federal, and international crimes against a multiplicity of governmental agencies, and in fact, threatened and coerced Plaintiff Anderson, including wrongfully terminating her and physical assault, for voicing concern that there was irrefutable evidence of wrongdoings by the attorneys and court officials to cover up the crimes committed against the United States.

In the lawsuit http://www.iviewit.tv/CCA-2-amended.pdf filed on October 27, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, filed as Christine C. Anderson v. The State of New York, et. al. S.D.N.Y., October 27, 2007 the Plaintiff affirmatively claims support by the Iviewit matters of patent sabotage, FRAUD ON THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, intellectual property theft , and an attempted murder perpetrated by, among others, the once respected Proskauer Rose LLP and its members Kenneth Rubenstein, Steven C. Krane, (former New York State Bar President, former clerk to Chief Judge Judith Kaye), Chief Judge Judith Kaye and her late Proskauer partner husband Stephen Kaye, Christopher C. Wheeler, Foley & Lardner LLP led by its former Chairman and former Republican National Committee, Chief Counsel, Michael C. Grebe and others.

In that lawsuit, the Plaintiff factually alleges that:

Upon information and belief, defendants also state that the timing of the, Plaintiff’s abrupt firing was connected to the newly circulated revelations concerning Cahill's status as an individually named defendant in a lawsuit entitled In the Matter of Complaints Against Attorneys and Counselors-At-Law; Kenneth Rubenstein - Docket 2003.0531; Raymond Joao-Docket 2003.0532; Steven C. Krane- Docket 2004.1883; Thomas J. Cahill- Special Inquiry #2004.1122; and the Law Firm of Proskauer Rose, LLP; filed by Eliot I. Bernstein, Pro Se and P. Stephen Lamont Both Individually and On Behalf of Shareholders of: Iviewit et. al., Petitioners. [Iviewit’s]…petition was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division: First Department.

The Iviewit Petition @ http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2007%2008%20Cahill%20Motion%20Supreme%20court%20new%20york%20FINAL%20BOOKMAR.pdf for immediate investigation was later granted by the First Department Justices in a unanimous decision to begin immediate investigation for the Appearance of Impropriety and Conflict of Interest in Unpublished Orders:

• M3198 - Steven C. Krane & Proskauer Rose @ http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2008%2011%20new%20york%20first%20department%20orders%20investigation%20Krane%20Rubenstein%20Joao.pdf

• M2820 Kenneth Rubenstein & Proskauer Rose
• M3212 Raymond A. Joao and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel and,
• Thomas J. Cahill – Special Inquiry #2004.1122 - Cahill was transferred for Special Inquiry and Investigation to Martin Gold per First Dept rules.

Original First Dept Complaints:
• Kenneth Rubenstein – Docket 2003.0531 First Department,
• Raymond Joao – Docket 2003.0532 First Department,
• Steven C. Krane – Docket 2004.1883 First Department,
• the Law Firm of Proskauer Rose, LLP and,
• the Law Firm of Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolfe and Schlissel

Additionally, and similar to the NYLJ and the NYT, as reported in an article aptly titled "Justice Department Widens 'Patentgate' Probe Buried by Ethics Chief Thomas J. Cahill" @ http://exposecorruptcourts.blogspot.com/2007/08/justice-dept-widens-patentgate-probe.html the Iviewit inquiries have reached the highest levels of New York & Washington political circles and into many judicial chambers as well.

The original inquiries revealed that New York ethics Chief Counsel Thomas J. Cahill of the First Department Disciplinary Committee whitewashed investigations, which recently led to his abrupt departure.

In a letter dated July 16, 2007, H. Marshall Jarret’s office, the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility, announced from its Washington, D.C. headquarters that it was expanding its investigation into a bizarrely stalled FBI and US Attorney investigation, initiated in 2001, that involves the theft from Iviewit of nearly 30 patents, trademarks and other intellectual properties, with an estimated value of a trillion dollars.

The OPR investigation was sparked by a request from the DOJ – OIG, Inspector General Glenn Fine’s Office whom is also conducting an ongoing investigation. The patent pending applications and other IP have been suspended by the Commissioner of Patents pending the outcome of ongoing state, federal and international investigations.

The probe reaches some of New York's most prominent politicians and judges, and has already proven to be a stunning embarrassment to the State's ethics watchdog committees.

As a backdrop to the technologies in question, Mr. Bernstein's inventions, the Iviewit video scaling and image overlay systems, are the backbone, enabling technologies for the transmission of video and images across almost all transmission networks and viewable on all display devices, an elegant upstream solution (towards the content creator) of reconfiguring video frames to unlock bandwidth, processing, and storage constraints -- the "Holy Grail" inventions of the digital imaging and video worlds that enable low bandwidth video on the Internet and mobile phones.

As previously reported, the U.S. Senate and U.S. House Judiciary Committees (Representative John Dingell, Chair of the Energy & Commerce Committee forwarded the Iviewit matters to John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee for investigation) have known about the Iviewit investigation since about September of 2006. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office is also championing the Iviewit cause.

The story is globally known in technical and intellectual property circles, with ongoing investigations at international patent offices such as the European Patent Office as well.

Full information available @ www.iviewit.tv , including full pertinent documentation and images of the car bombing attempt on inventor Bernstein’s life.

Eliot I. Bernstein & P. Stephen Lamont
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
Iviewit Holdings, Inc.
www.iviewit.tv
iviewit@iviewit.tv
...

About Iviewit Technologies, Inc. and Iviewit Holdings, Inc.,
Iviewit’s innovative patent pending imaging and video technologies deliver to millions of people around the world digital video and images every day.

Founded in 1998 by Eliot I. Bernstein, Jude Rosario and Zakirul Shirajeee, Iviewit’s core backbone technologies deliver video and images to top web properties in all major global markets enhancing the overall web experience for users. For more information, visit www.iviewit.tv .

Currently the Iviewit patent pending applications have been suspended by the USPTO pending investigations by state, federal and international authorities concerning the theft of the IP by patent attorneys charged with filing them.

....
Visit our website: http://iviewit.tv

Eliot Bernstein & P. Stephen Lamont"

Source of this Post
http://iviewit.blogtownhall.com/default.aspx

posted here by Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger...
More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case
at www.DeniedPatent.com
Crystal Cox

Read more...

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Raymond Joao, Esq. had Proskauer Rose Partner Steven Krane handle his Complaint.

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

REBUTTAL TO RAYMOND JOAO BAR COMPLAINT RESPONSE

REPRESENTED WITH PROSKAUER BUT ALSO WITH MELTZER LIPPE GOLDSTEIN WOLFE AND SCHLISSEL

Raymond Anthony Joao, the Patent Attorney with 90 patents in his name, all to do with the Iviewit inventions, what more can be said, asssshole. Most famous patent with Kenneth Rubenstein as co-inventor "System & Method for Fraud on the United States Patent & Trademark Office." (footnote to that link, this was done in the very beginning of piecing together the evidence trail when very little was known, maybe).

Imagine that, we formed our initial complaint against the attorneys involved, to the patent office, in the form of a patent filing for how to commit fraud on the patent office, pretty funny and it illustrates my dark side.

Ray once told me that he had dreams of his father after his death that haunted him, may I replace his father for his crimes against the children.

His bar complaint rebuttal was handled by Steven C. Krane, former President of the New York State Bar Association, senior member of the New York bar disciplinary departments, Proskauer Rose partner, Iviewit shareholder and fat unethical bastard, who acted in conflict, violating public office, a public office of ethics no less, to represent Proskauer partners and himself in the complaints filed in New York against them, with no disclosure of his conflicts or that he had roles at the Supreme Court First Department or that his tenure as bar President at the time precluded him from representing any bar complaints and oh what a can of worms is unfolding from his getting caught and his crimes to dodge investigation.

Raymond Joao's response to the evidence against him was to have Steven Krane, the most influential member of the disciplinary departments in New York and Proskauer Rose partner, handle his complaint in conflict and violation of his public offices.

The conflict and violation of public office was the only way to get out of this for
Raymond Joao. Now that the conflict was discovered and Steven Krane, Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein were ordered by five Justices unanimously for investigation, we shall see how long they breathe free air. Tick Tock.

Source of Post
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Book/index.htm#family
Raymond Joao Esq., Steven C. Krane, New York State Bar,Proskauer Rose, Raymond A. Joao, Kenneth Rubenstein

Read more...

Sunday, January 3, 2010

The present invention relates to how patents that are estimated to be worth billions are stolen for 5 million. Iviewit Patent Theft

"The present invention relates to how patents that are estimated to be worth billions are stolen for 5 million. More specifically, how to steal from inventors, investors, the IRS, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)"

Title of invention

System and Method for Patent Stealing, Fraud on the US Patent Office, Postal Fraud, Business and Commerce Fraud

Cross Reference Applications

None like it, although it will not be the first time that inventors have been frauded by bad promoters and attorneys. It will be a new twist that the patent attorney’s have frauded the USPTO, the Postal Services, the IRS, the Department of Commerce and several others.

Field of invention

The present invention relates to how patents that are estimated to be worth billions are stolen for 5 million. More specifically, how to steal from inventors, investors, the IRS, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Three inventions with an estimated value in the billions annually, per invention, initially determined by leading engineers from Intel, Lockheed, SGI and many others. These items were called "holy grail" inventions and it now appears to have blinded a few. I still believe that these patents are gifts from G-d that come in dreams that oft speak to inventors.These inventions were created in the pursuit of helping children fix the world we are breaking.

Following is a method for trying to steal a gift from g-d to help children, and if you are capable of that, anything is possible. Following are the steps used in the preferred embodiment although some will have to remain trade secrets a bit longer until a further investigation into these claims arises.

It is known in the field of patent fraud that the proprietors, so called promoters or patent attorney’s, try to take advantage of innocent inventors and the choice of promoter versus attorney is one of crapshoot versus supposed guaranteed success, if you overcome the prior art. It is supposed to be tantamount to trust your patent attorneys and the attorney client privileges should be upheld here to the highest ethical standards, especially when you have picked the best lawyers and paid in triplicate and it’s regarding something our forefathers took special note for. Further, these were not just our attorneys but in some instances shareholders and advisors to the company.

Once a bad promoter or attorney is identified, it is well known that they will attempt to change title out of the inventors name, try to steal patent ideas by filing with others or themselves or just bury the idea and use it.

It is also well known that your lawyer Kenneth Rubenstein and Christopher Wheeler would recommend a patent attorney out of NY (Raymond Joao) who we think is part of Proskauer originally. Then we are told Joao is transferring with Rubenstein to Proskauer and then that Rubenstein might not even be with Proskauer.

Anyhoots, we would have to put up some big retainer and start flying this guy out from NY and all this was doing was giving Christopher and Raymond time to file around I View It perhaps. Had the inventions been able to be designed around I am sure they would have taken that approach (Zeosync) and when that failed to procure a result, the only option left was to steal.

Why did Proskauer not do the filings?

Why do they make us use this expensive guy way away from us who needs upfront cash, etc, we think originally he works under Ken at Proskauer. We are a start-up with very little cash and we are already giving Proskauer a great stock deal to boot, Wheeler lies, I think, and said he does not have a department to handle patent filings at the time.

You will see how they keep making us pay up front for Ray’s services trying to delay the filings while Wheeler is billing/gauging us with frivolous legal expenses like corporate restructures of restructures of restructures and trademarks on things like my mother’s maiden name.

All of these initial delays in the filings are caused by Wheeler/Joao delays and while these delays are occurring patents from others, like Joao are being filed.

Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao commit major fraud on US Patent office when they knowingly file patents with missing inventors telling us foreigners could not be listed. They also lose patent file 5865-2 of Joao’s file folders and Joao claims to have destroyed all I View It notes when he is requested by Foley and Larder to procure these items, and further claims to have done this “to protect I View It”?

The frauds include; leaving out inventors knowingly, not filing patents timely on the Company’s behalf, then losing priority dates for such inventions and finally filing patents with missing parts.

These missing parts later show up in patents filed personally by Raymond Joao.

Other missing parts later show up filed personally at Brian Nutley’s home address with himself as sole inventor. This appears felonious, furthermore false information was promulgated to the Board and finally they submitted such frauded documents to the USPTO through the US Mail.

Chris Wheeler and Ken Rubenstein when questioned regarding the missing patents Joao lost, they guaranteed that the 3 patents Ray came to Florida to document and took information on, on his first trip, were filed or merged into one.

Turns out that by the time he files our second set of patents it is 3 months later and when you look at what he filed it is criminal in that it completely fails to describe the inventions (as determined by now 3 other law firms and finally some are abandoned), this is a direct attempt to sabotage our pool.

Chris Wheeler has been scheduling meetings with players like R3D, Hollywood.com, Visual Data, Huizenga (Web Cast) lying to everyone that the video patent is already filed. Then on the 3 hour drive to R3D, we tried to locate Joao as he was supposed to be scheduled to be available for questions, as this was IView It’s biggest meeting 20 engineers spawning Intel, Silicon Graphics and Lockheed we were sweating, if they had seen it we would pack up and go home. Ray Joao has disappeared and is unavailable for the meeting and Chris Wheeler guarantees us all for three hours on the way up that we are ok as we enter R3D, mind you we try calling Ray several hundred times.

At the meeting we present, review and disclose the full imaging process provisional patent 5865-1, sure enough at the meeting our biggest fears come true, when they ask us to disclose the video concept and we won’t without checking with Joao for confirmation of filing, Joao’s still MIA. I refuse to disclose and we decide not to proceed and set a time to reconvene. Chris later at his office cannot find 5865-2.

After the meeting, Joao becomes available only to tell us that in fact he had never filed a video patent at all. Eliot one of the inventors, throws a huge rage that it appears to be criminal, what happened, where is 5865-2 are they all merged into one? What is going on, calls ensue for Rubenstein to opine.

Huge panacea follows. I would check phone records of everyone that day if I had my dithers. On the other hand, I would look at what happened at R3D with a microscope from that point, sequester all people for testimony and start to follow the technology to the chip and into the camera and into space telescopes and simulators and VR and Cable, TV, etc… and all the other ideas we discussed that magical day.

Source and Full ARticle
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/patentforfraud.htm
Proskauer Rose
Kenneth Rubenstein
David Kappos, Patent Fraud

Read more...

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Enter William Dick of Foley to Replace Raymond Joao - Misrepresentation, Fraud, Lies, Deceit, IBM Connections and More..

"Once Raymond Joao was under “investigation” by Proskauer Rose he was then terminated from service by them, Proskauer instantly found an old friend of Christopher Wheeler’s, a one William Dick of Foley and Christopher Wheeler vouched for his friend William Dick to the Board of Directors.

William Dick, according to Christopher C. Wheeler was IBM’s Patent Counsel for IBM’s far eastern patent pool.

William Dick was also friends and former coworker at IBM and then again with Friedkin with another of Christopher Wheeler’s referrals to the Iviewit companies, Brian G. Utley, who was appointed President of the Iviewit companies whereby Christopher Wheeler had presented a falsified resume for Brian Utley to the Board, Shareholders and Investors, a falsified resume in several key ways.

First, the resume presented to the Board by Christopher Wheeler and Proskauer Rose claimed Brian Utley was a college graduate, in deposition Brian Utley utterly denies ever graduating.

The most important fraud on the resume though was on the point of his past employment whereby it stated that due to Brian Utley’s innovations for the company, Diamond Turf Equipment, owned by Monte Friedkin had grown to be one of the best and largest companies of its kind due to Brian Utley’s running that company.

Per Monte Friedkin, it was more like ruining the company, as when Monte Friedkin found Brian Utley, William Dick and Christopher Wheeler stealing Inventions from him, he fired Utley and closed the shop entirely down taking a several million dollar loss.

Major misrepresentation of Brian Utley by Proskauer’s Christopher C. Wheeler but even more astonishing is that the same crew of Brian Utley, Christopher Wheeler and William Dick were involved in the Monte Friedkin frauds.

Many perjured statements regarding these events were submitted to official investigatory bodies and courts and evidence of these perjurious statements have been included in the Exhibit and Linkage Section under the individuals names.

Prior to learning of their seedy past, which had been misrepresented to the Board, Investors and Shareholders, as neither Williamm Dick nor Christopher Wheeler disclosed their past history together at Friedkin’s with Brian G. Utley, nor did they share the information of the failed invention theft with anyone else.

Of course, if they did disclose the attempted theft, nobody would have retained them; everyone was in the dark as they handed out falsified resumes and financials to Investment Bankers, Iviewit Investors, Iviewit Shareholders, including the SBA and more.

Foley entered the scene under similar false pretenses with Christopher Wheeler vouching for William Dick’s integrity and again failing to notify anyone of their prior failed invention theft.

Instantly, Foley identified a mass of problems with Raymond Joao’s filing but claimed they could correct everything, such as missing assignments, missing inventors, missing patent disclosure information, etc.

Again, I myself and the Iviewit Board and Shareholders trusted yet another large law firm in the IP field referred again by Proskauer Rose and this time Foley assured Investors, Investment Banks and Shareholders that they could and would fix the problems with Raymond Joao’s filing and so they were retained, again, Proskauer’s Kenneth Rubenstein as oversight.

After several months, Brian Utley came to me and asked me to sign blank patent applications for filings the inventors had not reviewed, Brian Utley claiming they needed to be filed that day, which again was false, as they were not due for several days, Brian Utley persisting that the Inventors had no time for review and that he did not have the IP filing applications to review before signing and could not get them.

Noticing several large patent binders on his desk I went to pick them up with another founder and inventor of the Iviewit technologies, James Frazier Armstrong, and what was discovered inside them was both astonishing and criminal.

Inside the binders were intellectual property filings with now Brian Utley as sole inventor of technologies including for example an application titled “Zoom and Pan on a Digital Camera” and another “Zoom Image Design Applet” both inventions of which Brian Utley was not even employed at the time of invention.

Further, Brian Utley replaced original inventors on original patent filings, those filed incorrectly by Raymond Joao, Foley fraudulently replacing inventors Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario with Brian Utley on filings, again Brian Utley was nowhere near the scene of invention.

Foley now found continuing the Joao fraud it appeared although at the time hard for almost anyone to believe.

Further, there were now two or more sets of patents, which almost were identical but were wholly different, as one set missed the inventions entirely and was fraught with bad math and major errors, the others with Utley’s name seemed to be the broader and more correct filings.

In fact, some of the IP found in the binders taken from Brian Utley were for Intellectual Properties already filed at US Patent Office without anyone’s knowledge, including the Inventors, Shareholders or the Board of Directors, patents that were solely ( or soullessly ) in Utley’s name, being sent to his home address, not Iviewit’s and more.

Almost identical to the Monte Friedkin theft whereby William Dick wrote Friedkin’s inventions into Brian Utley’s name and filed them into a corporation incorporated by Proskauer Rose and Christopher Wheeler, outside Friedkin’s employ and without Friedkin’s knowledge or consent.

These fraudulent applications led to immediate taped meetings regarding the fraudulent IP with Foley and Proskauer Partners, Board Members and Shareholders where it was further learned that assignments were missing, inventors were wrong and the patent applications remained filled with errors, I submit to the Committee under the Exhibits and Linkage section of the prepared statement a sample of the IP errors, contained in William Dick’s Virginia Bar Complaint Rebuttal.

Foley was to correct everything in time for the filings, the inventors then corrected the patents, and yet Foley still filed the fraudulent patents with the bad math and other fraudulent information, discarding the inventors’ changes and continuing the fraud. The cat was almost out of the bag at that time, yet it was almost impossible to believe that these were crimes and not some type of mistakes versus part of an organized criminal syndicate of lawyers and law firms attempting to steal inventions, which only later and still today are being unraveled. At the same time, other information indicating fraud began to surface.

The Arthur Andersen Audit, The Enron Broadband Attempted Technology Transfers, the Collapse of both Enron and Arthur Andersen and the Ties to the Iviewit Inventions:
Another hidden and fraudulent set of events within the Iviewit companies links to Enron Broadband discovered at the same time that Arthur Andersen began a required Audit of the Iviewit Companies performed on behalf of Crossbow Ventures and their corresponding interests of the SBA on their SBIC loans. Andersen’s Audit discovered identically and similarly named Corporate Shell companies and other misdeeds, as Iviewit also became aware of unauthorized technology transfers taking place by Utley, Dick and Wheeler that included one with Enron Broadband and Blockbuster Video.

Enron Broadband had booked Hundreds of Millions of Dollars in revenue on a future deal with Blockbuster Video to stream full screen full frame video over the Internet, that once the crimes at Iviewit were beginning to be discovered, fell apart overnight. Many of those who fully understand the Enron fraud understand that the Broadband division’s fraud was the “straw that broke the camels back.” As soon as no technology was to transfer in backdoor secret deals to stream or download the videos due to the investigations, and the scandal was unraveling quickly from the audits findings, everything Enron Broadband and Enron had done had to become extinct overnight. Problem, they already had booked the revenue having forgotten the age-old proverb, “Don't count your chickens before they are hatched”, as greed often blinds the best and brightest too.

I note as an aside that the founder of Blockbuster, Wayne Huizenga and his Son, were the seed investors in the Iviewit companies brought to Iviewit by Proskauer and now named Defendants in my Federal Lawsuit. Instantly, almost overnight, with discovery of the Iviewit fraud, both Andersen who was in the midst of the Iviewit audit that was revealing fraud and Enron vanished in scandal, in a trail of criminal document shredding to cover their tracks. Seeing the danger they were in from the exposure of the crimes, our trusted advisors, our retained lawyers and accountants, then began a document shredding of the Iviewit files to rid the evidence of the illegal technology transfers and other evidence revealing their criminal acts.

Similar to what Anderson now describes taking place in the First Department regarding the Cover-Up crimes alleged. According to Iviewit Employees stolen briefcases of cash of investor monies, including the SBA’s money, then used to bribe and attempt to bribe employees to steal proprietary equipment and trade secrets as indicated in one employees written statement contained in the referenced link in my Prepared Statement Submitted to this Committee @ http://Iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/SHAREHOLDER%20STATEMENTS%20BOOKMARKED.pdf

Witness testimony on page 10 or found on the Iviewit Homepage under Evidence Link 784. "


Source of Post
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:ktIVkVh6K68J:www.iviewit.tv/20091005%2520NY%2520Judiciary%2520Committee%2520Prepared%2520Statement.doc+site://www.iviewit.tv+Reardon&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Proskauer Sucks
Also Check Out www.Iviewit.TV for More on this Proskauer Rose Deceit...
Kenneth Rubenstein
The William Dick Bar Rebuttal from Eliot Bernsten is at the Link Below.

William Dick submitted documents which the patent office claimed where fraudulent which led to suspension and investigation.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2003%2012%20William%20Dick%20Virginia%20Bar%20Complaint%20Response%20BOOKM.pdf
Proskauer

Read more...

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Proskauer Rose - Crime Accusations - Coverups - Scandals - Names and Players Chart

Click Below to see A Chart of Who the Players of
this High Finance, Stolen Patent Conspiracy are.

r
The Document Below is from www.IviewIt.TV
and shows you Proskauer Rose, Gerald R. Lewin, Brian Utley, Christopher Wheeler,Crossbow Ventures, MPEGLA LLC, Foley and Lardner Llp, Kenneth Rubenstein, Raymond Joao and More Players in all this and how they fit into the Greatest Caper of this Century, the Stealing of a Trillion Dollar Patent.
r
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/rico/CRIME%20ORG%20CHARTS%201.htm
p

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/RICO%20CRIME%20CHARTS.pdf

k

Read more...

Proskauer Rose - Crime Accusations - Coverups - Scandals - Names and Players Chart

Click Below to see A Chart of Who the Players of
this High Finance, Stolen Patent Conspiracy are.

r
The Document Below is from www.IviewIt.TV
and shows you Proskauer Rose, Gerald R. Lewin, Brian Utley, Christopher Wheeler,Crossbow Ventures, MPEGLA LLC, Foley and Lardner Llp, Kenneth Rubenstein, Raymond Joao and More Players in all this and how they fit into the Greatest Caper of this Century, the Stealing of a Trillion Dollar Patent.
r
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/rico/CRIME%20ORG%20CHARTS%201.htm
p

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/RICO%20CRIME%20CHARTS.pdf

k

Read more...

Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe - Clerk of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court - Steven Krane - Thomas Cahill - Raymond Joao

Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe

Read more...

Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose Claimed No Knowledge of Iviewit - is that the Story your Going With?

Can it possibly be True that with all the proof and evidence out there that Proskauer Rose - Kenneth Rubenstein could claim to have know knowledge of Iviewit?

I mean wasn't there contracts, bills, emails, texts, phone calls, documents... What?

Uh.. I don't them, ya I happen to control their technology but that was just a coincidence...

More Tidbits on Kenneth Rubenstein's statement to the Court of No Knowledge of Iviewit.

*Wheeler Letter to Investors Regarding Proskauer Rose's Review of Technologies.

* Hassan Regarding Rubenstein

* Proskauer Rose - Wheeler letter relating to patent services

* Kenneth Rubenstein whereabouts unknown immediately after learning of Iviewit moves from MLGS to Proskauer Rose, Letter to Wheeler who is Rubenstein.

* Kenneth Rubenstein Directs Raymond Joao who he claims is coming to Proskauer Rose with him from MLGS and Joao's statment to the Bar contradicts this. Factually, after meeting with Iviewit Proskauer Rose buys MLGS entire patent department which specializes in Iviewit Niche.

* Kenneth Rubenstein as advisor to MPEG - COI that is never disclosed since Iviewit thought Kenneth Rubenstein - Proskauer Rose was their "counsel", Kenneth Rubenstein repeatedly stated with Wheeler that the patent pools will soon pay royalities on the Iviewit Techs.

Source and Full Document.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/RICO%20CRIME%20CHARTS.pdf
r
r

Read more...

Raymond A. Joao Complaint

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Specifics of General Complaint

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

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

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

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

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

t

Read more...

Iviewit has also discovered a multi-layered scheme and artifice to defraud shareholders

"Iviewit has also discovered a multi-layered scheme and artifice to defraud shareholders via a complex corporate shell game whereby two sets of identical companies were formed and two sets of patents were filed.

Whereby one set of patents was bogus and put into the companies owned by the shareholders and the other set of patents containing the core inventions was put into companies dubiously formed with identical names to the shareholder companies.

The ownership of the shadow companies appears none other than the law firm of Proskauer Rose LLP and other unknowns at this time. Shareholders were notified of the crimes in a shareholder communication dated April 2004 identifying much of the information discovered relating to the crimes, (SHAREHOLDER LETTER IDENTIFYING CRIMES AND GUILTY PARTIES - 3meg file, patience is mandatory).

The crimes have been reported to Federal, State and International authorities and ongoing investigations into the crimes are underway, whereby including but not limited to: the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the USPTO OED which regulates licensed patent attorneys, the Inspector Generals Office of the Federally Backed Small Business Administration, the Boca Raton Florida PD in conjunction with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Florida Department of Professional Regulation, the AICPA, the European Patent Office (EPO) and its attorney regulatory body the Institute of Professional Representatives Before the European Patent Office (IPR).

Additionally, to no avail due to conflicts of interest, violations of public office and a denial of due process that precludes even filing complaints against them, the complaints none-the-less were filed with the state bar associations of New York, Florida and Virginia.

All been apprised of the criminal activities that have taken place, all have failed to investigate our allegations and New York and Florida bar and state Supreme Court agency members have been caught in conflict handling the complaints.

The company has compiled a list of crimes that have been filed with federal, state and international authorities showing the vast number of crimes that have been committed in the theft of the Iviewit intellectual properties.

Where such crimes include not only fraud against the Iviewit shareholders and inventors but fraud upon federal, state and international agencies, including but not limited to: the United States Patent & Trademark Office, the United States Copyright Office, the Federal Bankruptcy court, the Florida and Delaware State Departments, the Florida and New York Supreme Courts, the Federally backed Small Business Administration, a civil court in Florida, the European Patent Office (and the thirty or so representative countries that comprise such EPO) and the Japanese Patent Office.

Check out the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division: First Department court orders for investigation of the former President of the New York State Bar Association Steven C. Krane by clicking on his picture for the document. This is the price of gluttony and greed and why the almighty one has deemed such a sin.

Krane, who is the epitome of ethics has lost his way and acted in conflict of interest and abuse of public office with both the First Department Disciplinary Committee and the New York State Bar Association in representing his partners while maintaining conflicting public office positions in the New York Supreme Courts and NYSBA. Although his investigation has been temporarily de-railed, it will one day be completed as a formal investigation.

Yet, while Krane clerked for Chief Justice of the New York Court of Appeals, Judith Kaye, who by the by, is married to a Proskauer partner, Stephen Kaye, who is one of the accused Proskauer partners in the Intellectual Property Department (formed after learning of the Iviewit inventions), it looks like such forces are blocking the court ordered investigation through yet another series of conflicts and abuses in the investigating department.

Where it appears that Proskauer Rose has positioned deep within the ethics departments and courts to block due process and stave off the inevitable. Yet, as you read on, even these further desperate attempts to block prosecution have uncovered further conflicts which have only caused more people to become ensnared in the web of crimes and further complaints to be filed.
Florida Bar Complaints
Where those complaints in some instances have been refused to file and docket by members of the departments acting to block complaints against themselves inapposite of the laws of those states. Can you imagine, complaints filed against public officers where such officers than deny the complaints with out formal procedure, sounds like the old communist regime where citizens where unable to complain about their elected officials.

It does not sound like the good old USofA where we have a constitutional right to complain against our elected officials when they are found guilty of abuse of public office and as citizens we have an obligation to our country to file such charges. Yet, the onion is peeling and desperate times call for desperate measures.

And all the kings lawyers,
And all the kings men,
Couldn't put Proskauer Rose back together again.

Where once caught stealing the patents, Proskauer has gone through elaborate steps to obstruct justice and deny due process of complaints against them.
Through abuses of public office positions and a series of diabolical conflicts of interests at Supreme Court bar associations and in a civil court in Florida, where initial complaints were filed, including a counter complaint.
Florida Bar Complaints
The counter complaint was denied to be allowed and in this civil billing case Proskauer won through a default judgment after the judge dismissed two sets of Iviewit counsel and granted Proskauer a victory for Iviewit's failure to retain replacement counsel.
This case will be appealed pending information from the investigations, because as it turns out, Iviewit defended companies it did not own, as Proskauer appears to have sued the companies they fraudulently set up to own the stolen patents.
Florida Bar Complaints
That once caught stealing the patents, Proskauer made a desperate attempt to rid the shell companies that they had put the stolen IP into and gain control of the assets through a lawsuit claiming monies owed, while their management referrals tried and involuntary bankruptcy claiming monies owed. In fact, the company was not even aware that Proskauer Rose and their management had taken such actions.
Florida Bar Complaints
The company was notified by members of AOLTW/WB while seeking a twenty five million dollar raise that such legal actions were found while doing their due-diligence but the company was never made aware they were even lawsuits or bankruptcy, as these were for companies named similar and identical to the shareholder companies but not owned by the shareholders.
Upon learning of the legal actions and involuntary bankruptcy the company through a friend and hero (and you will learn of many who have helped carry the torch this far through personal sacrifice and risk), Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq. fired the counsel we were unaware we had and filed the counter complaint in the civil case and filed in the bankruptcy.
Florida Bar Complaints
We retained new counsel, Steven Selz, Esq., Greenberg Traurig, and others to begin to peel the onion and file back but Judge Jorge Labarga would not allow us to present our case and through denying due process and procedure threw the case.
All prior counsel was fired that had been prior representing the companies without authorization and this new team took over the cases. At the time, it was not known that two sets of identical companies had been set up and that the companies we were now defending were not owned by the shareholders but by the companies lawyers.
Florida Bar Complaints
Therefore, Iviewit at the time thought that it was representing companies that its shareholders owned. It was not until the USPTO found that certain patents listed by the attorneys as assets of the Iviewit companies, where not in fact owned or assigned to the parties the attorneys listed on the IP dockets, (USPTO LETTER SHOWING THAT CERTAIN IP ASSETS THOUGHT TO BE IVIEWIT ASSETS ARE OTHERS) that evidence of the multi-layered corporate and patent shell scheme began to surface.
Florida Bar Complaints
Identically named companies, as illustrated in the Company History section, were formed to transfer stolen IP in the wrong inventors names and with no assignment or ownership to shareholders; fascinating, like a shell game of hide the real patents.
Upon attempting to ascertain why the patents were all wrong in inventors, assignees, owners and content, it was learned that dual named corporations were set up and again the information has been forwarded to state and federal authorities and the company is awaiting the outcome of these investigations.

Federal and international authorities have been notified that the organization MPEGLA LLC and other patent pools now controlled by our former Proskauer patent attorneys are acting as anti-competitive and monopolistic criminal enterprises to further aid in the theft and proliferation of the Iviewit inventions through a tying and bundling scheme.
Florida Bar Complaints
This scheme denies paying royalties to the Iviewit Shareholders including the SBA. Why, you may ask, is Proskauer Rose, LLP a former real estate firm since the 1800's, suddenly controlling patent pools that directly infringe upon the Iviewit inventions, after Proskauer learned of the inventions directly from the inventors?
Florida Bar Complaints
In fact, Proskauer attorney Kenneth Rubenstein, a member of the Advisory Board for Iviewit and lead patent counsel to MPEGLA LLC, is now trying to claim that he never heard of Iviewit under deposition (Rubenstein Deposition) and sworn statements to a civil court. Where evidence shows Rubenstein's direct involvement, Rubenstein is found to be a BIG FAT LIAR (Click Ken's picture for his Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division: First Department court ordered investigation by ruling of five Justices).
Florida Bar Complaints
Evidence such as his name in the Iviewit billings and letters from executives of AOLTW/WB showing that he opined favorably on the patents to induce investment from them, contradicts his perjured deposition. Evidence like his name as an Advisory Board Member in a Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum, co-authored, disseminated and billed for by his firm Proskauer and hosts of other evidence clearly showing his knowledge and involvement.
Florida Bar Complaints
When confronted under deposition with such evidence, Rubenstein refused to answer direct deposition questions (at his civil billing case) and left his deposition stating that we would have to have the court order him back to answer questions that directly affect the shareholders.
The court did order him back to the answer the questions but before he could be re-deposed the civil case trial was thwarted by the judge. Iviewit after being released of retained counsel by the judge never got the opportunity.
Florida Bar Complaints
Kenneth Rubenstein who swears under deposition, under sworn statements to the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division: First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee and in a written statement to Judge Jorge Labarga of the civil court in Florida to have never heard of Iviewit, the Iviewit inventions or inventors; cannot be the same Kenneth Rubenstein opining favorably on the Iviewit patents to AOLTW/WB (click here for AOLTW/WB letter dusting Rubenstein's statements and exposing him for perjury).

Of course in good time we will get to Rubenstein's lackey, attorney Raymond Anthony Joao, who was a patent attorney working under Rubenstein's direction.
Florida Bar Complaints
Raymond Joao now claims 90 patents in his own name and Iviewit gives him kudos as the greatest slime ball inventor and patent attorney.
Florida Bar Complaints
No really, Iviewit considers our former counselors Joao and Rubenstein to be nothing more than co-inventors of a system and method to defraud shareholders and inventors of their inventions and commit fraud upon worldwide patent intellectual property organizations, an invention that should carry some stiff federal sentences.
Click here for a press article on the amazing inventiveness of Joao . Joao was so non-inventive that many of these patents resemble ideas and concepts lifted straight from the Iviewit business plan and invention disclosures and ideas that he was supposed to be patenting for the inventors and shareholders.

Much time was wasted causing losses of investors and inventors rights to the Intellectual Properties, perhaps permanently, by the railroading of complaints filed against the attorneys involved in thefts.
Where Proskauer partners were found violating state Supreme Court public office positions and representing their partners while holding public offices that directly prohibited their representations under conflict laws and other state laws in complaints filed against them. How they have staved off prosecution of confirmed conflicts of interest and Supreme Court of New York court ordered investigations, is just more abuse of public offices and further denial of due process through manipulation of the laws they are supposed to be upholding, but fascinating nonetheless.
How high to the crimes elevate, how much more can shareholders be denied of due process is a question of who exactly is spearheading the efforts to continue this hoax on shareholders.
If in fact, denials of due process are found in Justice or the Courts further, it would appear that after Inspector General reports and Department of Commerce investigations that perhaps only a President could be capable of placing people in these roles to block our efforts. If this is found to be the case shareholder claims will have to elevate to a complaint against the administration and those involved in the crimes or cover up of the crimes, to be appropriately titled Patentgate.

The state bars in New York and Florida investigations where thwarted by a series of conflicts of interests and improprieties. Proskauer attorneys violated public office positions in those states to derail investigations. Uncovered after almost two years, after delay after delay of the investigations was achieved through the conflicts, the Florida case against Wheeler and Triggs has reached the United States Supreme Court in an appeal of the Florida Supreme Courts decision in case SC04-1078 and Case Status.
Florida Supreme Court's failure to regulate and discipline attorney's caught in violation of public offices and failure to follow procedures established by the Florida Constitution for dealing with attorney misconduct as regulated by the Florida Bar and over sighted by the Supreme Court of Florida (SCF) is the cause of the case on appeal to the United States Supreme Court, that the Supreme Court of the United States denied to hear, leaving the shareholders with no forum to file complaints against Triggs for his public office violation of a Florida Supreme Court rule?
Perhaps this is why Sandra Day O'Connor upon fleeing the United States Supreme Court with death threats levied against her and Ginsburg, stated this country was in the throws of a dictatorship that should be stopped sooner than later.

Take a moment to honor the original conspirator, Christopher Clark Wheeler, one of the main suspects and ringleaders of the crime who has subsequently been charged with a Felony Driving Under the Influence Charge with Injury making his credibility as an attorney further mired in crimes. An arrest warrant was been issued in that matter, click Wheeler's picture on the left for the Delray Beach Police Department report or this link - Wheeler's arrest report or this one for the PD blotter.
So where his more serious crimes, like fraud on a whole bunch of government agencies and foreign nations now landed Iviewit and its shareholders at the United States Supreme Court to present our case for violations of public office by Wheeler and Triggs, Wheeler going with this further public nuisance crime upon his head.
Wheeler, the main protagonist, the first attorney to revel the inventions and be disclosed the processes, is found recklessly endangering lives, now drunk and a true danger to himself and society. In addition, the Petition filed by Iviewit contained allegations and evidence that linked the President of the Florida Bar and others to conflicts.
The Florida Supreme Court ordered a response to the Petition by the Florida Bar and what was set forth in response was perhaps the most incompetent legal response (Illiterate Florida Bar Response to Petition) ever by the Florida Bar, authored by Eric Turner - Chief Branch Officer, and Turner completed law school.
Authored with a complaint filed against him, which should have precluded his response in conflict, yet Turner so stressed out writes a letter that is legally and intelligibly incoherent, even addressing the Florida Supreme Court improperly and this is a Chief Counsel of The Florida Bar. For this letter alone Turner should have been sent back to law school.
Turners response fails to address any of the allegations in the Petition as demanded by the SCF order and instead states that the Florida Bar review work was done well.
The problem, the review was done and included responses tendered by Triggs as attorney for his partner Wheeler, while Triggs was in a confirmed black-out period at the Florida Bar where he was unable to represent any party due to his public office position with the Florida Bar.
Iviewit filed with the SCF a rebuttal identifying the Florida Bar failure to address the questions in the Petition and asking for a default judgment and also due to Turner's response failing to properly identify parties including the SCF, Rebuttal Response. Further, the exhibits in the illiterate response done by Turner which contain the Florida Bar reviewers (no investigation was undertaken) assessment of the Wheeler complaint, are all invalid, as Wheeler's responses where all tendered by Triggs in conflict but what is interesting to note is how each reviewer attempts to claim that they found no wrong doing or that Proskauer was not patent counsel.
Without any investigation, the Florida Bar is not allowed by their own rules to make any opinions in favor of either party and may only decline to undertake investigation.
Yet, the conflicts, unknown and concealed by Wheeler and Triggs had worked there magic and influenced the Florida Bar to attempt to write exculpatory language on behalf of Proskauer, one wonders what the cost of buying off justice cost.
The Florida Bar acting more as a defacto attorney protection agency versus a consumer organization, where even after being caught in conflicts and violations of public office - attorneys remain not prosecuted and where citizen complaints to The Florida Bar have been denied being filed quite inapposite the intent of the Florida Constitution in creating a bar and inapposite of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar.

When citizens are denied the right to complain about elected officials violating clearly established laws inapposite the rules of procedure, it is reminiscent of the former Soviet Union. Shocking but true, just look up the case and watch it as it now is up for appeal at the United States Supreme Court and there is more corruption following, this time a similar series of conflicts of interest, improprieties and abuses of public office in New York, where court ordered investigations have been derailed and other miscellaneous fodder.

So we begin our dialogue regarding New York by showing that former President of the New York State Bar, Proskauer partner Steven C. Krane, was caught in conflict of interest in violation of his public office positions and where a court of five Justices ordered an immediate investigation (New York Supreme Court Appellate Division: First Department Court Order Investigate Krane) of Krane and had to have the matters moved to a new jurisdiction for investigation.

So how did Krane, Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao avoid court ordered investigation, stay tuned as more information regarding how to derail and deny due process continues, where the answer will assimilated and uploaded shortly.

OK - now if you have all week and are a speed reader, here are some of the Iviewit rebuttals to the responses these guys attempted at the state bars and they are chalk full of evidence and exhibits of all kinds of cool crimes and you will scratch your head again and again as you wonder how they got out of this, until it dawns on you that Proskauer partners in conflict handled the complaint processes against themselves and positioned and politicked like their lives depended on it to stop due process through conflict and abuse of public offices.

Proskauer's responses to the bar will start the flow here and where Proskauer's eternal defense for these crimes is stated in their sworn perjured statements to the bar and it is composed of the following arguments:

Proskauer had nothing to do with Iviewit's intellectual properties; absurd but they try it in the face of mounds of evidence and witness against such claim, including their own bills.

Iviewit is a failed dot com looking for someone to blame. So what are we still doing here and why are patents involved in a failed dot com, why are Proskauer partners being ordered for investigation for conflicts, why is Iviewit petitioning the Supreme Court with patents in suspension by the Commissioner of Patents and why is the Inspector General of the SBA preparing to audit their investment, as the largest shareholder of the company?

If these weak arguments do not hold up once a formal and conflict free investigation prevails, its goodbye Proskauer, et. al. to the federal big house, not to be confused with white collar camp, as these are some pretty heavy charges of federal, state and international crimes and again the theft is certainly grand and perhaps the largest ever attempted in history.

As we all know the patents are priceless and being used around the world in almost every home and business that's "connected" and in every form of digital imaging and video.

So with that ado here are the Proskauer responses to the original complaints and the Iviewit rebuttals.

A word of caution, Wheeler's complaint was filed before Joao and Rubenstein by a stretch and his complaint is contained in exhibit in both the Wheeler and Joao complaints. Rubenstein and Joao both likewise have the entirety of each others complaints inside their individual complaints and the Wheeler Complaint as well. This is why the documents appear so voluminous, although they are all about 1000 pages.

We threw William J. Dick of Foley and Lardner's bar complaint in as well, and this is full of evidences of the patent frauds that were discovered post Wheeler, Kenneth Rubenstein and Joao filings.

It is interesting to see how Iviewit did not know how the scam worked when filing the original complaints and did not know of the fraudulent set of identically named companies or the fraudulent set of patents and when you read more current filings you see how additional evidence continued to surface and put the puzzle together.

Even today, with much evidence still being reviewed it is as if each day new crimes are uncovered and a bit more of the truth is revealed.

Also be weary that the responses done on both Christopher Wheeler and Kenneth Rubenstein were done by Proskauer Rose partners with conflicting public office roles at those departments and the conflicts extend throughout the disciplinary departments to the executive offices of the bars and disciplinary.

Must say Proskauer Rose did do an amicable job of planting and corrupting the process through conflict but how else could they stave off of the evidence presented in the bar rebuttals and civil courts, etc.

Yet, now all prior reviews of the matters are worthless, all letters and correspondences from these departments are worthless and until the Proskauer controls on the New York disciplinary departments and New York courts are removed and then the same done in Florida, Iviewit does not have a snowballs chance in Florida of fair and impartial, conflict free due process in the courts or the attorney disciplinary agencies.

Yet, now that they are caught in the violations of public office positions it is only a matter of time until they will be prosecuted.

Source of POST and Lots of Documentation
http://www.iviewit.tv/about/index.htm
Patent Fraud

Read more...

About This Blog

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP