Warner Bros. Fraud. Warner Bros. Shareholder Fraud. iViewit Technology Theft.

Anti-Corruption Blogger Crystal Cox Says, a Bit About the iViewit Technology Court Case. Crystal Cox regarding the Eliot Bernstein Story, and Justice for the iViewit Inventors

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:21:00 +0000

What if This was Your Invention, Stolen by the Patent Attorneys
that You Hired to get you a Patent?

More on the iViewit Technology Case

http://www.DeniedPatent.com/
http://www.iViewit.tv/

FBI, SEC Complaint, iViewithttp://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf
http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/open-letter-to-time-warner-warner-bros.html Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, Open Letter to Intel Shareholders

http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/open-letter-to-intel-corp-board-of.html Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, Open Letter to Warner Bros. Shareholders

http://intelcorruption.blogspot.com/
Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox Blog On Paul Otelline
Formerly CeoPaulOtellini.com
http://www.alexisdevane.com/ This Blog was Formerly KennethRubenstein.com
http://www.proskauerfraud.com/
http://ceopaulotellini.blogspot.com/
http://jeffreybewkes.blogspot.com/
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=498
http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/intel-corp-intc-press-release-on-mass.html
http://www.foley-lardner.com/
http://www.greenbergtraurigsucks.com/
http://www.proskauerlawfirm.com/ Formerly ProskauerSucks.com
Christopher C. Wheeler, Proskauer Rose Attorney
Formerly ChristopherCWheeler.com
http://christophercwheeler.blogspot.com/
Mathew Triggs, Proskauer Rose Attorney http://matthewtriggscom.blogspot.com/
Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Founder and One of the Inventorshttp://www.EliotBernstein.com/
Raymond Joao Proskauer Rose
Formerly RaymondJoao.comhttp://raymondjoao.blogspot.com/
http://www.scottsherr.com/ Scott Sherr Sony
http://www.toddoutten.com/ Todd Outten
http://douglaschey.blogspot.com/ Formerly DouglasChey.com

Many of My Domain Names Expired, were Lost,
such is Life, the information is still there,Feel Free to Repost.

Lonnie Davis Department of Justice Regarding Vehicle Tampering by Marrone Volvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings, Volvo Cars of North America and Volvo of Sweden. IViewit Technologies Eliot Bernstein

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 15:21:00 +0000

Vehicle and Vehicle Record tampering by Marrone Volvo Autonation Huizenga Holdings, Volvo Cars of North America and Volvo of Sweden

"Dear Lonnie Davis, Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General and the Department of Justice Intake Office,

Attached herein, in a PDF file and contained in the letter below, is information about an alleged Vehicle and Vehicle Record tampering by Marrone Volvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings, Volvo Cars of North America and Volvo of Sweden, which may have been a further attempt to MURDER my family through another instance of alleged Vehicular Tampering while our car was being serviced. Please make this communiqué part of the Ongoing Department of Justice Investigation into the Iviewit/Eliot Bernstein investigation, which also includes an attempted murder via a vehicle CAR BOMBING in Fl., while the prior minivan was in for servicing.

Of major concern is that it has only recently been learned that one of the main perpetrators in the Iviewit/Eliot Bernstein RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit and the Criminal Complaints filed with the DOJ and others, Mr. Wayne Huizenga, is intimately involved and owned the dealership, Marrone Volvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings, where this new Vehicle Tampering issue has occurred. Mr. Huizenga is a CENTRAL CONSPIRATOR in my RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit and that predicate act of Attempted Murder cited in my Amended Complaint in that matter.

Another point of concern, is that once Marrone Volvo and Volvo North America were found to be tampering with Vehicle records and falsifying claims of a Certified Vehicle Inspection by a Volvo Certified Engineer regarding the safety of the vehicle, the General Counsel for Mr. Huizenga’s organization, a one Jill Bilanchone, Esq., attempted to claim that she was not conflicted in responding to these matters for her employer, Marrone Volvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings, despite the fact that Wayne Huizenga owns/owned Marrone Volvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings and was the founder and listed in the Board of Director page. Bilanchone refused to sign a conflict of interest disclosure and acted on behalf of all the corporations knowing of her conflicts with Mr. Huizenga’s organizations, instead of retaining outside NON CONFLICTED legal counsel to respond to the matters.

After realizing my car was not only not getting serviced properly since almost day one by Marrone/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings but that Huizenga owned Marrone, I tendered several letters to both Marrone Volvo, Volvo North America and Volvo Sweden, which advised them of the criminal RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit in NY that Huizenga is a central defendant in and that Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin “legally related” my lawsuit to a New York Supreme Court Whistleblower lawsuit and that these alleged Vehicle tampering issues represented legal liabilities MarroneVolvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings, Volvo Cars of North America and Volvo Sweden. Instead of having Counsel reply to the myriad of Civil and Criminal allegations against the corporations and officers and employees of the corporations,

I received a call last week from Erika Kirsch, one of the main alleged perpetrators named in the documents and charged with falsifying Service Records and Vehicle Engineering Reports and despite admitting and acknowledging that she was aware of Criminal and Civil charges alleged against her in the matters and the conflict this posed in her contacting me regarding legal liabilities of the Corporations and their employees, she maintained that she was representing the legal matters for the corporations.

I am unclear if Erika, the Executive Management Specialist for Volvo Cars of North America, has legal standing to respond to these very legal matters relating to massive potential liabilities for the corporations and executives involved or if any of the corporations could not retain legal counsel due to conflicts and thus had Erika, a named party in the complaints, respond as no one else could be found to continue to perpetrate the crimes involved in covering up the matter. I have notified all of the parties of their liabilities and that they were being criminally complained of and would be added to all ongoing and future Civil and Criminal actions relating to these matters.

Finally, Marrone Volvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings, Volvo North America and Volvo Sweden have refused repeated requests to provide FULL VEHICLE RECORDS to me, which I believe is mandatory under law and this again imparts something afoul. To date, I have not received the signed Certified Engineering Report that supposedly was done and is mentioned in the attached Adobe PDF file either and the executives at Volvo, including legal counsel for both Volvo Cars of North America and Volvo Sweden, have refused to take my calls or respond, other than through Erika, to letters tendered to them and their counsel. I have more evidence, including conversations, messages and letters regarding these matters not contained herein and will be submitting that information for your review after analysis but please take this letter as a FORMAL Criminal Complaint for this matter to be added to all my DOJ and DOJ OIG investigations ongoing.

I will be contacting you shortly to further discuss these matters. Again, thank you for all of your time, effort and consideration of these life threatening matters regarding the Iviewit/Eliot Bernstein matters, I will be forwarding this letter to several other criminal investigators with ongoing investigations and will copy you on those. I have copied those involved from the corporations named in the complaints as further service to them of the criminal and civil notice of liabilities in criminal and civil complaints being filed against them for reporting to their auditors, insurance carriers, bondholders, shareholders and any other party they are obligated to notice of such or any party who may incur liabilities in these matters. Please feel free to call me if you have questions or need additional information.

Eliot Bernstein"

"Dear Stefan Jacoby, Elisabet Wenzlaff, Esq., Maria Hemberg, Esq. and Michael Thomas, Esq. ~ it has come to my attention that some or all of you may not have received this prior communication regarding Criminal and Civil actions and liabilities now involving Executives of Volvo Cars of North America, Volvo Car Corporation, Autonation and others noted in the attached correspondences [attached below] and the Adobe pdf file attached herein. Notice has been given to the investigatory agencies, including the Department of Justice, listed below and others regarding these most serious charges. Michael, I have left a message on your voice mail several weeks back for you to contact me, which has been ignored, however, I did get a call from Erica at Volvo North America, one of accused parties in the Criminal Complaints noted in the attached Adobe PDF file and was appalled that Volvo would allow a conflicted party and named individual in the Criminal Complaint to contact me directly. I did notify Erica that it seemed wholly out of place that one of the accused parties in the Criminal Complaints would be allowed by Volvo to contact the Customer complaining, in an effort to distance Volvo from further communications with me, especially when the matters are legal in nature and have massive liabilities attached, which truly should only be responded to by Non Conflicted legal counsel and may in fact cause more Civil and Criminal liabilities. Erica informed me that she was even responding on behalf of all parties named in the complaints in a legal capacity or on legal counsels behalf, which seems outrageous and perhaps illegal and unethical. Further, I have received from Volvo North America a package of pictures, which appear further efforts to paper the file, after “complete records” were supposedly tendered by Jill Bilanchone of AutoNation and where VOLVO has REFUSED TO RELEASE FULL VEHICLE HISTORY REPORTS despite repeated WRITTEN REQUESTS, again this may cause further liabilities to VOLVO et al.

I will be preparing a further Criminal Complaint and formal response regarding the newly tendered evidence in a few days but wanted to also note here that Erica has stated that nobody at VOLVO et al. will talk with me ever again, in any regard, other than through her, a non lawyer and conflicted party in the matters. Further, at this point, without the requested Signed Vehicle Safety and Engineering Report promised by Volvo, I cannot in good conscience even sell the car with the possible life threatening dangers associated with the Vehicle that Volvo is now fully apprised of. The Vehicle remains having all the problems noted in the attached PDF letter, which grow more dangerous each day. We attempted to service the Vehicle at a different dealership than Marrone/Autonation but due to the fact that the Vehicle has recently gone over 50,000 miles and supposedly out of warranty, they will not address the safety issues, such as the brakes, etc. They stated that since Marrone/Autonation had done the prior work, it was under warranty with them only and they could address the problems, leaving us with no service options and a wholly unsafe vehicle.

Your prompt attention to these matters would be greatly appreciated, if I do not hear back from you to resolve these matters in the next five days, you may take this correspondence as legal notice that all those named herein and in the attached PDF file will have new individual Criminal and Civil charges filed against you, in addition to those already filed as indicated below.

Thank you,

Eliot Bernstein"

Source, IViewit, Eliot Bernstein to Volvo
Below is Letter to Volvo

Huizenga Holdings, Inc., Jeanetter Rider, Stefan Jacoby, Elisabet, Wenslaff, Volvo Car Corporation Sweden.

Huizenga Holdings, Inc., Jeanetter Rider, Stefan Jacoby, Elisabet, Wenslaff,
Volvo Car Corporation Sweden.

Sony Pictures Entertainment Constantly Researching my Blogs Regarding John Calkins and iViewit. Yes, your Involved, time to come clean

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:57:00 +0000

Visitor Analysis & System Spec Show Full URLs
Referring URL:	www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cts=1331743601586&ved=0CG0QFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.investigativeblogger.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fjohn-calkins-sony-googled-by-esaress.html&ei=JctgT_2DLIHFtgea4Ki7BQ&usg=AFQjCNHt7PCmvvkXeR_V7QP9jhZO_lysCQ&sig2=iBRQ68Le41riinKIp14eqw
Host Name:		Browser:	Firefox 10.0
IP Address:	208.84.225.10 — [Label IP Address]	Operating System:	Win7
Location:	Culver City, California, United States	Resolution:	1440x900
Returning Visits:	0	Javascript:	Enabled
Visit Length:	Multiple visits spread over more than one day	ISP:	Sony Pictures Entertainment

Navigation Path

Date	Time	WebPage Show Full URLs
		www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cts=1331743601586&ved=0CG0QFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.investigativeblogger.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fjohn-calkins-sony-googled-by-esaress.html&ei=JctgT_2DLIHFtgea4Ki7BQ&usg=AFQjCNHt7PCmvvkXeR_V7QP9jhZO_lysCQ&sig2=iBRQ68Le41riinKIp14eqw
14 Mar	10:46:42	www.investigativeblogger.com/2011/06/john-calkins-sony-googled-by-esaress.html
		(No referring link)
14 Mar	17:38:17	www.investigativeblogger.com/2011/06/john-calkins-sony-googled-by-esaress.html
		www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.investigativeblogger.com%2F2011%2F02%2Fjohn-calkins.html&ei=UMhsT7GOCcX7ggf9tMzLBg&usg=AFQjCNHVbR2-N071ukGyxCGH3iJHaX6tLw&sig2=sRk0gMuSj9CjbBJMimdH_g
23 Mar	13:00:42	www.investigativeblogger.com/2011/02/john-calkins.html

Proskauer Rose LLP, Proskauer Law Firm, Proskauer Rose, Chadbourne and others Charged with Conspiracy and Fraud.. IViewit is Next. 13 Trillion Dollar Scandal, USPTO, DOJ, SEC, knows of Massive Shareholder Fraud.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 04:37:00 +0000

"Proskauer Rose, Chadbourne and others Charged with Conspiracy and Fraud in R. Allen Stanford Ponzi by Court Receiver for Victims Ralph Janvey.

Iviewit Inventor Eliot I. Bernstein Publishes Draft Motion to US Appeals Court involving direct ties to the Iviewit Stolen Patents and Sir R. Allen Stanford, Bernie Madoff, Galleon, Dreier, MF Global scams and more.

Proskauer Rose, Chadbourne and others Charged with Conspiracy and Fraud in R. Allen Stanford Ponzi by Court Receiver for Victims Ralph Janvey.

Stanford Trial Drags Former Proskauer, Chadbourne Partner Back into Spotlight
Brian Baxter The American Lawyer February 8, 2012

View Article Click Below
http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1202541880071&slreturn=1

—–
Iviewit Inventor Eliot I. Bernstein Publishes Draft Motion to US Appeals Court involving direct ties to the Iviewit Stolen Patents and Sir R. Allen Stanford, Bernie Madoff, Galleon, Dreier, MF Global scams and more
—

IVIEWIT DRAFT MOTION TO SECOND CIRCUIT COURT

OF APPEALS OF CONFLICTS

Case No. 08-4873-CV

—-

United States Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit
Justices: Debra Ann Livingston, Richard C. Wesley, Peter W. Hall and- Ralph K. Winter, Jr.

—-

Eliot Ivan Bernstein, Pro Se Plaintiff – Appellant

–v–

Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee et al. Defendants / Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

CASE 07 Civ. 11196 (Shira Anne Scheindlin)

LEGALLY Related Case to Iviewit RICO by Federal Judge Shira A. Scheindlin to:

(07 Civ. 9599) (SAS-AJP) WHISTLEBLOWER LAWSUIT of Christine C. Anderson, Esq. v. the State of New York, et al.
(Anderson, a Former New York Supreme Court Attorney)

Cases Legally Related to Anderson / Iviewit:

1. 08-4873-cv United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Docket - Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al. - TRILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT

2. Capogrosso v New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, et al.

3. Esposito v The State of New York, et al.

4. McKeown v The State of New York, et al.

5. Related Cases @ US District Court - Southern District NY

6. 07cv09599 Anderson v The State of New York, et al. - WHISTLEBLOWER LAWSUIT which other cases have been marked legally “related” to by Fed. Judge Shira A. Scheindlin

7. 07cv11196 Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al.

8. 07cv11612 Esposito v The State of New York, et al.

9. 08cv00526 Capogrosso v New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, et al.

10. 08cv02391 McKeown v The State of New York, et al.

11. 08cv02852 Galison v The State of New York, et al.

12. 08cv03305 Carvel v The State of New York, et al.

13. 08cv4053 Gizella Weisshaus v The State of New York, et al.

14. 08cv4438 Suzanne McCormick v The State of New York, et al.

15. 08 cv 6368 John L. Petrec-Tolino v. The State of New York

16. 06cv05169 McNamara v The State of New York, et al.

ELIOT IVAN BERNSTEIN, PRO SE
2753 N.W. 34TH STREET BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33434-3459
(561) 245.8588 (o) / (561) 886.7628 (c) / (561) 245-8644 (f)
iviewit@iviewit.tv / www.iviewit.tv

Table of Contents

Conflict of Interest (COI) Disclosure Form… 6

Motion to.. 22

I. Introduction.. 23

a. Christine c. Anderson, Esq., new york supreme court attorney Whistleblower Testimony Reveals a Criminal RICO Cartel Coup D’ÉTAT on government at the highest outposts of law and regulation.. 23

b. Meet the coupsters.. 26

c. The Controlled Demolition of World Markets by Attorneys at Law operating as a criminal rico enterprise and infiltrating senior pUBLIC offices, including within the department of justice and the courts.. 39

d. Where is the Justice? THe CRIMINAL role of this court in AIDING AND ABETTING the criminal rico enterprise.. 48

II. IMMEDIATELY DISQUALIFY ALL Justices and other Members of the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals ( this Court ) whom have currently acted in this Lawsuit in anyway whatsoever, for their part in Aiding and Abetting Fraud on the Court, Obstruction of Justice, Denial of Due Process, HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS and more.. 69

III. Remand, Halt and Rehear this RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit due to the New York State Attorney General’s now Admitted and Acknowledged Conflicts of Interest, both past and present, in acting ILLEGALLY as Counsel their office and additionally for 39 plus State Defendant/Actors in this Lawsuit, by Violating Public Office Rules & Regulations, Attorney Conduct Codes and State & Federal Law 83

IV. Remand and Rehear this Lawsuit due to the New York State Supreme Court Attorney Whistleblower Christine C. Anderson’s Felony Criminal Allegations against SENIOR Court Officials, Public Officials and more. 92

HALT THIS LAWSUIT and the “Legally Related” Lawsuits, pending investigations of Whistleblower Anderson’s FELONY CRIMINAL Allegations against Members of, the New York Attorney General’s Office, the US Attorney’s Office, the New York District Attorney’s Office, Justices of the courts, Officers of the New York Supreme Court, the New York Supreme Court Disciplinary Departments, officers of the new york supreme court disciplinary departments and others, based on FELONY CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS in US Federal Court and before the New York Senate Judiciary Committee.

The Felony Crimes alleged by Anderson, directly relate to this RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit, including having several identical New York State Public Official Actor/Defendants and the allegations are wholly germane to the nexus of the Iviewit RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit Crimes alleged. Further the two lawsuits are “Legally Related” by Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin. 96

V. Remove and report ALL other Conflicts of Interest, violations of public office rules, violations of judicial cannons, attorney conduct codes and state and federal law, currently in place in this RICO Lawsuit and related cases, in order to impart fair and impartial DUE PROCESS UNDER LAW… 96

VI.   DEMAND that ALL parties to this Lawsuit going forward, including but not limited to, Court Justices & Officials, Attorneys at Law, Prosecutors, Clerks, etc. sign Affirmed Conflict of Interest Disclosures, identical to the one attached herein, acknowledging PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL LIABILITIES for any violation, prior to, ANY further Action by ANYONE in this RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit. 97

VII.   Demand for Justices of the SECOND CIRCUIT to turn themselves in to State and Federal Criminal Authorities to ANSWER to filed CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS against them and served upon them.. 97

VIII.   Alleged crimes ongoing by p. stephen lamont et al. both known and unknown and fraud on this court, the us district court and now other courts including the supreme court and more. 98

IX. PLAINTIFF SEEKS LEAVE TO AMEND THE AMENDED COMPLAINT TO ADD NEW DEFENDANTS AND NEW ALLEGED CRIMES NEWLY DISCOVERED.. 98

X. Relief.. 99

Exhibit 1 – conflict of interest disclosure PARTIAL LIST OF KNOWN CONFLICTED PARTIES. 100

Exhibit 2. 106

EXHIBIT 3 – Criminal Complaint S. 108

Exhibit 4 – Ethics Complaint. 108

MOTION TO:

· Remand and Rehear this Lawsuit due to the New York State Attorney General’s now Admitted and Acknowledged Conflicts of Interest both past and present, in acting ILLEGALLY as Counsel for 39 plus State Defendant/Actors in this Lawsuit by Violating Public Office Rules &; Regulations, Attorney Conduct Codes and State & Federal Law.

· Remand and Rehear this Lawsuit due to the New York State Supreme Court’s Attorney Whistleblower, Christine C. Anderson’s (“Anderson”) Felony Criminal Allegations against SENIOR Court Officials, Public Officials et al.

· HALT THIS LAWSUIT and the “Legally Related” Lawsuits, pending investigations of Whistleblower Anderson’s FELONY CRIMINAL Allegations against Members of the New York Attorney General’s Office, the US Attorney’s Office, the New York District Attorney’s Office, New York State Supreme Court, the New York Supreme Court Disciplinary Departments and others.

FELONY CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS EXPOSED in US Federal District Court, THIS COURT and before the New York Senate Judiciary Committee by the HEROIC TESTIMONY and SWORN STATEMENTS of NEW YORK SUPREME COURT ATTORNEY WHISTLEBLOWER, CHRISTINE C. ANDERSON.

· IMMEDIATELY DISQUALIFY ALL Justices and other Members of the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals ( this Court ) whom have acted to this point in this Lawsuit in any capacity whatsoever, for Aiding and Abetting Fraud on the Court, Obstruction of Justice, Denial of Due Process and more.

· Remove ALL other Conflicts of Interest currently in place in this Lawsuit in order to implement FAIR & IMPARTIAL DUE PROCESS UNDER LAW.

· DEMAND that ALL parties to this Lawsuit going forward, including but not limited to, Court Justices & Officials, Attorneys at Law, Prosecutors, Clerks, et al. Sign and Affirm Conflict of Interest Disclosures identical to the one attached herein, acknowledging PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL LIABILITIES for any violation, prior to, ANY further Action by ANYONE in this RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit.

· Demand for Justices and others named herein of this Court to turn themselves in to the appropriate State and Federal Criminal Authorities to ANSWER to filed CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS against them and served upon them.

——

Caution! if you have not signed the attached Conflict of Interest Disclosure form and returned it as instructed and you continue to act in any manner whatsoever in these matters, Criminal Charges will be brought against you, for Obstruction of Justice, Aiding & Abetting a Criminal RICO Organization and More. see the attached Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form for further information regarding your potential personal and professional liabilities.

—–

I. Introduction

“What country before ever existed a century &; a half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.

The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon &; pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure.”

The “Tree of Liberty” letter from Thomas Jefferson to William Smith http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/96oct/obrien/blood.htm

A. NEW YORK SUPREME COURT WHISTLEBLOWER ATTORNEY, CHRISTINE C. ANDERSON, ESQ. (“Anderson”) MAKES FELONY CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS IN US FEDERAL COURT AND BEFORE THE NEW YORK SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. ALLEGATIONS AGAINST SENIOR RANKING OFFICIALS OF THE US ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, THE NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, THE NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, THE NEW YORK SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY DEPARTMENTS, “FAVORED LAWYERS AND LAW FIRMS” [Footnote 3] and names a “CLEANER” [Footnote 4] , as revealed in federal court testimony, a one Naomi Goldstein.

THESE ALLEGATIONS DEMAND IMMEDIATE REPORTING, INVESTIGATION AND HALTING OF THE LEGALLY RELATED IVIEWIT RICO & ANTITRUST LAWSUIT IN ORDER TO BEGIN INVESTIGATIONS TO IDENTIFY AND PROSECUTE THOSE FINGERED BY WHISTLE BLOWER ANDERSON and OTHERS.

—

[3] From Anderson’s Sworn Statement to the New York Senate Judiciary Committee, “Specifically, I discovered and reported that employees of the DDC had engaged in, inter alia, the “whitewashing” [of] complaints of misconduct leveled against certain “select” attorneys and law firms.

This “whitewashing” sometimes involved burying cases or destroying evidence, so that certain complaints were inevitably, unavoidably, dismissed. I witnessed this destruction of evidence myself. Other reported misconduct involves victimizing attorneys lacking privileged positions or connections.”

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=365

[4] “Legal Document: Request for Discovery” Posted on July 22, 2011 by Fred Celani

http://fredcelani.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/request-for-discovery/

—
The “Legally Related” Federal Lawsuit of New York Supreme Court Veteran Senior Supreme Court Disciplinary Department Attorney and Expert in Attorney Criminal Misconduct Complaints, Whistleblower Christine Anderson, Esq., by Federal Judge Shira Anne Scheindlin to this RICO & ANTITRUST Lawsuit, exposes from the inside, a legal conspiracy of corruption involving the highest levels of Regulatory, Prosecutorial and Judicial Public Offices both State and Federal. Heroism is a word earned through action. The Whistleblowing Efforts of Anderson, another New York Supreme Court Attorney Whistleblower and Hero, Nicole Corrado, Esq., and, a Sitting New York Supreme Court Justice, Honorable Duane A. Hart, Esq., all cited herein, should be the Moniker of HEROISM for others in the legal profession to follow.

These Whistleblowers Expose Corruption at the Top of Government, including the Courts, this Court, the Department of Justice, the New York Attorney General and others.

They further provide the World with an understanding of how America’s Financial System has melted top down, from rigged economic breakdowns and controlled demolition of world markets through fraud, with no Regulators or Prosecutors or Courts to stop it, in fact, all of them Aiding and Abetting the crimes.

Nobody attempting to RECOVER the stolen funds for the PEOPLE, as all of the Top Government Officials charged with enforcement of the Law, appear on the take and part of the crimes according to these Whistleblowers. These Whistleblowing efforts expose how and why no one on Wall Street/Greed Street/Fraud Street has been charged with Criminal Acts, despite massive and overwhelming evidence of CRIMINAL ACTS and FRAUD.

Further exposed, is why none of the Stolen Loot from these Economic Crimes have been recovered back to the People. What is unveiled is a COUP D’ÉTAT on the HIGHEST OUTPOSTS OF LAW & ORDER in the United States and yet not a single story in the Mainstream Media aka US Pravda Press, regarding these shocking allegations by inside Whistleblowers.

Exposed by these HEROIC WHISTLEBLOWING EFFORTS is a REVOLVING DOOR between a licentious GROUP OF LAW FIRMS and ATTORNEYS AT LAW, acting in both PRIVATE PRACTICE and PUBLIC OFFICE, working together in CONSPIRACY and forming a RICO CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION with tentacles embedded at the highest outposts of the US Government in order to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE for the CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.

Anderson, Corrado and Other Public Office Whistleblowers cited herein, also provide explanation for why Judges and Attorneys at Law are now desperately trying to grant themselves immunity for felony crimes and attempting to use the State Attorney General Offices and other Government officials as accomplice in the cover-up.

Immunity for ATTORNEYS AT LAW for their role in TORTURE CRIMES, WAR CRIMES and ECONOMIC CRIMES, crimes that include the CREATION OF ILLEGAL/FRAUDULENT FINANCIAL & INSURANCE CONTRACTS that led to the RIGGED HOUSING and MARKET COLLAPSES, that led to MILLIONS OF VERY ILLEGAL FORECLOSURES and left MILLIONS UNEMPLOYED AND STARVING. Seeking immunity for crime, as a legal defense is both futile and an obvious admission of guilt, which will never hold in a fair and impartial court of law?

The attempts to gain immunity for FELONY CRIMINAL ACTS shows culpability in the crimes, exposing fear by the guilty of retribution of the day when the “long arm of the law” swings back.

Fear that they will hang for their crimes against Humanity, their War Crimes (Illegal Undeclared Wars of Aggression, Torture, Misappropriation of Public funds by Congress for Undeclared Wars, Economic Terrorism and more) and they must hope for dirty courts to clear them forever.

Whistleblowing comes at a price to Whistleblowers in this new environment of a CRIMINAL GOVERNMENT.

Christine Anderson, Corrado, Hart and others, including PLAINTIFF have been through hell to bring this INFORMATION TO LIGHT and where this Court should acknowledge Anderson, Corrado and the others who have come forth for their HEROISM, suspiciously, they do not.

These are TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOTS, HEROES and ROLE MODELS OF ETHICS shunned by the very legal system they work in.

We instead find this Court currently attempting to ILLEGALLY DISMISS Anderson’s WHISTLEBLOWER Lawsuit and the “legally related” cases prior to investigations and hearings of the criminal acts exposed by government officials against other Senior Ranking Officials.

We find THIS COURT attempting to BURY THE FELONY CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS AGAINST FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES EXPOSED BY CREDIBLE WITNESSES in a FEDERAL COURT by “SWEEPING THEM UNDER THE RUG,”

PRIOR TO INVESTIGATIONS REQUIRED BY LAW, as more fully defined herein. Therefore, Plaintiff starts this Motion in Honor.

A Tip of the Hat to the TRUE PATRIOTS NAMED HEREIN AND THEIR HEROIC WHISTLEBLOWING EFFORTS TO BLOW THE LID OFF ONE OF THE LARGEST CORRUPTION STORIES OF ALL TIME, PLACING MEMBERS OF THIS COURT RIGHT IN THE CENTER of world market fraud and more, A ROOT OF THE PROBLEM."

Source and Full Article

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=594

More on the iViewit Story

http://iviewit.tv/

http://www.deniedpatent.com/

Ian Duggan - Anything Social Researching iViewit

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:42:00 +0000

Visitor Analysis & System Spec
Referring URL:	(No referring link)
Host Name:	vl221.cr1.sfo1.peakwebhosting.com	Browser:	Unknown
IP Address:	204.11.219.90 — [Label IP Address]	Operating System:	Unknown
Location:	San Francisco, California, United States	Resolution:	1024x768
Returning Visits:	0	Javascript:	Enabled
Visit Length:	39 mins 58 secs	ISP:	Ian Duggan

Navigation Path

Date	Time	WebPage
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:36:53	www.deniedpatent.com/
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:38:44	www.deniedpatent.com/
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:04	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/US Court System
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:05	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Fox Business News
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:10	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/DVD
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Court of Appeals
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Expose Corrupt Courts
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Iviewit Court Docket
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Matthew Mink
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Michael Grebe
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/USPTO
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Web Stats
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:17	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Zakirul Shirajee
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Inventors Protection Act of 1999
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/MPEG
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/MPEG-2
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Patent Examining Procedure
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Patent Protection
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/SBA Fraud
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Trillion Dollar Heist
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:39:18	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/patent fraud
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:46:40	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Michael Grebe
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:46:41	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Intel
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:46:41	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Lockheed Martin
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:46:41	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Todd A. Gerety
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:47:06	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Department of Justice
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:38	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Stolen Technologies
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Duval and Stachenfeld
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Ellen DeGeneres
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Judiciary Commettee Hearing
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Judith S. Kaye
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Law Cases
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Lisa Berkowitz Herrnson
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Michael Grebe
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/P. Stephen Lamont
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:49:53	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Social Network
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:55:51	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Foley and Lardner
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:55:54	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Expose Corrupt Courts
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:55:59	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Judiciary Commettee Hearing
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:56:00	www.deniedpatent.com/2009/12/iviewit-stolen-patent-patent-pool.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:56:00	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Department of Justice
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:56:00	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Ellen G. White
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:56:00	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Silicon Graphics
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:56:00	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Todd A. Gerety
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:56:21	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/How to Steal a Patent
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:57:25	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Patent Lawyers
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:57:36	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Gerald R. Lewin
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	14:59:49	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/iViewIt Technologies
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:02:52	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Catherine O%27Hagan Wolfe
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/2009/12/civil-action-filed-trillion-dollar.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/2010/02/on-what-or-whose-authority-is-p-stephen.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Brian Utley
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Court Corruption
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Erika Lewin
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Lisa M. Stern
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/P. Stephen Lamont
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Patent Law Group
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Raymond Hersh
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:07:12	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Whistleblower Laws
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:49	www.deniedpatent.com/2010/01/why-did-john-doll-and-jon-dudas-then.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/2010/02/who-has-authority-right-now-to-speak.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Brian G. Utley
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Inventors
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Judith S. Kaye
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Michael Jakes
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Patent Examining Procedure
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Scott Harshbarger
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Tiedemann Investment Group
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:08:50	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Trillion Dollar Heist
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:11:07	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Matthew Mink
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:11:08	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Commission on Judicial Conduct
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:14:51	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Proskauer Complaint
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:16:33	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/How to Steal a Patent
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:16:51	www.deniedpatent.com/2010/01/foley-and-lardner-connections-with.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:16:51	www.deniedpatent.com/2010/01/proskauer-rose-from-proskauer-defense.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:16:51	www.deniedpatent.com/2010/01/slack-barshinger-wildman-harrold-allen.html
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:16:51	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Attorney Bar Complaints
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:16:51	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Patent Lawyers
		(No referring link)
6 Feb	15:16:51	www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Patent Pending Technologies

Iviewit Court Docket, iViewIt Technologies, - Eliot Bernstein et al v. Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee et al, Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction: Federal Question

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 20:52:00 +0000

U.S. District Court
Southern District of New York (Foley Square)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:07-cv-11196-SAS

Bernstein et al v. Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee et al
Assigned to: Judge Shira A. Scheindlin
Demand: $9,999,000

Related Case:

1:07-cv-09599-SAS

Case in other court:	US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 08-04873-cv
	US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 10-05303

Cause: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act

Date Filed: 12/12/2007
Date Terminated: 08/08/2008
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 470 Racketeer/Corrupt Organization
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
Eliot I. Bernstein Individually	represented by	Eliot I. Bernstein 39 Little Avenue Red Bluff, CA 96080 PRO SE

Plaintiff
Eliot I. Bernstein	represented by	Eliot I. Bernstein (See above for address) PRO SE

Plaintiff
P. Stephen Lamont on behalf of Shareholders of Iviewit Holdings, Inc., Iviewit Technologies, Inc., Uview.com, Inc., Iviewit.com, Inc., I.C., Inc., Iviewit.com LLC, Iviewit LLC, Iviewit Corporation, Iviewit, Inc., and Patent Interest Holders	represented by	P. Stephen Lamont 35 Locust Avenue Rye, NY 10580 PRO SE

V.
Defendant
Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee	represented by	Monica Anne Connell New York State Office of the Attorney General (24th Floor) 120 Broadway, 24th Floor New York, NY 10271 212-416-8965 Fax: 212-416-6009 Email: Monica.Connell@oag.state.ny.us ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Thomas J. Cahill in his official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Thomas J. Cahill in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Joseph Wigley in his official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Joseph Wigley in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe in their official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe in their individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Paul Curran in their official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Paul Curran in individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Martin R. Gold in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Martin R. Gold in thier offical capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Hon. Angela M. Mazzarelli in her official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Angela M. Mazzarelli in her individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Hon. Richard T. Andrias in his official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Richard T. Andrias in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Hon. David B. Saxe in his offical capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
David B. Saxe in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Hon. David Friedman in his official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
David Friedman in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Hon. Luiz A. Gonzales in his official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Luiz A. Gonzales in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Lawrence DiGiovanna in his official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Lawrence DiGiovanna in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Diana Maxfield Kearse in her official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Diana Maxfield Kearse in her individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
James E. Peltzer in his offical capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
James E. Peltzer in his individual capcity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Hon. A. Gail Prudenti in her offical capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
A. Gail Prudenti in her individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Steven C. Krane in his official capacity

Defendant
Steven C. Krane in his individual capacity	represented by	Joanna Frances Sandolo Meiselman, Denlea, Packman, Carton & Eberz P.C.(WPl) 1311 Mamaroneck Avenue White Plains, NY 10605 (914)-517-5000 Fax: (914)-517-5055 Email: jsandolo@mdpcelaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Hon. Judith S. Kaye in her official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Judith S. Kaye in her individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Kenneth Rubenstein	represented by	Joanna Frances Sandolo (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Estate of Stephen Kaye	represented by	Joanna Frances Sandolo (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Proskauer Rose LLP	represented by	Joanna Frances Sandolo (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP	represented by	Richard M. Howard Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein & Breitstone, LLP 190 Willis Avenue Mineola, NY 11501 (516) 747-0300 Fax: (516) 747-0653 Email: rhoward@meltzerlippe.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Lewis S. Meltzer	represented by	Richard M. Howard (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Raymond A. Joao	represented by	John Walter Fried Fried and Epstein 350 Fifth Avenue Suite 7612 New York, NY 10118 212-268-7111 Fax: 212-268-3110 Email: johnwfried@fried-epstein.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Foley Lardner LLP	represented by	Kent Kari Anker Friedman, Kaplan, Seiler and Adelman 1633 Broadway NY, NY 10019 212 833-1244 Fax: 212 833 1250 Email: kanker@fklaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lili Zandpour Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 (212)-9833-1100 Fax: (212)-9833-1250 Email: lzandpour@fklaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Michael C. Grebe	represented by	Kent Kari Anker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lili Zandpour (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
William J. Dick	represented by	Kent Kari Anker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lili Zandpour (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Douglas A. Boehm	represented by	Kent Kari Anker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lili Zandpour (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Steven C. Becker	represented by	Kent Kari Anker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lili Zandpour (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
State of New York Commission of Investigation	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Lawyers Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
The Florida Bar

Defendant
Lorraine Christine Hoffman in her official capacity	represented by	Glenn Thomas Burhans , Jr. Greenberg Traurig 101 East College Avenue Tallahassee, FL 10022 (850) 521-8570 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Lorraine Christine Hoffman in her individual capacity

Defendant
Eric Turner in his official capacity	represented by	Glenn Thomas Burhans , Jr. (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Eric Turner in his individual capacity

Defendant
John Anthony Boggs in his official capacity	represented by	Glenn Thomas Burhans , Jr. (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
John Anthony Boggs in his individual capacity

Defendant
Kenneth Marvin in his official capacity	represented by	Glenn Thomas Burhans , Jr. (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Kenneth Marvin in his individual capacity

Defendant
Thomas Hall in his official capacity

Defendant
Thomas Hall in his individual capacity

Defendant
Debroah Yarborough in her official capacity

Defendant
Debroah Yarborough in her individual capacity

Defendant
Virginia State Bar	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen M. Hall Assistant Attorney General III Office of Attorney Genreral 900 E. Main Street Richmond, VA 23219 (804) 786-2071 Fax: (804) 371-2087 PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Andrew H. Goodman in his official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen M. Hall (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Andrew H. Goodman in his individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen M. Hall (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Noel Sengel in her official capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen M. Hall (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Noel Sengel in her individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen M. Hall (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Mary W. Martelino in her individual capacity	represented by	Monica Anne Connell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen M. Hall (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
John Does

Date Filed	#	Docket Text
12/12/2007	1	COMPLAINT against Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their individual capacity), Paul Curran(in their official capacity), Paul Curran(in individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in his individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in thier offical capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her official capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her individual capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his official capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his individual capacity), David B. Saxe, David B. Saxe, David Friedman(in his official capacity), David Friedman(in his individual capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his official capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his individual capacity), Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his official capacity), Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his individual capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her official capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her individual capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his offical capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his individual capcity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her offical capacity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her individual capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity), Judith S. Kaye, Judith S. Kaye, Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose LLP, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer, Raymond A. Joao, Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker, State of New York Commission of Investigation, Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawyers Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York, The Florida Bar, Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her individual capacity), Eric Turner(in his official capacity), Eric Turner(in his individual capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his individual capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his individual capacity), Thomas J. Cahill(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his individual capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her official capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her individual capacity), Virginia State Bar, Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity), Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity), Noel Sengel(in her official capacity), Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity), Mary W. Martelino, Thomas J. Cahill(in his individual capacity), John Does, Joseph Wigley(in his official capacity), Joseph Wigley(in his individual capacity), Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their official capacity). (Filing Fee $ 350.00, Receipt Number 635712)Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein, P. Stephen Lamont.(mbe) (Entered: 12/14/2007)
12/12/2007		SUMMONS ISSUED as to Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their individual capacity), Paul Curran(in their official capacity), Paul Curran(in individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in his individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in thier offical capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her official capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her individual capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his official capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his individual capacity), David B. Saxe, David B. Saxe, David Friedman(in his official capacity), David Friedman(in his individual capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his official capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his individual capacity), Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his official capacity), Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his individual capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her official capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her individual capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his offical capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his individual capcity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her offical capacity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her individual capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity), Judith S. Kaye, Judith S. Kaye, Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose LLP, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer, Raymond A. Joao, Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker, State of New York Commission of Investigation, Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawyers Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York, The Florida Bar, Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her individual capacity), Eric Turner(in his official capacity), Eric Turner(in his individual capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his individual capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his individual capacity), Thomas J. Cahill(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his individual capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her official capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her individual capacity), Virginia State Bar, Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity), Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity), Noel Sengel(in her official capacity), Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity), Mary W. Martelino, Thomas J. Cahill(in his individual capacity), John Does, Joseph Wigley(in his official capacity), Joseph Wigley(in his individual capacity), Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their official capacity). (mbe) (Entered: 12/14/2007)
12/12/2007		CASE REFERRED TO Judge Shira A. Shindlin as possibly related to 1:07-cv-9599. (mbe) (Entered: 12/14/2007)
12/21/2007		CASE ACCEPTED AS RELATED. Create association to 1:07-cv-09599-SAS. Notice of Assignment to follow. (laq) (Entered: 01/10/2008)
12/21/2007	4	NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT to Judge Shira A. Scheindlin. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (laq) (Entered: 01/10/2008)
12/21/2007		Magistrate Judge Douglas F. Eaton is so designated. (laq) (Entered: 01/10/2008)
12/26/2007	2	MOTION for appointment of pro bono counsel; MOTION for Extension of Time to file amended complaint after original complaint has been filed on some or all of the defendants; MOTION for order for the United States Marshal Service to serve papers on remaining or all of the defendants; MOTION to accept limited power of attorney of plaintiff Bernstein and Plaintiff Lamont Accept Remote appearance of plaintiff Bernstein for Court Proceedings; and Physical Protection of Plaintiffs for Court Appearances. Attached is Affidavit in Support. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein.(djc) (Entered: 01/08/2008)
12/26/2007	3	DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually).(djc) (Entered: 01/09/2008)
01/10/2008		Mailed notice to the attorney(s) of record. (laq) (Entered: 01/10/2008)
01/10/2008	5	ORDER granting in part and denying in part 2 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; granting in part and denying in part 2 Motion for Extension of Time; granting in part and denying in part 2 Motion to Serve; granting in part and denying in part 2 Motion. For the reasons stated above, plaintiffs' motions are granted in part and denied in part. The United States Marshals are directed to serve the Complaint on defendants. Plaintiffs will have until twenty days after service is completed on all defendants to file an amended complaint. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close these motions (document no. 2 on the docket sheet). (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 1/9/2008)(jmi) (Entered: 01/11/2008)
01/23/2008		AMENDED SUMMONS ISSUED as to Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their individual capacity), Paul Curran(in their official capacity), Paul Curran(in individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in his individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in thier offical capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her official capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her individual capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his official capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his individual capacity), David B. Saxe, David B. Saxe, David Friedman(in his official capacity), David Friedman(in his individual capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his official capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his individual capacity), Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his official capacity), Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his individual capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her official capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her individual capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his offical capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his individual capcity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her offical capacity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her individual capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity), Judith S. Kaye, Judith S. Kaye, Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose LLP, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer, Raymond A. Joao, Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker, State of New York Commission of Investigation, Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawyers Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York, The Florida Bar, Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her individual capacity), Eric Turner(in his official capacity), Eric Turner(in his individual capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his individual capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his individual capacity), Thomas J. Cahill(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his individual capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her official capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her individual capacity), Virginia State Bar, Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity), Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity), Noel Sengel(in her official capacity), Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity), Mary W. Martelino, Thomas J. Cahill(in his individual capacity), John Does, Joseph Wigley(in his official capacity), Joseph Wigley(in his individual capacity), Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their official capacity). (tro) (Entered: 01/25/2008)
03/07/2008	6	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. David B. Saxe served on 2/28/2008, answer due 3/19/2008; David B. Saxe served on 2/28/2008, answer due 3/19/2008. Service was accepted by David B. Saxe. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/10/2008)
03/10/2008	7	ORDER: I have considered plaintiffs' request and have determined that the Attorney General does not face an improper conflict of interest in representing the State Defendants. If, however, the Attorney General concludes that an investigation of defendants is warranted, then independent counsel would be required. Plaintiffs request that the Court find that defendant Raymond A. Joao's counsel, alleged to be John W. Fried is conflicted because Fried will be required to testify and may be added as a defendant. Plaintiffs' request is denied at this time. Plaintiff also request that the Court reconsider its earlier denial of plaintiffs' request for pro bono counsel. Plaintiffs have presented no such decisions or factual matters. The Request is denied. Defendants time to return waivers of personal service is hereby extended until March 21, 2008. Defendants shall move or answer no later than May 30, 2008. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 3/7/2008) (jpo) (Entered: 03/10/2008)
03/11/2008	8	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Martin R. Gold(in his individual capacity) served on 2/29/2008, answer due 3/20/2008; Martin R. Gold(in their official capacity) served on 2/29/2008, answer due 3/20/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (jmi) (Entered: 03/14/2008)
03/14/2008	9	ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE. John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity) served on 3/4/2008, answer due 3/24/2008. Service was accepted by John Anthony Boggs. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein. (djc) (Entered: 03/17/2008)
03/19/2008	10	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE UNEXECUTED as to Debroah Yarborough(in her official capacity). Attempted Service of Summons and Complaint. Service was attempted on 3/12/08. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein. (pl) (Entered: 03/20/2008)
03/21/2008	11	ORDER: plaintiffs are again reminded that pursuant to Standing Order M10-468, all communications with the Court, including all motions and letters are to be directed to the Court's Pro Se Office, not to chambers. Violation of the Standing Order may lead to a finding of contempt of court. Plaintiffs have requested reconsideration of the Court's Order dated March 7, 2008. The Court declines to revisit its earlier decision. Plaintiffs have also requested legal advice on several topics. The Court does not give legal advice to parties. Plaintiffs have requested legal advice on several topics. The Court does not give legal advice to parties. Plaintiffs have requested that the Court notify the appropriate authorities of defendants' alleged criminal misconduct. At this early stage of the litigation, such notification would be both inappropriate and premature. Finally, plaintiffs have requested permission to make use of the Court's electronic case filing and case management system. At this time, permission to do so is denied. Any further consideration of the substantive issues raised by plaintiffs, including plaintiffs' requests regarding conflicts of interest, must await the resolution of anticipated motions to dismiss. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 3/21/08) (tro) (Entered: 03/21/2008)
03/21/2008	12	MOTION to Dismiss pursuant to F. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) and (6). (Attached is the Declaration of Glenn T. Burhans, Jr., in Support of The Florida Bar Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.) Document filed by The Florida Bar, Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her individual capacity), Eric Turner(in his official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity).(rw) (Entered: 03/24/2008)
03/21/2008	13	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support of the Florida Bar Defendants' Motion to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)and (6). Document filed by The Florida Bar, Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), Eric Turner(in his official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his individual capacity). (jpo) (Entered: 03/24/2008)
03/24/2008	14	ORDER all defendants that seek to move to dismiss must so move and submit memoranda of law no later than May 30, 2008. Plaintiffs' response is due on June 30, 2008. Defendants' reply, if any, is due on July 14, 2008. The parties are reminded that the restrictions on page limits and exhibits detailed in the Court's Individual Rules and Procedures are in effect, and memoranda of law that do not comply with these Rules will be rejected. SO ORDERED. ( Responses due by 6/30/2008, Replies due by 7/14/2008.) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 3/24/2008) (jmi) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	15	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Proskauer Rose LLP served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Service was accepted by Greg Mashberg. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	16	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Kenneth Rubenstein served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Service was accepted by Greg Mashberg. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	17	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008; Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Service was accepted by Gregg Mashberg. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	18	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Estate of Stephen Kaye served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Service was accepted by Gregg Mashberg. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	20	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Mary W. Martelino served on 3/14/2008, answer due 4/3/2008. Service was accepted by Stephen Hall. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	21	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Virginia State Bar served on 3/14/2008, answer due 4/3/2008. Service was accepted by Stephen Hall. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	22	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Noel Sengel(in her official capacity) served on 3/14/2008, answer due 4/3/2008; Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity) served on 3/14/2008, answer due 4/3/2008. Service was accepted by Stephen Hall. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/24/2008	23	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity) served on 3/14/2008, answer due 4/3/2008; Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity) served on 3/14/2008, answer due 4/3/2008. Service was accepted by Stephen Hall. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/25/2008	19	FILING ERROR - ELECTRONIC FILING IN NON-ECF CASE - NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by John Walter Fried on behalf of Raymond A. Joao (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Service)(Fried, John) Modified on 3/26/2008 (db). (Entered: 03/25/2008)
03/25/2008	24	NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Monica Anne Connell on behalf of Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their individual capacity), Paul Curran(in their official capacity), Paul Curran(in individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in his individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in thier offical capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her official capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her individual capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his official capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his individual capacity), David B. Saxe, David B. Saxe, David Friedman(in his official capacity), David Friedman(in his individual capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his official capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his individual capacity), Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his official capacity), Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his individual capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her official capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her individual capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his offical capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his individual capcity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her offical capacity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her individual capacity), Judith S. Kaye, Judith S. Kaye, State of New York Commission of Investigation, Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawyers Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York, Thomas J. Cahill(in his official capacity), Thomas J. Cahill(in his individual capacity), Joseph Wigley(in his official capacity), Joseph Wigley(in his individual capacity), Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their official capacity) (dle) (Entered: 03/26/2008)
03/26/2008		***NOTE TO ATTORNEY TO RE-FILE DOCUMENT - NON-ECF CASE ERROR. Note to Attorney John Walter Fried to MANUALLY RE-FILE Document Notice of Appearance, Document No. 19. This case is not ECF. (db) (Entered: 03/26/2008)
03/26/2008	25	NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by John Walter Fried on behalf of Raymond A. Joao. (jco) (Entered: 03/27/2008)
03/27/2008	26	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Michael C. Grebe served on 3/16/2008, answer due 5/30/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	27	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity) served on 3/5/2008, answer due 3/25/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	28	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Judith S. Kaye served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	29	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Lawyers Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	30	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. State of New York Commission of Investigation served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	31	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Paul Curran(in individual capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	32	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	33	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. James E. Peltzer(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	34	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Joseph Wigley(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	35	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	36	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Richard T. Andrias(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	37	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Thomas J. Cahill(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	38	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	39	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. A. Gail Prudenti(in her offical capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	40	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	41	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	42	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. David Friedman(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	43	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Luiz A. Gonzales(in his official capacity) served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	44	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity) served on 3/17/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/27/2008	45	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee served on 3/18/2008, answer due 4/7/2008. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (pl) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
03/31/2008	46	ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Shira A. Scheindlin from Kent K. Anker dated 3/28/2008 re: Requesting that defendants Foley & Lardner LLP, Steven C. Beeker, Douglas A. Behm, William J. Dick, and Michael W. Grebe be granted an extension of time to respond to plaintiffs' complaint. ENDORSEMENT: Defendants request is granted. Plaintiffs response is due June 30, 2008, Defendants' reply is due July 14, 2008. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 3/28/2008) (jpo) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
04/07/2008	47	MOTION to Allow Filling of an Amend/Correct 1 Complaint. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein.(jmi) (Entered: 04/08/2008)
04/07/2008	48	MOTION in Opposition to Defendants re: 12 MOTION to Dismiss Based on Material and Substantial Evidence. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein.(jmi) (Entered: 04/08/2008)
04/08/2008	49	ORDER: The Court has received a document styled "opposition to Defendants Motion to dismiss." from plaintiffs. This document was apparently sent directly to Chambers, not to the Courts Pro Se Office. Because plaintiffs have failed to comply with the Court's standing order this document is rejected. If plaintiff seeks to file a motion they must do so through the Court's Pro SE Office. The time for defendants to move to dismiss is extended to May 30, 2008, plaintiffs response is due by June 30, 2008 Defendants reply is due July 14, 2008. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 4/8/2008) (jpo) (Entered: 04/09/2008)
04/11/2008	50	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Raymond A. Joao served on 3/25/2008, answer due 5/30/2008. Service was accepted by John W. Fried. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 04/11/2008)
04/11/2008	51	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. William J. Dick served on 3/25/2008, answer due 5/30/2008. Service was accepted by William J. Dick. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 04/11/2008)
04/11/2008	52	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Douglas A. Boehm served on 3/24/2008, answer due 5/30/2008. Service was accepted by Douglas Boehm. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 04/11/2008)
04/11/2008	53	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Steven C. Becker served on 3/24/2008, answer due 5/30/2008. Service was accepted by Steven Becker. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 04/11/2008)
04/11/2008	54	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Complaint, served. Foley Lardner LLP served on 3/20/2008, answer due 5/30/2008. Service was accepted by James R. Clark. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (dle) (Entered: 04/11/2008)
04/15/2008	55	ORDER that the Court has received plaintiffs' request to file an Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs' request is granted. The Amended Complaint must be filed no later than 5/10/08. Notwithstanding the filing of the Amended Complaint, defendants' deadline to move to dismiss or file an Answer remains 5/30/08. Plaintiffs' response remains due on 6/30/08. Defendants' reply, if any, remains due on 7/14/08. The parties are again reminded that the restrictions on page limits and exhibits detailed in the Court's Individual Rules and Procedures are in effect, and memoranda of law that do not comply with these Rules will be rejected. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 4/14/08) (dle) (Entered: 04/15/2008)
04/24/2008	56	MOTION for Stephen Hall to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Virginia State Bar, Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity), Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity), Noel Sengel(in her official capacity), Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity), Mary W. Martelino.(dle) (Entered: 04/25/2008)
04/29/2008		CASHIERS OFFICE REMARK on 56 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, in the amount of $25.00, paid on 04/24/2008, Receipt Number 649058. (jd) (Entered: 04/29/2008)
05/02/2008	57	DECLARATION of Kent K. Anker RESPONSE to Plaintiffs' Motion for Pro Bono Counsel. Document filed by Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker. (jmi) (Entered: 05/05/2008)
05/02/2008	58	RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker.(jmi) (Entered: 05/05/2008)
05/02/2008	59	NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Lili Zandpour, Kent Kari Anker on behalf of Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker (jmi) (Entered: 05/05/2008)
05/09/2008	60	ORDER: Service of any amended complaint will be stayed until such time as the scheduled motions to dismiss have been decided. Accordingly, the time for newly named defendants to respond to the Complaint is hereby stayed until after the Court has ruled on those motions. This Order is subject to reconsideration upon receipt of opposition, if any, from plaintiffs. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 5/9/08) (tro) (Entered: 05/12/2008)
05/12/2008	61	NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Joanna Frances Smith on behalf of Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity), Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose LLP (pl) (Entered: 05/13/2008)
05/12/2008	62	MOTION for a pro se office to copy and transmit amended complaint to U.S. Marshal's Office. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), P. Stephen Lamont.(pl) (Entered: 05/13/2008)
05/12/2008	87	AMENDED COMPLAINT amending 1 Complaint,,,,,,,,,,, against Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their individual capacity), Paul Curran(in their official capacity), Paul Curran(in individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in his individual capacity), Martin R. Gold(in thier offical capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her official capacity), Angela M. Mazzarelli(in her individual capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his official capacity), Richard T. Andrias(in his individual capacity), David B. Saxe, David B. Saxe, David Friedman(in his official capacity), David Friedman(in his individual capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his official capacity), Luiz A. Gonzales(in his individual capacity), Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his official capacity), Lawrence DiGiovanna(in his individual capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her official capacity), Diana Maxfield Kearse(in her individual capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his offical capacity), James E. Peltzer(in his individual capcity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her offical capacity), A. Gail Prudenti(in her individual capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity), Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity), Judith S. Kaye, Judith S. Kaye, Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose LLP, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer, Raymond A. Joao, Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker, State of New York Commission of Investigation, Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Lawyers Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York, The Florida Bar, Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her individual capacity), Eric Turner(in his official capacity), Eric Turner(in his individual capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his individual capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his individual capacity), Thomas J. Cahill(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his official capacity), Thomas Hall(in his individual capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her official capacity), Debroah Yarborough(in her individual capacity), Virginia State Bar, Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity), Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity), Noel Sengel(in her official capacity), Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity), Mary W. Martelino, Thomas J. Cahill(in his individual capacity), John Does, Joseph Wigley(in his official capacity), Joseph Wigley(in his individual capacity), Catherine O'Hagen Wolfe(in their official capacity).Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein, P. Stephen Lamont. Related document: 1 Complaint,,,,,,,,,,, filed by P. Stephen Lamont, Eliot I. Bernstein.(dle) (Entered: 07/03/2008)
05/13/2008	63	ORDER granting 56 Motion for Stephen M. Hall to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 5/13/08) (mme) (Entered: 05/13/2008)
05/14/2008	64	MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 62 MOTION for a pro se office to copy and transmit amended complaint to U.S. Marshal's Office. filed by P. Stephen Lamont, Eliot I. Bernstein ENDORSEMENT; In accordance with this court's order dated May 9, 2008, service of any amended complaint is stayed until such the as the scheduled motions to dismiss are decided. Plaintiff's motion is therefore denied with leave to renew after that time. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 5/13/08) (mme) (Entered: 05/14/2008)
05/22/2008	65	MOTION IN OPPOSITION TO 60 STAY ORDER dated 5/9/08 - REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION ORDER. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein, P. Stephen Lamont.(db) (Entered: 05/22/2008)
05/28/2008	66	MOTION for an order of dismissal, under FRCP Rule 12 dismissing the Complaint in this action as to the Virginia Defendants in its entirety. Document filed by Virginia State Bar, Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity), Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity), Noel Sengel(in her official capacity), Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity), Mary W. Martelino.(dle) (Entered: 05/29/2008)
05/28/2008	67	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 66 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by Virginia State Bar, Andrew H. Goodman(in his official capacity), Andrew H. Goodman(in his individual capacity), Noel Sengel(in her official capacity), Noel Sengel(in her individual capacity), Mary W. Martelino. (dle) (Entered: 05/29/2008)
05/30/2008	68	MOTION for an order pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(2) and (6) to Dismiss the Amended Complaint; w/ attch. Declaration in support. Document filed by Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), Eric Turner(in his official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity).(pl) (Entered: 05/30/2008)
05/30/2008	69	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 68 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), John Anthony Boggs(in his official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity, et al. (pl) (Entered: 05/30/2008)
05/30/2008	70	FILING ERROR - ELECTRONIC FILING IN NON-ECF CASE - CROSS MOTION to Dismiss Complaint. Document filed by Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer.(Howard, Richard) Modified on 6/2/2008 (KA). (Entered: 05/30/2008)
05/30/2008	71	FILING ERROR - ELECTRONIC FILING IN NON-ECF CASE - AFFIDAVIT of Richard M. Howard, Esq. in Support re: 70 CROSS MOTION to Dismiss Complaint. Document filed by Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer. (Howard, Richard) Modified on 6/2/2008 (KA). (Entered: 05/30/2008)
05/30/2008	72	FILING ERROR - ELECTRONIC FILING IN NON-ECF CASE - AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Notice of Cross Motion with Affidavit in Support served on Elliot I. Bernstein, P. Stephen Lamont, Monica Connell, Esq., Gregg M. Mashberg, Esq., Glenn T. Burhans, Jr., Esq., John W. Fried, Esq. on May 30, 2008. Service was made by Mail. Document filed by Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer. (Howard, Richard) Modified on 6/2/2008 (KA). (Entered: 05/30/2008)
05/30/2008	73	MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. Document filed by State of New York Commission of Investigation et al.(cd) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	74	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 73 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by State of New York Commission of Investigation et al. (cd) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	75	MOTION for an order pursuant to Rules 8 (a)(2), 9(b), 12(b)(1), and 12(b)(6), of the F.R.C.P. to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. Document filed by Raymond A. Joao.(pl) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	76	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 75 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by Raymond A. Joao. (pl) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	77	DECLARATION of John W. Fried in Support re: 75 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by Raymond A. Joao. (pl) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	78	MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint and Amended Complaint, with prejudice. Document filed by Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity), Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose LLP.(cd) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	79	DECLARATION of Joanna Smith in Support re: 78 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity), Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose LLP. (cd) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	80	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 78 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by Steven C. Krane(in his individual capacity), Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose LLP. (cd) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	81	MOTION for an order pursuant to F.R.C.P. 9(b) and 12(b)(b) dismissing the original and amended complaints. Document filed by Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker.(pl) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
05/30/2008	82	DECLARATION of Lili Zandpour in Support re: 81 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker. (pl) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
06/02/2008		***NOTE TO ATTORNEY TO RE-FILE DOCUMENT - NON-ECF CASE ERROR. Note to Attorney Richard M. Howard to MANUALLY RE-FILE Document Cross-Motion to Dismiss Complaint, Document No. 70. This case is not ECF. (KA) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
06/02/2008		***NOTE TO ATTORNEY TO RE-FILE DOCUMENT - NON-ECF CASE ERROR. Note to Attorney Richard M. Howard to MANUALLY RE-FILE Document Affidavit in Support of Motion, Document No. 71. This case is not ECF. (KA) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
06/02/2008		***NOTE TO ATTORNEY TO RE-FILE DOCUMENT - NON-ECF CASE ERROR. Note to Attorney Richard M. Howard to MANUALLY RE-FILE Document Affidavit of Service, Document No. 72. This case is not ECF. (KA) (Entered: 06/02/2008)
06/03/2008	83	CROSS-MOTION to Dismiss plaintiffs' complaint purs to FRCP Rule 12(b)(6). Attached is Affidavit. Document filed by Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer.(djc) Modified on 6/5/2008 (djc). (Entered: 06/05/2008)
06/06/2008	85	MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS DUE TO EXTRANEOUS CIRCUMSTANCES AND POSSIBLE ABUSE OF PROCESS AND REQUESTS COURT TO REVISIT PRO BONO COUNSEL. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), P. Stephen Lamont.(pl) (Entered: 06/11/2008)
06/09/2008	84	DECLARATION OF SERVICE by Attorney Monica Connell, of Motion to dismiss dated 5/30/08, the Declaration of Monica A. Connell and State Defendants Memorandum in support of Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint served on Pro Se Plaintiff, Attorneys for Harvey Gladstein & Partners, Attorneys for Alan Isaac, and Attorneys for the City defendants on 5/30/08. Service was made by Federal Express. Document filed by Appellate Division Second Department Departmental Diciplinary Committee, Lawrence DiGiovanna, A. Gail Pudenti, James E. Peltzer, Virginia State Bar, et al... (pl) Modified on 6/10/2008 (pl). Modified on 7/8/2008 (pl). Modified on 7/8/2008 (pl). (Entered: 06/10/2008)
06/18/2008	86	ORDER: Plaintiff's moved (doc. #85), for an extension of time to respond to the Motions to Dismiss. Plaintiffs responses due 7/14/08. Defendants replies due 7/28/08. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED. Set Deadlines/Hearing as to 73 MOTION to Dismiss. 83 MOTION to Dismiss. 68 MOTION to Dismiss. 78 MOTION to Dismiss. 75 MOTION to Dismiss. 81 MOTION to Dismiss. 66 MOTION to Dismiss: (Responses due by 7/14/2008, Replies due by 7/28/2008.) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 6/17/07) (db) (Entered: 06/18/2008)
07/03/2008	88	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Amended Complaint served. Thomas Hall(in his individual capacity) served on 6/6/2008, answer due 6/26/2008. Service was accepted by Vickie Vanlith, Administrative Assistant. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually). (pl) (Entered: 07/07/2008)
07/07/2008	89	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Amended Complaint served. The Florida Bar served on 6/6/2008, answer due 6/26/2008. Service was accepted by Jack Harkness-Executive Director. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually). (pl) (Entered: 07/07/2008)
07/14/2008	90	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE to Motion re: 83 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (djc) (Entered: 07/15/2008)
07/14/2008	91	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE to Motion re: 75 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (djc) (Entered: 07/15/2008)
07/14/2008	92	Co-Plaintiff Lamont's Opposition to the Sate Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (djc) (Entered: 07/15/2008)
07/14/2008	93	opposition/RESPONSE to Motion re: 78 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (djc) (Entered: 07/15/2008)
07/14/2008	94	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE to Motion re: 81 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (djc) (Entered: 07/15/2008)
07/14/2008	95	RESPONSE to Motion re: 12 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (djc) (Entered: 07/15/2008)
07/14/2008	96	OPPOSITION RESPONSE to Motion re: 66 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (djc) (Entered: 07/15/2008)
07/15/2008	97	MOTION for Extension of Time To File Responsive Pleadings to Motions to Dismiss & Opposition to Motions to Dismiss; attached are papers in support. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually).(cd) (Entered: 07/17/2008)
07/16/2008	99	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Amended Complaint, served. Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee served on 6/19/2008, answer due 7/9/2008. Service was accepted by Tom McGowan. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein; P. Stephen Lamont. (jpo) (Entered: 07/21/2008)
07/16/2008	100	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Amended Complaint served. Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP served on 6/19/2008, answer due 7/9/2008. Service was accepted by Tom McGowan. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (tro) (Entered: 07/21/2008)
07/17/2008	98	ORDER: It is hereby stipulated and agreed that the Clerk's Certificate obtained by plaintiff is vacated. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 7/17/2008) (jpo) (Entered: 07/17/2008)
07/24/2008	101	REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW ON BEHALF of Defendants Lewis and MLGB Document filed by Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer. (djc) (Entered: 07/25/2008)
07/28/2008	102	REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 75 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by Raymond A. Joao. (pl) (Entered: 07/29/2008)
07/28/2008	103	REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 81 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by Foley Lardner LLP, Michael C. Grebe, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker. (pl) (Entered: 07/29/2008)
07/28/2008	104	SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION of Joanna Smith in Support re: 78 MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity), Kenneth Rubenstein. (pl) (Entered: 07/29/2008)
07/28/2008	105	REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 78 MOTION to Dismiss.. Document filed by Steven C. Krane(in his official capacity), Kenneth Rubenstein. (pl) (Entered: 07/29/2008)
08/01/2008	106	ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Schira A. Scheindlin from P. Stephen Lamont dated 7/29/08 re: Request for leave to file a sur reply. ENDORSEMENT: Plaintiff's request to file a sur-reply is denied. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 8/1/08) (cd) (Entered: 08/04/2008)
08/08/2008	107	OPINION AND ORDER that for the reasons stated above, defendants' motions to dismiss are granted. The remaining defendants are dismissed sua sponte. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close these and related motions (documents no. 12,47,48,65,66,68,73,75,78,81,83, and 97 on the docket sheet) and this case re: 75 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Raymond A. Joao, 47 MOTION to Amend/Correct 1 Complaint, filed by Eliot I. Bernstein, 66 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Andrew H. Goodman, Virginia State Bar, Noel Sengel, Mary W. Martelino, 83 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breistone LLP, Lewis S. Meltzer, 68 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Eric Turner, Lorraine Christine Hoffman, Kenneth Marvin, John Anthony Boggs, 48 MOTION in Opposition to Defendants Motionto Dismiss Based on Material and Substantial Evidence re: 12 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Eliot I. Bernstein, 97 MOTION for Extension of Time, filed by Eliot I. Bernstein, 73 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by State of New York Commission of Investigation, 81 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Michael C. Grebe, Foley Lardner LLP, William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, Steven C. Becker, 12 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Eric Turner, Lorraine Christine Hoffman, Kenneth Marvin, John Anthony Boggs, The Florida Bar, 65 MOTION re: 60 Order, filed by P. Stephen Lamont, Eliot I. Bernstein, 78 MOTION to Dismiss, filed by Proskauer Rose LLP, Kenneth Rubenstein, Estate of Stephen Kaye, Steven C. Krane. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 8/8/08) Copies sent by chambers.(cd) (Entered: 08/11/2008)
08/08/2008		Transmission to Judgments and Orders Clerk. Transmitted re: 107 Memorandum & Opinion, to the Judgments and Orders Clerk. (cd) (Entered: 08/11/2008)
08/19/2008	108	ORDER: Plaintiffs move for reconsideration of the Opinion and Order dated 8/8/08, in which this Court granted certain defendants' motions to dismiss and dismissed all other defendants sua sponte. The federal courts are simply not the appropriate forum for plaintiffs to seek redress of these grievances. Plaintiffs have not identified any material facts or law overlooked by the Court. Reconsideration is there denied. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 8/19/08) (tro) (Entered: 08/19/2008)
08/19/2008	109	MOTION for Reconsideration and Modification of the Court's August 8,2008 re; 107 Memorandum & Opinion. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually), Eliot I. Bernstein.(jmi) (Entered: 09/11/2008)
09/04/2008	112	NOTICE OF APPEAL from 107 Memorandum & Opinion. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. Filing fee $ 455.00, receipt number E 662193. Copies mailed to attorney(s) of record: Attorney General, NYS. (tp) (Entered: 09/30/2008)
09/05/2008	111	NOTICE OF APPEAL from 107 Memorandum & Opinion. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein. Copies mailed to attorney(s) of record: Attorney General, NYS. (tp) (Entered: 09/30/2008)
09/05/2008		Appeal Remark as to 111 Notice of Appeal filed by Eliot I. Bernstein. $455.00 APPEAL FEE DUE. (tp) (Entered: 09/30/2008)
09/23/2008	110	MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED Summons and Amended Complaint served. Eric Turner(in his official capacity) served on 8/13/2008, answer due 9/2/2008; Eric Turner(in his individual capacity) served on 8/13/2008, answer due 9/2/2008. Service was made by MAIL. Document filed by Eliot I. Bernstein(Individually); Eliot I. Bernstein. (js) (Entered: 09/24/2008)
09/30/2008		Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy of Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re: 111 Notice of Appeal. (tp) (Entered: 09/30/2008)
09/30/2008		Transmission of Notice of Appeal to the District Judge re: 111 Notice of Appeal. (tp) (Entered: 09/30/2008)
09/30/2008		Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy of Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re: 112 Notice of Appeal. (tp) (Entered: 09/30/2008)
09/30/2008		Transmission of Notice of Appeal to the District Judge re: 112 Notice of Appeal. (tp) (Entered: 09/30/2008)
10/02/2008	113	Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Index). Notice that the Original index to the record on Appeal for 111 Notice of Appeal filed by Eliot I. Bernstein 3 Copies of the index, Certified Clerk Certificate and Certified Docket Sheet were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (nd) (tp). (Entered: 10/02/2008)
10/02/2008		Appeal Record Sent to USCA (File). Indexed record on Appeal Files for 111 Notice of Appeal filed by Eliot I. Bernstein were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (Total of 4 volumes sent to USCA on 10/3/2008). (nd) (Entered: 10/02/2008)
10/02/2008	114	Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Index). Notice that the Original index to the record on Appeal for 112 Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont 3 Copies of the index, Certified Clerk Certificate and Certified Docket Sheet were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (nd) (tp). (Entered: 10/02/2008)
10/02/2008		Appeal Record Sent to USCA (File). Indexed record on Appeal Files for 112 Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (nd) (Entered: 10/02/2008)
10/08/2008		USCA Case Number 08-4873-cv from the US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit assigned to 112 Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (nd) (Entered: 10/08/2008)
02/05/2010	115	MANDATE of USCA (Certified Copy) as to 111 Notice of Appeal filed by Eliot I. Bernstein USCA Case Number 08-4873-cv. Appellant Bernstein, pro se, move to compel the appointment of counsel and for extensive relief. Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion is DENIED to the extent it seeks to compel the appointment of counsel and the appeal is DISMISSED because it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the remainder of Appellant Bernstein's motion to compel, and all motions that remain pending before this court, are DENIED as moot. Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk USCA. Issued As Mandate: 1/27/2010. (nd) (Entered: 02/05/2010)
10/05/2010	116	ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Shira Scheindlin from P. Stephen Lamont dated 9/10/2010 re: As an individual Plaintiff in the above referenced case, I respectfully request leave to file a Motion to Re-Open based upon exceptional circumstances that have ensued after your Order and Opinion dismissing the complaint on August 8, 2008. ENDORSEMENT: There is nothing in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requiring a party to obtain leave to file a motion to re-open a case. This Court's Pro Se Office can provide guidance as to procedure but cannot offer legal advice. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 10/5/2010) (jmi) (Entered: 10/06/2010)
10/12/2010	117	MOTION to Reopen docket No. 07-cv-11196 based on Exceptional Circumstances. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (Attachments: # 1 part 2)(mro) (Entered: 10/15/2010)
10/19/2010	118	ORDER that any defendant who wishes to oppose the Motion to Re-Open must file and serve opposition papers by October 29,2010. If this Court receives opposition papers from any defendant( s), plaintiff's reply will be due by November 5,2010. SO ORDERED. ( Replies due by 11/5/2010.) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 10/18/2010) (jmi) (Entered: 10/19/2010)
10/21/2010	119	NOTICE OF PRO SE REPRESENTATION AND REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO REOPEN CASE. Document filed by Raymond A. Joao.(mbe) (Entered: 10/29/2010)
10/25/2010	120	RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF LAMONT'S MOTION TO REOPEN CASE. Document filed by Raymond A. Joao. (mbe) (Entered: 10/29/2010)
10/27/2010	121	RESPONSE in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Reopen Docket. Document filed by Steven C. Becker, Douglas A. Boehm, William J. Dick, Foley Lardner LLP. (mro) (Entered: 10/29/2010)
10/27/2010	122	PROSKAUER DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO REOPEN DOCKET. Document filed by Proskauer Rose LLP, Kenneth Rubenstein, Steven C. Krane, The Estate of Stephen Rackow Kaye. (mro) (Entered: 10/29/2010)
10/29/2010	124	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 117 MOTION to Reopen Docket. Document filed by State Defendants. (Received in the night deposit box on 10/29/10 at 4:57pm) (mro) (Entered: 11/03/2010)
11/01/2010	123	ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Shira A. Scheindlin from Monica Connell dated 10/13/2010, re: Counsel writes in response to a "Motion to Re-open Docket" which was sent by fax on October 11, 2010. The motion also seeks the disqualification of the Attorney General from representing the State Defendants in this case. Because this motion is entirely without merit, we ask that the Court accept this letter as opposition to the motion and deny the same. Alternatively, due to pressing briefing schedules in other cases, State defendants ask to have until November 15, 2010 to submit formal opposition. ENDORSEMENT: The State Defendants may file their opposition to plaintiff's motion to re-open by Nov 15, 2010. Plaintiff's reply will then be due by Nov 30, 2010. So Ordered. Set Deadlines as to 117MOTION to Reopen. (Response/Opposition due by 11/15/2010. Replies due by 11/30/2010) (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 10/29/2010) (lnl) (Entered: 11/01/2010)
11/03/2010	125	THE FLORIDA BAR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF LAMONT'S MOTION TO REOPEN CASE. Document filed by John Anthony Boggs(in his individual capacity), Lorraine Christine Hoffman(in her official capacity), Kenneth Marvin(in his official capacity), The Florida Bar, Eric Turner(in his individual capacity). (mro) (Entered: 11/04/2010)
11/10/2010	126	ORDER. This Court's endorsement, dated October 29, 2010, to the State Defendants' letter, dated October 13, 2010, is hereby vacated because the State Defendants submitted their opposition without the need for an extension of time. Plaintiff, who has had the State Defendants' Opposition since on or about October 29, 2010, may file his reply by November 15, 2010. No further adjournment requests will be granted. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 11/9/10) (rjm) (Entered: 11/10/2010)
11/10/2010		Set Deadlines/Hearings: Replies due by 11/15/2010. (rjm) (Entered: 11/10/2010)
11/15/2010	127	REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO REOPEN BASED ON EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (mbe) (Entered: 11/16/2010)
12/15/2010	128	MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER, #99750 for the reasons stated in this Order, Lamont's Motion to Re-Open is denied. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the Motion to Re-Open (Document # 117). (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 12/15/10) (pl) Modified on 12/15/2010 (pl). Modified on 12/20/2010 (ajc). (Entered: 12/15/2010)
12/16/2010	129	MOTION for Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont.(kj) (Entered: 12/16/2010)
12/16/2010	131	NOTICE OF APPEAL from 128 Memorandum & Opinion. Document filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (tp) (Entered: 12/29/2010)
12/16/2010		Appeal Remark as to 131 Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont. $455.00 APPEAL FEE DUE. IFP DENIED 12/17/10. (tp) (Entered: 12/29/2010)
12/20/2010	130	ORDER: Pro se plaintiff P. Stephen Lamont has moved to proceed in forma pauperis on his appeal of this Court's denial of his Motion to Re-Open. Plaintiffs motion is hereby DENIED. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 12/17/2010) (jfe) (Entered: 12/20/2010)
12/29/2010		Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy of Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re: 131Notice of Appeal. (tp) (Entered: 12/29/2010)
12/29/2010		Transmission of Notice of Appeal to the District Judge re: 131 Notice of Appeal. (tp) (Entered: 12/29/2010)
12/29/2010	132	Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Index). Notice that the Original index to the record on Appeal for 131Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont 3 Copies of the index, Certified Clerk Certificate and Certified Docket Sheet were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (tp) (nd). (Entered: 12/29/2010)
12/29/2010		Appeal Record Sent to USCA (File). Indexed record on Appeal Files for 131 Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (tp) (Entered: 12/29/2010)
01/05/2011	133	MEMO ENDORSEMENT on Motion Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal 129 . ENDORSEMENT: Request Denied. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 12/17/2010) The Pro Se Office Has Mailed Copies. (kj) (Entered: 01/05/2011)
01/06/2011		USCA Case Number 10-5303 from the US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit assigned to 131 Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont. (nd) (Entered: 01/06/2011)
02/15/2011	134	ORDER: Plaintiff Stephen Lamont's motion to re-open the above case was closed in a Memorandum Opinion and Order, signed December 15, 2010. Defendant Raymond A. Joao's Notice of Pro Se Representation and Request for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion to Re-Open Case is hereby denied as moot. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this motion (Document # 119 ). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 2/14/2011) (lnl) (Entered: 02/15/2011)
02/18/2011		Appeal Record Returned. [4 vols.] Indexed record on Appeal Files for Appeal Record Sent to USCA - File USCA Case Number 08-4873-cv, returned from the U.S. Court of Appeals. (nd) (Entered: 02/22/2011)
05/05/2011	135	MANDATE of USCA (Certified Copy) as to 131 Notice of Appeal filed by P. Stephen Lamont USCA Case Number 10-5303-cv. Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED because it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk USCA for the Second Circuit. Issued As Mandate: 05/05/2011. (nd) (Entered: 05/05/2011)
08/11/2011		Appeal Record Returned. Indexed record on Appeal Files for Appeal Record Sent to USCA - File USCA Case Number 10-5303, returned from the U.S. Court of Appeals. (nd) (Entered: 11/01/2011)

Kim Dotcom, Mega Upload, Warner Bros. Steals iViewit Inventions, Uses for Over a Decade for FREE and has the Nerve to Complain about Kim Dotcom of MegaUpload? Kim Schmitz, King Kimble.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 02:09:00 +0000

Warner Bros. Has Violated a Non-Compete and Signed Agreements for Over a Decade, that Warner Bros. TWX had with the Iviewit Technology Inventors.

Warner Bros., TWX has used this video technology all this time and was to pay iViewit Technology per minute, that is worth Billions and the Warner Bros. TWX shareholders have not been warned. Ernst and Young Knows, the SEC knows, the Dept. of Justice knows, the FBI knows and over a decade of liability has built up and still Warner Bros. is above the law, yet the Motion Pictures Association of America (MPAA), Motion Picture Industry Lobbyists and Warner Bros. Complain about Kim Dotcom (Kim Schmitz,King Kimble) infringing on their sacred right to sell us all videos technology that they STOLE from iViewit and for some reason the DOJ, FBI, SEC, and international police jump to it and there you have it, an arrest of MegaUpload's Kim Dotcom (Kim Schmitz,King Kimble) is made and justice is served. What? Really, this is justice? Warner Bros. STOLE the Technology in the first place and used it over a decade for FREE.

Here is the Warner Bros. Contract

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010822%20-%20SIGNED%20Warner%20Bros%20Agreement%20AOL.pdf

Here is the SEC Complaint Naming Warner Bros. and the Motion Picture Association for crimes, conspiracy and cover up with Proskauer Rose Law Firm, MPEG LA, Kenneth Rubenstein and others in the Stealing of the IViewit Technology.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf

Here is the iViewit Technologies RICO Complaint naming Warner Bros. - Felony Rico Crimes Warner Bros. conspiring to cover up 13 Trillion Dollar Technology Thefthttp://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080509%20FINAL%20AMENDED%20COMPLAINT%20AND%20RICO%20SIGNED%20COPY%20MED.pdf

Andrew Cuomo, former New York Attorney General Now New York Governor, Criminal Complaint Naming Warner Bros.
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=588

Time Warner, Warner Bros. Covering Up Major Shareholder Fraud in IViewit Technology Theft

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?tag=warner-bros

http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/

Open Letter to Time Warner Shareholders
http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/open-letter-to-time-warner-warner-bros.html

http://www.massiveshareholderfraud.com/p/warner-bros-aol-major-shareholder.html

Eliot Bernstein Iviewit Testimony
http://www.crystalcox.com/2011/12/eliot-bernstein-iviewit-testimony-new.html

More on the Iviewit Technology Scandal

Letter to GS regarding Warner Bros. Technological Calls to Iviewit Investors by Warner Bros. employees, describing the efficacy of the Inventions and the results of the review by Warner Bros., including the anticipated uses by Warner Bros et al.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20001101%20Goldman%20Friedstein%20Letter%20from%20Buchsbaum%20re%20AOLTW%20Colter%20meetings.pdf

http://www.deniedpatent.com/

http://iviewit.tv/

http://www.massiveshareholderfraud.com/2011/07/steven-c-krane-esq-proskaur-rose.html

http://www.scottsherr.com/2011/03/sony-and-warner-bros-involved-in.html

http://www.douglaschey.com/

Doug Chey

http://www.curtislu.com/2011/02/curtis-lu-senior-vice-president-and.html

Curtis Lu, Lightsquared - then Time Warner General Counsel

http://www.federalricolawsuit.com/search/label/Time%20Warner%20Inc

http://www.josephleccese.com/search/label/iViewIt%20Technologies

MPEG LA involved in iViewit Technology Theft

http://www.alexisdevane.com/

Intel Corp Involved
http://www.paulotellini.info/

http://intelcorruption.blogspot.com/

What Does Head Guy at Proskauer Rose Law Firm, Joseph Leccese have to say about Raymond Joao and connections to Proskauer Rose over the Iviewit Scandal ?

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 18:29:00 +0000

Joseph Leccese, Proskauer Rose knows full well of major liability over iViewit Scandal. Joseph Leccese chooses to harass blogger as Solution to dealing with Corrupt Proskauer Rose Attorneys.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 18:14:00 +0000

Twelve Trillion Dollar, Federal RICO Lawsuit - Iviewit Stolen Patent Case.

Proskauer Rose Ethics Complaint

The Florida Justice System is About as Corrupt as It Gets and the US Department of Justice, the USPTO, the SEC, the FBI, The Florida State Bar, the Florida Supreme Court and all the Corruption out of the New York Supreme Court that is protecting Proskauer Rose in all this.. well it all adds up to THERE is no Justice, and it DOES not matter how much evidence you have, the Corruption is so Thick and there is so many attorneys and judges covering up for those breaking the law and violating your rights that you don't stand a chance.

the Following is From www.Iviewit.TV and well it is some pretty sick stuff, it leaves me hopeless as to the United States Justice System doing anything but making the Rich RICHER and covering for the Criminals...

"The Cover-Up Crimes

The Twelve Trillion Dollar, Federal RICO Lawsuit “Legally Related” by Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin to the Whistleblower Anderson Lawsuit, exposes the original violations of federal, state, and international law committed to steal the technologies and additionally exposes a series of ongoing and continuous Cover-Up Crimes.

Cover-up Crimes designed to block due process through violations of Judicial Cannons, Attorney Conduct Codes, Public Office Rules and Regulations and Law, through Conflicts of Interest that act to Obstruct Justice, similar to that claimed by Anderson and committed by the many of the same Public Officials of the New York Supreme Court that Anderson fingers.

Wherever Iviewit and I filed complaints at the State Bars or disciplinary agencies under State Supreme Court aegis’ in New York, Florida and Virginia, each was later found to have MAJOR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THROUGH VIOLATIONS OF JUDICIAL CANNONS, ATTORNEY CONDUCT CODES, PUBLIC OFFICE RULES AND REGULATIONS AND LAW, CREATING THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS.

Mind blowing conflicts, so outrageous as to find Steven C. Krane, former President of the New York Bar Association, Official at the First Department DDC and one, if not thee, leading ethics lawyer in New York and Nationally, found representing complaints against his Proskauer Partners and Himself in First Department complaints, while having an Official Role at the First Department DDC where the complaints were being investigated. How unethical but true and we will return to this matter further in a moment.

Fraudulent Patent applications and Patents fraudulently issued into the names of others are crimes directly against the United States and Foreign Agencies as there are sworn oaths on the US Patent Office applications by the inventors, so filing fraudulent patents in others names is a Fraud Directly Upon the United States Patent Office and Worldwide Patent Authorities.

Crimes committed by the attorneys directly against government agencies and in violation of Federal Patent Bar Rules, State Attorney Conduct Codes and Law.

The crimes also involve not only the creation of fraudulent shell patent filings but fraudulent shell companies for the fraudulent patents to walk out the back door in, all formed by Proskauer and others not properly authorized to create such similarly named entities by the Board of Directors, Investors or management.

All these corporate crimes were violations of hosts of state and federal securities regulations and state incorporation laws, more crimes of fraud against government agencies, again committed in violation of Attorney Conduct Codes and Law.

Further, the scheme involved a false and fraudulent Billing fraud using a Florida Civil Court ( ruled by recently elected Florida Supreme Court Judge Jorge Labarga and a Defendant in the Iviewit Lawsuit ), which was filed by Proskauer Rose to the tune of $500,000 plus in Wrongful Fraudulent bills, bills designed to create false debt to the fraudulent companies they created, which contained the fraudulent patent filings.

Using this complex legal scheme which is a Fraud on a Federal Bankruptcy Court, the fraudulent companies were then to be bankrupted, after being sued for the fraudulent bills whereby the law firm and lawyers would become the largest creditors in the bankruptcy and seize the fraudulent patents hidden inside the fraudulent companies.

A plan that went extremely wrong when Arthur Andersen and others discovered that there were possible crimes being committed and fraudulent companies created and that this false information was being distributed to investors including, Wayne Huizenga, Ellen DeGeneres, Alanis Morissette, Crossbow Ventures and the Small Business Administration.

The SBA through Crossbow’s SBA loans which were two thirds of the money Crossbow invested makes the US Government one of the most aggrieved investors in Iviewit.

The Proskauer Rose Fraudulent Billing Scheme popped up on the horizon at or around the same time the Iviewit companies were in process to close the $25 Million Private Placement financing deal with Wachovia Securities.

No one other than the conspirators of the RICO crimes knew about these illegal legal actions.

The Involuntary Bankruptcy was another legal scheme involving this time, Fraud on a Federal Bankruptcy Court, orchestrated by Proskauer Rose referred management Brian Utley and Michael Reale both formerly with IBM and Real 3D Inc. ( Intel, SGI and Lockheed ) on a fraudulent company with fraudulent inventions inside it.

On or about this time, Intel, a minority 20% owner of Real 3D, suddenly bought Real 3D from Lockheed the 70% owner and SGI, a 10% owner, in a publicly undisclosed transaction, taking with it the Iviewit inventions which now are alleged to be on almost EVERY chip manufactured since 1998.

Through the bankruptcy the underlying IP for the inventions would have become owned by the largest creditors to the fraudulent companies, Proskauer Rose and Real 3D.

Again, neither of these illegal legal actions constituting frauds on the courts, the Fraud on the Florida State Court in The Proskauer Fraudulent Billing Lawsuit or the Fraud on the Federal Bankruptcy Court via the illegal Involuntary Bankruptcy were disclosed to Wachovia, Investors, Auditors, Investment Bankers, Shareholders or Management by Proskauer or Foley.

At first, upon learning of the billing lawsuit and Involuntary Bankruptcy, it was unclear why these ILLEGAL legal actions existed and what the motive was, still much of the conspiracy remains unknown but at that time very little was known.

Only later, while investigating the falsified patent applications with the US Patent Office was it discovered that there were fraudulent patents inside the fraudulent similarly named companies involved in the IB, a company that Proskauer created, then sued and then with their referred co-conspirators filed the Involuntary Bankruptcy against.

Companies created without authorization of Shareholders, the Board of Directors or the Investors, and, where the real owners of the fraudulent companies are still unknown and subject of ongoing investigations and calls for Acts of Congress from the US Patent Office to get information regarding the inventions that were involved in the illegal legal schemes and frauds on the courts.

Upon learning of the corporate crimes from Arthur Andersen and much of the information regarding the fraudulent legal schemes by AOLTW / Warner Bros. who were doing due diligence for the Wachovia PPM when they discovered the undisclosed actions, including information that patents filed at the USPTO were not those being given to prospective investors and more.

Immediately, Iviewit retained counsel to investigate if the Billing Lawsuit, the Involuntary Bankruptcy and the thefts of the IP were realities.

Counsel retained by Iviewit found that indeed there were these illegal legal actions and frauds and that the Board of Directors, Management, Investors, Investment Bankers had no knowledge and in fact were distributing the Wachovia PPM which neither mentions the Lawsuit, the Utley IP and other fraudulent IP or the Involuntary Bankruptcy.

Iviewit threw out counsel that was representing the matters without authorization or retainers from the Iviewit companies and that time it was still unknown these companies were fraudulent, as they were similarly and identically named to the legitimate companies and Iviewit counsel began representing the matters instantly.

The Involuntary Bankruptcy found that Brian Utley, Reale and Real 3d all had no employment contract or ANY binding agreement with the Iviewit company they filed against and that matter instantly went away, as soon as, it was discovered.

On the Fraudulent Billing Lawsuit, well Proskauer Rose was not so lucky, counsel retained filed a Counter Complaint exposing the basics of the fraud known at the time, I submit this Counter Complaint to this Committee for review, as it too is subject to ongoing federal investigations11.

Again, in this fraud, Proskauer Rose was found suing companies they had no retainers with and the bills were not even in the companies sued names but the judge, Jorge Labarga, refused to even acknowledge the Counter Complaint, filed by Competent Counsel, alleging that the lawyers in the Fraudulent Billing Lawsuit perhaps were involved in crimes against the United States and Foreign Nations.

Jorge Labarga refusing the Counter Complaint and then illegally throwing the Lawsuit out but ruling a default judgment against Iviewit for the entire amount of the fraudulent bill, for failure to retain replacement counsel. It should be noted that Labarga on the eve of trial, cancelled the trial with no notice to Iviewit who showed up with two law firms representing their interests.

At the rescheduling hearing, Jorge Labarga dismissed both of Iviewit’s counsel and forced Iviewit to get new counsel for this most complex case in just a few days.

In fact, I submit to this Committee evidence that Jorge Labarga was aware of Kenneth Rubenstein, Christopher C. Wheeler, William Dick and Brian Utley’s perjurious statements made to his court, under deposition and in response to Bar Complaints, whereby perjured statements were proven prior to his throwing the case.

In one instance, Iviewit Patent Counsel Kenneth Rubenstein makes representation that he is being harassed to come to deposition in the matter as he knows nothing about Iviewit or the Iviewit inventions and inventors and refused to be deposed.

Jorge Labarga had no legal basis to block the deposition so he ordered Rubenstein to deposition, where it became apparent that Kenneth Rubenstein had LIED and PERJURED HIMSELF to the Court and knew far more about Iviewit than his sworn statements12.

Despite this damning and irrefutable evidence of Perjury to his court, Jorge Labarga ruled against Iviewit and buried the case for an undisclosed amount.

Again, information relevant to the case fraud has been submitted to Federal and State authorities.

Who owns all these fraudulent companies remains under investigation and all relevant information pertaining to these crimes have also been submitted to Federal and State Authorities and evidence, witness statements, copies of the fraudulent IP and much more are available in the Evidence Section of the Iviewit Homepage with over 1000 exhibits and hereby incorporated by reference in entirety herein for this Committee.

Crimes that if prosecuted would have taken down these powerful law firms overnight and put many of the perpetrators behind bars for more years than Madoff, as these crimes involved crimes directly against Federal, State and International Government Agencies, not merely Iviewit.

As soon as order is restored to the courts handling these matters in conflict and the corruption plaguing the New York Court system as further supported by Anderson regarding these matters is exterminated, these criminals cloaked as law firms and lawyers will be behind bars for eternity with loss of the entire partnerships assets in a successful RICO prosecution.

Knowing that it was all or nothing for the powerful law firms, they had to block due process at every venue at the highest levels, as if any of the complaints, court proceedings or investigations elevated the Billions of Dollars of revenue these firms generate would be gone and legal robes exchanged for prison garb.

Herein lies the motive for the Cover-Up Crimes and Mass of Conflicts of Interest and Violations of virtually all Attorney Conduct Codes, Judicial Cannons, Public Office Violations and Law that have infected these matters at present.

So thick are the Conflicts that not one person out of all of the courts, disciplinary agencies, law enforcement agencies, even this Committee have signed the requested Conflict of Interest Disclosure Forms provided prior to taking action in the matters.

I have provided a Conflict form for the Committee submitted with my Prepared Statement for the June 08, 2009 hearing that did not happen and again have submitted one accompanying this Prepared Statement for my testimony today, again I respectfully demand signing of this COI before the Committee takes action in anyway that may have any impact good or bad on my case.

New York Ethics Complaints Filed in 2003 and Dismissed Without Investigation; The Commissioner of Patents for the US Patent Office and Harry I. Moatz, Director of OED of the US Patent Office lead Federal Investigation of Same Attorneys State Bars and Disciplinary Agencies Dismissed without Investigation; West Palm Beach FBI Joins Patent Fraud Investigation Regarding Fraud Directly Upon the USPTO.

I filed complaints of professional misconduct instantly against Proskauer Rose, Kenneth Rubenstein, Christopher Wheeler, Meltzer, Raymond Joao, Foley and William Dick and continuously since 2003 alleged a host of professional misconduct, adding new Defendants in my lawsuit who became involved in the Cover-Up Crimes such as Krane, Cahill, the First Department and more.

Copies of the complaints can be found on the homepage or in the written Prepared Statement submitted herein to the Committee and in the Exhibit Section at the end of the document and for inclusion into this Committees permanent record, as promised by members of this Committee in accepting this statement.

I also note for this Committee that I fully reported the Iviewit Frauds on the courts committed by those adjudicating the matters in conflicts in both the courts and state disciplinary agencies, to the West Palm Beach FBI office.

Special Agent Stephen Lucchesi of that office was already investigating the Iviewit companies’ allegations of Frauds, Fraud on the USPTO, Intellectual Property Theft, Death Threats and the Attempted Murder by Car Bombing of my Family Mini-Van in Boynton Beach, Florida.

According to the FBI, later, Lucchesi and the Iviewit files went, and remain missing at this time, although upon last speaking to Lucchesi, he was on his way to the US Patent Office to begin investigating the Fraud on the US Patent Office with investigators at the US Patent Office.

Moatz confirmed that Lucchesi was in fact working with the US Patent Office regarding the Frauds on the USPTO.

The reporting of these public office crimes to the FBI and the missing investigator, led the FBI West Palm Beach Office to direct me to speak only with the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility ( OPR ) the department responsible for handling misconduct complaints against DOJ &; US attorneys. When OPR refused to speak with me, claiming they could not speak with private citizens, Inspector General of the DOJ, Glenn Fine’s Office interceded and the matters where then directed to Alberto Gonzales, then to Michael Mukasey both of them who failed to respond to formal written complaints prior to them fleeing or being forced out of office.

The matters have now been forwarded on to US Attorney General, Eric Holder, Jr. and while we await response from Holder at this time, we have not had a response yet.

Perhaps he is busy investigating the crimes of lawyers for war crimes or the crimes of lawyers in politicizing the DOJ, or the torture memo lawyers who violated international torture treatises and more or perhaps he is busy investigating the lawyers behind the financial market meltdown who have destroyed our economy for the benefit of a few, mostly criminals disguised as lawyers.

A Copy of the Letter to President Barack Obama and Holder can found on the Iviewit Homepage or @

http://Iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090213%20FINAL%20SIGNED%20LETTER%20OBAMA%20TO%20ENJOIN%20US%20ATTORNEY%20FINGERED%20ORIGINAL%20MAIL%20l.pdf

and http://Iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20080411%20Iviewit%20Response%20to%20FBI%20OPR%20letter%20signed%20sent%20and%20printed%20copy.pdf

Ultimately, Iviewit filed a Complaint of Professional Misconduct against NYS First Dept Disciplinary Committee Chief Counsel Cahill, when it was learned that Cahill had allowed Steven C. Krane of Proskauer, an active Official of the First Department to handle complaints against Proskauer Rose and Proskauer Partner Kenneth Rubenstein and ultimately himself, Iviewit filed further complaints for Violations of Public Office, Violations of Attorney Conduct Codes and Violations of Law against all of them.

Yes, Steven C Krane represented the complaints filed against his firm, partners and himself, all the while concealing multiple conflicts of interest and violations of public offices at the First Department which excluded from such twisted representation.

In Florida at the State Bar we find similarly

Proskauer partner Matthew Triggs

While Krane was handling the complaints he was a member of the First Department and kept this Conflict undisclosed while he levied responses on behalf of his clients Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein that were attempts to smear the Iviewit companies and myself, claiming Iviewit was a failed dot com and that Kenneth Rubenstein never heard of Iviewit and that Proskauer knew nothing about the patents, all while failing to disclose his First Department Roles and CONFLICT.

Krane, also in his role at the time as immediate past PRESIDENT of the NYSBA had public office rules barring his handling of disciplinary complaints for a period of one year after his service.

His representations of his firm and Proskauer Rose falling within that blackout and Krane again fails to disclose this Public Office Rule and Regulation that prevented his representation.

It is interesting to note that without knowing of the concealed conflicts and violations of public offices at the time, how the complaints within the First Department, despite the overwhelming evidence presented to the State Bar and Disciplinary Committees and despite the fact that the Federal Patent Bar, USPTO, USPTO OED and FBI were investigating them, how the state complaints had been “Stalled” Indefinitely. It was not until discovering the conflicts that it became overwhelming apparent.

Iviewit has found Proskauer or Foley in every instance where there was dismissal with no investigation by a State Bar or Disciplinary, much later into the investigations, the Conflicts of Interest and Violations of Public Offices that acted as the glue that bound the Cover-Up causing the delays and dismissals without investigation, even as the First Department Court Unanimously Ordered Krane and the others for formal and procedural “INVESTIGATIONS” based on the Krane and Cahill conflict information.

It was only recently exposed in July 2007 that the underlying "Patentgate" inquiries were effectively buried, or derailed, under the leadership of Manhattan's top State ethics Chief Counsel, Thomas J. Cahill, Esq. Cahill's "retirement" was then quickly announced after his own ethical failings in the Patentgate matter and other unfolding scandal as Anderson began surfacing with Whistleblower allegations, along with other ethics complaints that were made, became known.

Then the Whistleblower Anderson came along to confirm ones worst nightmares about the Disciplinary Committees and Courts of New York. It should be noted that Cahill was later deposed in Anderson. From an article in Expose Corrupt Courts, I quote,

July 16 2007 DOJ Widens Patentgate Inquiry:

In a letter dated July 16, 2007, 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 investigation that involves an almost surreal story of the theft of nearly 30 U.S. Patents, and other intellectual property, worth billions of dollars.

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.

The Fox and the Hen HouseIt was only recently exposed in July that the underlying “Patentgate” inquiries were effectively buried, or derailed, under the leadership of Manhattan’s top State ethics Chief Counsel, Thomas J. Cahill, Esq. Mr. Cahill’s “retirement” was then quickly announced after his own ethical failings in the Patentgate matter, along with other ethics complaints that were made, became known.

While no one can exactly figure out how inquiries under Mr. Cahill’s charge went so awry, one thing is certain. At the same time the Patentgate probes were being secreted by state officials in New York, the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent bar increased their own investigation into the same matter implicating the same attorneys. (Note: Mr. Cahill’s replacement was recently decided, and an announcement is expected as early as next week by the Appellate Division, First Department Presiding Justice, Jonathan Lippman.)

Article @ http://exposecorruptcourts.blogspot.com/2007/08/justice-dept-widens-patentgate-probe.html

The Damning Whistleblower Case of Christine C. Anderson –Allegations of Coercion, Assault, Title 18 and State Obstruction of Justice via Official Supreme Court Document Destruction Inside the First Department by Public Officials, for “Favored Law Firms”

Christine Anderson provides a pivotal link in her heroic Whistleblowing revelations that shed insight into the criminal behavior running rampant at the highest levels of the First Department, including Coercion, Obstruction, Tampering with Official Investigatory Files, Threatening Federal Witnesses, Document Destruction and Physical Assaults on a Whistleblower tying Iviewit to her own complaint.

Anderson’s original lawsuit filing discussed the impact of Iviewit on her situation relating to a Complaint filed against Cahill and others13, as part of her allegations. Anderson’s Original Complaint can be found at Iviewit Homepage, Evidence Link or @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/anderson/20071028%20Anderson%20Original%20Filing.pdf

Pages 24-25 contain references to the Iviewit Cahill, Krane et al. complaints.

Christine C. Anderson a former Staff Attorney at the First Dept filed WHISTLEBLOWER allegations in a Fed Whistleblower suit slated for trial Oct 13 in US District Court Southern District NY (USDC), Anderson v State of NY, 07cv09599.

http://iviewit.tv/press/press1.pdf

Anderson’s suit adjudicated by Judge Shira Scheindlin contains allegations of retaliation against Anderson for termination from her job of 6 years, after Anderson exposed systemic Whitewashing & Obstruction inside the First Dept, claiming favoritism by the First Dept for favored law firms & attorneys.

I have attached in my Prepared Statement links to several news articles relating to Anderson.

http://exposecorruptcourts.blogspot.com/2009/04/andersons-10-million-lawsuit-proceeds.html & http://iviewit.tv/press/press2.pdf

Anderson’s suit set to bring volcanic like testimony involving Public Office corruption & testimony by officials of the NY State Unified Court system, including Court of Appeals Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, Presiding Judge at the First Dept during the firing of Anderson. Along with Lippman will be Defendants in Anderson, First Dept Supervisor Sherry Cohen, Former Chief Counsel Thomas J. Cahill, Hon John Buckley, David Spokony & Catherine O’Hagen Wolfe, Clerk @ US Second Circuit Court of Appeals (USCA), an initial Anderson defendant in her former job as Clerk for the First Dept, now witness in Anderson.

Anderson claims Physical Assault & Harassment by Cohen for her heroic WHISTLEBLOWING efforts, Anderson gave riveting testimony at the first of these hearings by the NY Senate Judiciary Committee headed by Hon. Senator John L. Sampson.

Anderson’s testimony found online and links again are provided in the written statement. Anderson’s testimony comes at 30min into the video found online at the NY State Senate Website or @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR8OX8uuAbw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fiviewit%2Etv%2F&feature=player_embedded

Prior to permitting Anderson to trial, Scheindlin marked 7 suits, including Iviewit’s Multi-Count Multi-Trillion Dollar suit http://iviewit.tv/press/press3.pdf legally “related” to Anderson.""

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

Iviewit

More on the Stolen Iviewit Patents at

www.DeniedPatent.com

Proskauer Rose SEC Complaint

James Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ernst & Young Fails to Disclose Massive Shareholder Fraud.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:23:00 +0000

James Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ernst & Young Gets Warning Of Massive Shareholder Fraud and Ignores this Information. This Email is From Jan. 10th 2010 - ALL originals available to FBI - Department of Justice - SEC or any Kind of FCC Probe, USPTO Investigation, Fraud on the Courts Investigation.

Here is the Email To James Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Ernst & Young and AOL Executives.

" From: Eliot Ivan Bernstein [mailto:iviewit@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 7:57 AM

To: James Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer @ Ernst & Young
Global Limited (james.turley@ey.com)

Cc: Tim Armstrong ~ Chairman and Chief Executive Officer @ AOL Inc.
(tim.armstrong@corp.aol.com);

Artie Minson ~ Chief Financial Officer @ AOL Inc. (arthur.minson@corp.aol.com);

Jerry McKinley @ AOL Inc. (mackinleyj@aol.com);

Ira Parker ~ General Counsel and Executive Vice
President, Corporate Development @ AOL Inc (ira.parker@corp.aol.com);

Christopher Day ~ Assistant General Counsel - Patent Litigation,
Prosecution, and Licensing @ AOL Inc. (Christopher.Day@corp.aol.com);

Subject: MR. TURLEY ~ URGENT TIME SENSITIVE MATTER RE MAJOR LIABILITIES OF YOUR CLIENTS AOL INC., WARNER BROS. AND TIME WARNER

Dear Mr. Turley ~ Please note the following massive liabilities to AOL Inc., Time Warner and Warner Bros. and report such liabilities to all regulators, financial institutions, shareholders of the companies your firm represents that are involved in these matters and any other parties which liabilities may extend to as a result of the information attached herein.

As there may be serious violations of FASB No. and state and federal law as the attached
documents show which may trigger Rescissory Shareholder Rights for FRAUD,
these matters require instant compliance.

Failure to acknowledge these liabilities may result in your companies Ernst & Young LLP & Ernst & Young Global Limited (EYG) being included in ongoing federal and state investigations, new SEC Complaints against your clients and inclusion in
ongoing and future litigation for fraud and more.

As you may be aware by now, as I have sent you other correspondences regarding these matters in regard to other clients you represent that have similar liabilities that
must be reported, your firm may be conflicted with the Iviewit companies as
having been former auditors for my companies, after Arthur Andersen had
discovered probable fraud against the companies by the law firm Proskauer
Rose LLP, who is also a defendant in a 12-Count, 12 Trillion Dollar Federal
Lawsuit, legally marked "related" by Federal Judge Shira A. Scheindlin to a
Whistleblower Lawsuit of Christine C. Anderson of the New York Supreme Court
Appellate Division First Department. "

"This message has been sent and verified received by Senior Management named
on the below correspondences at AOL Inc., including Mr. Armstrong."

Thank you ~ Eliot Bernstein "

Open Letter to Time Warner, Warner Bros, TWX, TWC, AOL - Shareholders - Investors - Stakeholders - Insurance Carriers.
http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/open-letter-to-time-warner-warner-bros.html

More on this Stolen Video Technology and Liability of Time Warner Companies

http://www.douglaschey.com/

http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/

NASDAQ:INTC - Open Letter to Intel Corp Board of Directors and INTC Shareholders over Massive INTC Liability.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:44:00 +0000

Intellectual Property THEFT by Intel Corp - INTC

Intel Corp. Executives have Been Hiding a Very Big Secret from the Intel Corp - INTC Board of Directors, and Intel Corp's Shareholders for Over a Decade Now.

Intel Corp is involved in a Stolen Technology Scandal over the IViewit Technologies, and Intel Corp CEO Paul Otellini has been covering it up.

Then General Counsel Bruce Sewell also covered up this Massive Proven Fraud. This is FACT, there are Links in this Letter to Prove it.

For over a Decade the Corruption in Courts, Law Firms and in Government Agencies have Covered for Intel Corp Executives.

However, those days are over Now. And when it is time to pay the Iviewit TechnologyInventors for their Invention USED by Intel Corp. for Over a Decade, well it will be the Intel Corp. Shareholders and Intel Corp Board of Directors that pays for the Crimes and Cover Ups of the Intel Corp. Executives.

Intel Corp. has been Named in an SEC Complaint over the Stolen Iviewit Technology
Click Here to Read the SEC Complaint Naming Intel Corp.

Intel Corp Has also been named in a 12 Trillion Dollar Federal RICO Lawsuit over the Stolen Iviewit Technology.

ATTENTION:

Jane E. Shaw, Ambassador Charlene Barshefsky,Wilmer Cutler Pickering, Susan L. Decker,
John J. Donahoe,Reed E. Hundt, James D. Plummer, John M. Fluke, Frederick E. Terman,David S. Pottruck, Frank D. Yeary, Vice Chancellor, David B. Yoffie, Max and Doris Starr.

This Open Letter Will Go to ALL Intel Corp. Board of Directors, Shareholders, Insurance Carriers and ALL Government Agencies Involved to serve as YET another Warning of what will happen to Intel Corp. Shareholders. Just as in the Madoff Scandal, they CANNOT Say they Did Not Know. There is a Whole lot of Fact, Proof that they Did Know and DO Know RIGHT NOW.

Please Forward this Letter to ALL Intel Corp. Investors, Shareholders, Directors, Executives that You Know of. This is a VERY Big Deal Financially. It is NOT a Hoax, Look at the Fact yourself and Warn Others.

The Stolen Iviewit Technology will Cost Intel Corp. Investors, Shareholders Billions. CEO Paul Otellini of Intel Corp. KNOWS of this Massive Shareholder and is NOT Disclosing to Intel Corps. Board of Directors, Shareholders or Insurance Carriers.

It is Your Money, You Have a Right to Know that Billions will be Paid By Intel Corp. in theIviewit Technology Theft. It is not a Matter of IF, the Proof is ALL there. It is a Matter of When.

Here is Proof that Intel Corps. CEO Paul Otellini and then Intel Corp. General Counsel Bruce Sewell knew of the Stolen Iviewit Technology and have Yet to Disclose to Intel Corps. Board of Directors, Shareholders or Insurance Carriers to this day.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States
%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090306%20
Intel%20Demand%20Letter%20&%20Liability%20Exposure%
20%20Signed%203549l.pdf

For More information on the iViewit Stolen Technology Go To
DeniedPatent.com

More Links and Resources to Intel's Involvement in a 13 Trillion Dollar Technology Theft

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=288

http://www.antitrustviolations.com/2011/01/intel-shareholder-fraud-over-iviewit.html

More Proof on Intel Corp. Cover Ups
SEC Galleon, Intel Capital Complaint Click Here

Click Below For FTC Investigators Reports on MORE Cover Ups by Intel Corp.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/51737284/Proof-Of-Intel-Cartel---RICO-Proof

Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Please Share EVERYWHERE you Think it Will Help to STOP Intel Corp Executive from Hiding Mass Shareholder Fraud, and to Protect Shareholders and Inventors RIGHTS.

MPEG LA, DVD Licensing, Toshiba - Letter From DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - JOEL I. KLIEN of the Antitrust Division

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:07:00 +0000

More Iviewit Proof of Fraud and MPEG LA Involvement.Proskauer Rose LLP Corruption. Patent Fraud ?

June 10, 1999 - Letter From DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - JOEL I. KLIEN of the Antitrust Division - Assistant Attorney General

" Carey R. Ramos, Esq.
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10019-6064

Dear Mr. Ramos:

This letter is in response to your request on behalf of Hitachi, Ltd., Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Time Warner Inc., Toshiba Corporation, and Victor Company of Japan, Ltd. (collectively, the "Licensors"), for the issuance of a business review letter pursuant to the Department of Justice's Business Review Procedure, 28 C.F.R. § 50.6.

You have requested a statement of the Department of Justice's antitrust enforcement intentions with respect to a proposed arrangement pursuant to which Toshiba will assemble and offer a package license under the Licensors' patents that are "essential," as defined below, to manufacturing products in compliance with the DVD-ROM and DVD-Video formats and will distribute royalty income to the other Licensors.

I. The DVD-ROM and DVD-Video Formats

The Standard Specifications for the DVD-ROM and DVD-Video formats describe the physical and technical parameters for DVDs for read-only-memory and video applications, respectively, and "rules, conditions and mechanisms" for player units for the two formats.

(1) In either format, the DVD has more than seven times the storage capacity of a compact disc; a single-layer, single-sided DVD, for example, can store 4.7 billion bytes (4.38 GB) of information including audio, video, text, and data. Employing compression technology, a DVD-Video disc can hold a 135-minute feature film on a single side.

The Licensors, along with a number of other producers of consumer electronics hardware, software, or both,

(2) established the Standard Specifications.

(3) These Standard Specifications appear to implicate the intellectual property rights of numerous firms.

II. The Proposed Arrangement

A memorandum of understanding among the Licensors (the "MOU," attached as Exhibit 1 to your letter) sets forth the central terms of the proposed arrangement, pursuant to which Toshiba will aggregate the Licensors' "essential" patents and disseminate rights under them to makers of Digital Versatile Discs (DVDs), DVD players, and DVD decoders

(4) ("DVD Products"), and distribute royalty income to the other Licensors. The arrangement will be carried out through a group of other agreements, including:

(1) a license that Toshiba will receive from each other Licensor to enable Toshiba to license users of the Standard Specifications under that Licensor's "essential" patents (the "Authorization Agreement," attached as Exhibit 3); (2) Toshiba's sublicense to makers of DVD Products under the Licensors' patents (the "DVD Patent License," attached as Exhibit 2);

(3) an agreement among the Licensors concerning the retention and authority of experts to select and evaluate the patents to be licensed (the "Expert Agreement," attached as Exhibit 4); and

(4) the "Ground Rules for Royalty Allocation" (attached as Exhibit 7), which set forth the formula that will determine how Toshiba will distribute royalties among the Licensors.

(5) A. The patents to be licensed In the MOU, the Licensors commit to license each other and third parties to make, use and sell DVD Products under their present and future patents that are "essential" to doing so.

(6) The Licensors agree to two separate means of carrying out this obligation. First, they agree to grant Toshiba the right to sublicense third parties under their present and future "essential" patents for these purposes, and Toshiba agrees in turn to sublicense those patents, along with its own such patents, in the DVD Patent Licenses.

(7) Second, each Licensor agrees to "offer to license its essential DVD patents on a non-exclusive basis to interested third-party licensees pursuant to separate negotiations on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, whether or not said third-party licensees intend to make, use and sell DVD products that are in conformity with the Specifications."

(8) A Licensor's patent is "essential," and thus subject to the commitments in the MOU, if it is "necessarily infringed," or "there is no realistic alternative" to it, "in implementing the DVD Standard Specifications."

(9) Initially, each Licensor will identify its own "essential" patents in an attachment to its Authorization Agreement with Toshiba.

(10) Toshiba will then incorporate those patents in a list attached to the DVD Patent License.

(11) Shortly, however, an expert individual or panel, with "full and sufficient knowledge and skill in the relevant technology,"

(12) will complete a review the patents each Licensor has designated as "essential" in order to determine whether they satisfy the MOU criteria.

(13).MOU, ¶ 8; Expert Agreement, preamble.

(14) At that time, any patent initially designated by a Licensor for inclusion in the DVD Patent License that the expert determines is not "essential" will be excluded from subsequent DVD Patent Licenses, although current licensees will have the option to retain it in their existing licenses.

(15) The expert will repeat this comprehensive review of all the patents in the DVD Patent License portfolio every four years.

(16) In between the quadrennial reviews, the proposed program also provides a mechanism by which the expert may review individual patents whose essentiality comes into question. If a Licensor comes to a good faith conclusion that a licensed patent is not "essential," and provides a reasonable basis for that belief, the expert will re-examine the patent.

(17) If the expert concludes that the patent is not "essential," the patent will be excluded from the DVD Patent License.

(18) The agreement provides that the expert's determinations are "conclusive and non-appealable," although the expert must submit a report explaining any decision that a patent was not "essential."

(19) Compensation will be at the expert's "standard hourly rates."

(20) Each Licensor will bear the cost of the expert's review of its patents; the Licensors will share costs attributable to all of them, such as time spent reviewing the DVD Standard Specifications.

(21) The expert, although retained by the Licensors and selected by a majority vote among them, will not have an economic affiliation with any individual Licensor.

(22) A majority of the Licensors may remove the expert for failure or inability to perform the duties set forth in the Expert Agreement "in a professional, competent, reliable or timely manner."

(23) Although the proposed licensing program currently includes the patents of only the Licensors, it is open to any owner of an "essential" patent willing to license on the program's terms and conditions.(24)

Full Letter and Source of Post
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/busreview/2485.htm

Save and Print the Above for Your Records.

Note: over the Last year of Writing on iViewt the companies at the top of this post have been all over my Blogs, they Ignore what is happening because the UPSTO, US Judges, Corrupt Law Firms like Foley and Lardner and ALL on my blog at http://www.deniedpatent.com/ seem to be protected by US Billionaires and Politicians. THEY know that the Massive Shareholder Liability is Inevitable and Are Protecting themselve from it.

No ONE is Protecting Investors or Inventors.

More on the Massive Shareholder Fraud Coming Soon to a Pocket Book near You.

http://www.iviewit.tv/

http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/

http://www.deniedpatent.com/

Eliot Bernstein Testimony New York Senate Judiciary on Iviewit Scandal, Cover Ups, and Corruption.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 03:07:00 +0000

Eliot Bernstein Testimony NY Senate Judiciary Part 1
Trillion Dollar Lawsuit, Attempted Murder, Court Corruption
Patent Attorney Corruption, and Mass Fraud on the Courts in ALL
Judicial Branches, the USPTO and Multiple Supreme Courts.

Eliot Bernstein Testimony NY Senate Judiciary Part 2
Iviewit Technologies - Eliot Bernstein Testifies on
Massive Corruption Surrounding
the Stealing of the Iviewit Technology.

More on the Massive Shareholder Fraud and Major Corruption in the
Iviewit Stolen Intellectual Property Scandal ... Go to..

www.DeniedPatent.com

www.Iviewit.TV

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

Lockheed Martin Corruption, Foley-Lardner Corruption, Proskauer Rose Corruption, Intel Corp. Corruption, Time Warner Inc. Corruption, Greenberg Traurig, Michael Grebe, New York Second Department, Joseph Leccese Proskauer Rose Law Firm, Sony, Doug Chey, AOL, New York Supreme Court, Florida Supreme Court, USPTO Corruption,

Iviewit Commercial from Archives. Ellen DeGeneres Testimony - Iviewit Technologies Explained

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 02:21:00 +0000

Iviewit Commercial - Including Ellen DeGeneres Testimony - Technologies Explained

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-NBsMONci4

More on this Massive Shareholder Fraud at

http://www.iviewit.tv/

http://www.deniedpatent.com/

http://www.kennethrubenstein.com/

http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/

Ex-Supreme Court Judge Judith Kaye is Corrupt and Helped Proskauer Rose Committ Patent Theft and Massive Fraud.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 04:19:00 +0000

"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.

Steven Krane, Proskauer Ross LLP 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 Rose 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 LLP 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.

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. "

Source and Lots More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm

the Above is about 1/4 the way down....

Posted here by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger...

Foley and Larder Patent Attorney Committ Massive Fraud and is Protected by US Courts.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 04:16:00 +0000

"William J. Dick - foley and lardner - Virginia state bar rebuttal - it is interesting to note that dick in his response to the the vsb sends a portfolio patent docket that the united states patent & trademark office says has some false & misleading information contained in - such as certain patents that the company has no rights, title or interests in. the vsb refuses phone calls to re-investigate based on this information that has led to uspto and federal investigations of the matters.

in the dick exhibits you will see how iviewit got dicked around as the evidence appears that there are two sets of patents with similar names and different inventors. iviewit does not attest to these documents as factual representations of the original filings as much document tampering has occurred on the patent documents. "

Source and Lots More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm

Judith Kaye - Ex. Supreme Court Judge who Protected Proskauer Rose Law Firm for Her Special Interests and her Husband WAS a partner (Stephen Kaye) - and her formoer Clerk and Co-Concpirator Steven Kaye WAS also at Proskauer Rose LLP. Well Judith Kaye USE to Work with William Dick at IBM... the Conflicts of Interest KEEP Rolling out on the Iviewt Stolen Patent.

Foley & Lardner – Doug Boehm, Steven Becker Bill Dick + Brain Utley Patent Crimes

Exhibit 1 – Case of inventor fraud perpetrated with I View It Counsel and Brian Utley

Exhibit 2 – How to claim others ideas as your own

Exhibit 7 – Case of Switching Inventors

Exhibit 9 – More on the Case of Walking Patents out of I View It and to your home

Exhibit 10 – Case of the Mismatched File Numbers on filed patent documents aka the cover-up

Exhibit 11 – Case of the changing patent titley

Exhibit 12 – Smudges & Fudges on 57013-112 and how to add your name to inventions that were invented without you

Exhibit 14 – Case of changing fonts again

Exhibit 16 – Case of bad math from an “engineer” and two certified engineers at Foley and Lardner, this is hours before filing, and the inventors have never seen these documents

Exhibit 20 – Cleaning up the mess of Utley Folly’s with Foley

Exhibit 22 – Another case of adding oneself to inventions one did not invent

Exhibit 33 – What happens to 57103/101

Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney for MPEG LA - Involves Attorney Raymond Anthony Joao.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:25:00 +0000

Kenneth Rubenstein 's lackey, attorney Raymond Anthony Joao, who was a patent attorney working DIRECTLY under Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein 's direction.

Raymond Joao now claims 90 patents in his own name and Iviewit gives him kudos as the greatest slime ball inventor and patent attorney.

No really, Iviewit considers our former counselors Raymond Joao and Kenneth 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

Raymond 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.

More on Raymond Joao Click Here

Source of Above and LOTS More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm

More on Iviewit Massive Shareholder Fraud

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

www.iviewit.TV

www.DeniedPatent.com

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

SEC Complaint AGAINST Time Warner, Warner Bros. - Jeffrey Bewkes, Curtis Lu - Massive Shareholder Fraud. Still NOT Disclosed to Shareholders.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 23:44:00 +0000

Jeffrey Bewkes CEO of Time Warner Inc. Continues to NOT Disclose Massive Shareholder Liability over the Iviewit Stolen Technology and the Blatant NOT HONORED contracts with Time Warner Inc. and Iviewit.

Curtis Lu - Time Warner General Counsel Talks to iViewit in 2010 then Leaves Time Warner Inc. to be the General Counsel for Philip Falcones - Harbinger Capital Partner 's - Lightsquared - Click here for Curtis Lu Conversation with iViewit over the Stolen Technology, the Liability to Time Warner Inc. and More.

" 2009-2010 Recent Communications with Warner Bros et al.

The SEC should note that while there is a long gap in time between the prior Iviewit and Warner Bros et al. communications and contracts, that during the gap I was nevertheless actively pursuing my rights contrary to Smith’s claim that nothing has been done.

Factually, I have given similar information to several state, federal and international investigators, House and Senate Judiciary Committees, the New York Senate Judiciary Committee, many state and federal courts and more over the last several years.

During the gap in time, I was also forced to flee my home several times for my family’s safety, including from death threats from Mr. Brian Utley on behalf of the law firms Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner and then from actual Attempted Murder of my family.

Attempted Murder through a Car Bombing of my family minivan in Del Ray Beach, FL., images of the Car Bombing can be found on the www.iViewit.tv homepage.

· March 17, 2009 ~ Hall and I left a message for John Rogovin (“Rogovin”) ~ Executive Vice President and General Counsel @ Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. with his assistant Ginger Tipton (“Tipton”) to arrange a business meeting to discuss the lawsuit liabilities, patent infringement liabilities, FASB NO. 5 accounting liabilities and regulatory issues that would likely result in Massive Shareholder Liabilities if not quelled, if possible.

· April 23, 2009 ~ Hall and I left a second message for Rogovin with assistant Tipton, as the March 17, 2009 call was not returned although Tipton was aware that urgent time frames were involved.

· April 28, 2009 ~ Hall and I spoke to Rogovin’s office that referred us to Smith. The referral to Smith coming despite his conflicts resulting from his previous involvement in the alleged fraud, the fact that he is a central witness in the matters and the fact that as a lawyer he has multiple legal conflicts of interest, as well as, corporate conflicts in handling the matters he is central too. Yet, these conflicts would not matter unless Smith directly handled the matters, which he then did.

· April 30, 2009 ~ Bernstein spoke to Smith’s assistant Yolanda who claimed that Smith was now tied up in litigation for two weeks and that he would get back with an answer shortly. This delay was despite pressing the need with Yolanda for urgent action on Smith’s part due to the MASSIVE Shareholder liabilities and the need for a twenty-four hour response.

· May 28, 2009 ~ Time Warner Inc. Announces Plan to Separate AOL

http://bx.businessweek.com/america-online/view?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedeal.com%2Fcorporatedealmaker%2F2009%2F05%2Ftime_warner_aol_timeline.php

o The SEC should note the timing of this announcement with the delays in response by Warner Bros et al.’s Smith to the Iviewit notice of IP infringement liabilities and their involvement in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit.

o The SEC should instantly ascertain if Warner Bros et al. notified Shareholders and Auditors during these corporate restructurings of the impending and absolute liabilities, to determine if Shareholders were formally noticed of the massive Twelve Count Twelve Trillion Dollar Lawsuit liability and additional patent infringement liabilities.

Further, the SEC must determine if full disclosure by Counsel was concealed, including but not limited to, Smith and Rogovin. Finally, the question further arises of if the liabilities were properly accounted for in the Audited Financials for the separation transactions, where it does not appear to have been.

Obviously, if these material facts regarding massive liabilities were omitted from financial reporting, Shareholders would have Rescissory Rights from the securities fraud by the Officers. As evidenced in the following series of communications, not only is counsel notified and fails to disclose the liabilities but Officers, Directors and Auditors of the companies when contacted regarding the liabilities, all fail to handle the issues as fiducially required by law.

· October 07, 2009 ~ Eliot Bernstein letter to Wayne Smith regarding setting up meeting to discuss matters that could have Catastrophic effect on the Shareholders. Smith already advised by Tipton, per confirmation with Tipton, of the Time Sensitive Nature and the seriousness of the liabilities in relation to their Shareholders.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091007%20Eliot%20Bernstein%20letter%20to%20Wayne%20Smith%20re%20Warner%20Bros%20AOL%20meeting%20request.pdf

· November 23, 2009 ~ Hall spoke directly with Smith, who claimed to Hall that he was not the best person to handle the matters but that he instead was assembling a team from Warner Bros et al. to discuss the matters and would get back to Hall. Yet, instead of putting a team together, Smith continued handling the matters despite the multiple conflicts.

· November 30, 2009 ~ Hall sent a letter to Smith reviewing their call @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20091201%20Wayne%20Smith%20Fax%20Email%20Demand%20Receipt%20of%20Kevin%20Hall%20Confirmation%20Letter.pdf

· December 02, 2009 ~ Smith response to Hall request for meeting @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091202%20Wayne%20Smith%20Response%20Warner%20Bros%20to%20Iviewit%20letter%2012-2-09.pdf

o It should be noted by the SEC here, that the above linked exhibit has two attachments from February and March 2002.

Whereby, despite the previously exhibited evidence herein, including but not limited to, Signed NDA’s, Admission of Use and Violation of NDA’s by a Warner Bros. employee and a SIGNED LICENSING AGREEMENT, the letter and the attached letters all attempt to deny these material incontestable facts, facts omitted in annual reports as well.

· December 09, 2009 ~ AOL Time Warner completes split.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/business/8403302.stm

· December 18, 2009 ~ Hall and Bernstein response to December 02, 2009 Warner Bros. letter @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091218%20FINAL%20Wayne%20Smith%20Warner%20Bros%20Demand%20Letter36889%20SIGNED%20KRHEIB%20fax.pdf

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091218%20FINAL%20Wayne%20Smith%20Warner%20Bros%20Demand%20Letter%20Cover%20Email.pdf

· December 23, 2009 ~ Warner Bros. Letter from Smith to Iviewit and Bernstein.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091223%20Warner%20Bros%20Wayne%20Smith%20to%20Bernstein%20Response.pdf

o Note that in this letter Smith claims that,

“Your time-barred claims hinge almost entirely on an internal email written by David Colter on January 15, 2002 - an email he subsequently disavowed and admitted that he had written (and improperly provided you with a copy) only as a personal favor to you.”

This statement attempts to deny that liability claims were based on Multiple Signed NDA’s, Admission of Use by Warner Employees, Admission of Violation of NDA’s by Warner Bros. employees, a SIGNED LICENSING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT, correspondences and notices of an ongoing Federal Lawsuit, etc.

The SEC should not that in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit both Smith and Calkins are central witnesses and actors directly involved, again conflicting Smith’s involvement in the matter.

Note that Wayne Smith is a licensed and practicing attorney and therefore has additional conflicts of interest and ethical violations under the Attorney Conduct Code, in addition to the Corporate Conflicts of Interest in handling the matters, again where he is directly involved in the alleged crimes described herein.

· December 29, 2009 ~ Hall and I, unclear if Smith had notified Senior Executives and Auditors or concealed the matters in an attempt to bury them despite our letters demand for him to copy all companies Executives, Board, Counsel and Auditors, contacted Warner Bros et al. Officers, Directors and Auditors directly.

The first AOL Inc. spokesperson, returning our call to determine if Smith had contacted them was a one Jerry McKinley (“McKinley”) ~ Sr. Liaison of Executive Escalation at AOL Inc. calling to follow up on earlier messages to Tim Armstrong (“Armstrong”) ~ Chairman and CEO of AOL Inc. and others. A follow up letter to our call with McKinley can be found @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20091231%20Jerry%20McKinley%20AOL%20Inc%20letter%20Re%20Wayne%20Smith%20Warner%20Bros%20response.pdf

o McKinley was then given critical documents expressing the urgent nature of these matters and McKinley was to get back to Hall and me instantly with confirmation that the named Executives, Officers and Auditors from the companies had received the URGENT TIME SENSITIVE documents regarding the liabilities.

McKinley then took a vacation the next day and was unavailable to answer calls despite knowing that the documents had a 24-hour period before we would be notifying the SEC and others of the liabilities, if resolution could not be achieved through sound business discussions and practices.

· December 29, 2009 ~ Hall and Bernstein calls to Time Warner Inc. and Warner Bros. executives.

o Further, I hereby complain that such recent elusive conduct involves the CEO, CFO and General Counsel at Time Warner, Inc., even hiding and dodging professional phone calls, in fact wholly ignoring them, simply to confirm messages and communications were received and seeking responsibly to address the mass of liabilities described herein.

Instead, quite shockingly, both Hall and I were intentionally passed along to extensions whereby the employees refused to give their names and several times just hung up on us.

Then, unidentified employees transferred us to Security personnel, personnel who would claim to be proper members of the company to receive and deliver messages to the Senior Executives regarding the massive potential Shareholder liabilities, yet they too would offer no confirmation of the delivery of the matters to the Executives and several refused to give their proper names or oversight.

o Security for Time Warner instead then took messages with a promise only to deliver the message and since there has been absolutely no call back from Senior Management, Counsel, Outside Counsel or an Auditor since those calls, we presume that avoidance equals concealment.

This stands as additional cause for the SEC to investigate and find out more information regarding the failure to return these calls and address liabilities properly by either Officers, Directors, Auditors, Outside Counsel, etc. and further determine if they have reported the liabilities their offices have been notified about to Auditors and Shareholders.

· January 06, 2010 ~ Phone conversation with Day

o Most amazingly, Wednesday Jan. 6, 2010, I had a Direct Phone conversation with Christopher Day (“Day”) who claimed to be an Assistant General Counsel at AOL, Inc.

The call also involved my business consultant Kevin Hall, Esq. Mr. Day was calling back after Hall and I left urgent voicemails for AOL CEO & COB Armstrong, after McKinley failed to return calls as promised. Mr. Day apparently is also Licensing and Patent counsel for AOL Inc., yet it was unclear on whose behalf Day was acting, as we had left messages for several key officers, including Armstrong and General Counsel Ira Parker (“Parker”) and Day refused to tell us.

o Day also refused to tell us not only who sent him the information and gave him orders to call us back but also refused to disclose what documentation he was mysteriously and anonymously sent and referring to, making it impossible to even confirm the documents he referenced receiving.

o This was most bizarre conduct from an alleged Assistant General Counsel who refused to describe how, who or why the documents and business matters came to him. Yet, it appeared that Day was returning my calls to CEO Armstrong at AOL and stated that he was a direct report to the key management persons we were attempting to reach and assuming liability for the matters.

o Efforts to avoid the liabilities involve actual dodging and hiding by Senior Executives, Officers and Directors from these matters, including but not limited to, the brand new CEO Armstrong and General Counsel at AOL Inc., Parker.

Upon leaving messages for Ira Parker, his assistant returned the call and stated that Parker was on vacation, could not be disturbed despite the PRIORITY situation and would return the call upon his return.

As of this date, I have received no call back from Parker; perhaps he is on extended vacation.

· January 07, 2010 ~ Letter out to AOL Management Regarding Evasive Tactics of Management from Shareholder Liabilities.

o Sent to: Tim Armstrong ~ Chairman and Chief Executive Officer @ AOL Inc. ( tim.armstrong@corp.aol.com ); Artie Minson ~ Chief Financial Officer @ AOL Inc. ( arthur.minson@corp.aol.com ); Jerry McKinley @ AOL Inc. ( mackinleyj@aol.com ); Ira Parker ~ General Counsel and Executive Vice President, Corporate Development @ AOL Inc ( ira.parker@corp.aol.com ); Christopher Day ~ Assistant General Counsel - Patent Litigation, Prosecution, and Licensing @ AOL Inc ( christopherday@corp.aol.com )

January 07, 2010 Letter to CEO, Armstrong at AOL Inc. @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100110%20Kevin%20Hall%20Letter%20sent%20to%20Tim%20Armstrong%20AOL%20re%20Christopher%20Day%20calls%20to%20eib.pdf

· January 08, 2010 ~ Additional Offer made to AOL Inc. CEO Armstrong thru Assistant General Counsel Christopher Day and Summarizing Notes of Jan. 6, 2010 conversation @

January 08, 2010 Letter of Hall to Bernstein copied to Tim Armstrong, CEO at AOL Inc. and others.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100108%20Letter%20to%20Tim%20Armstrong%20AOL%20Warner%20Bros.pdf

· January 2010 ~ Calls were again placed to CEO Armstrong and Day by Iviewit and Eliot Bernstein’s Counsel, Marc R. Garber, Esq. (“Garber”) of Flaster Greenberg PC (“Flaster”), Kevin Hall, Esq. and Eliot Bernstein. Counsel Garber left the messages with his personal and business phone numbers for AOL Counsel, Officers, Directors or Auditors to return his call.

Again, not even a return call from AOL to Iviewit Counsel Garber, whereby the failure of Warner Bros. et al. to return calls to our Counsel should send additional red flags to the SEC.

This failure to return calls to Counsel Garber by Warner Bros. et al. counsel and executives regarding matters as serious as this to Shareholders is unheard of, indicating further cause for the SEC to investigate all named parties herein and in the attached Exhibit 1. Investigations by the SEC should include all personal and corporate stock transactions from1999 to Present for all of these executives, including the recent corporate splits.

o Counsel Garber of Flaster left messages with both Armstrong and Day, giving them both a chance to return the calls, as it was already established that Armstrong had direct actual and constructive receipt of correspondences via email and therefore direct knowledge of the impending liabilities to AOL, Inc.

The calls to contact Counsel Garber were not returned as of this date, leading to the filing of this Formal Complaint against Warner Bros et al. The failure of Warner Bros et al. to resolve the issues through sound business discussions and licensing of the technologies with the true and proper inventors, and in fact, instead exhibiting a continued pattern attempting to conceal the liabilities from Shareholders and others with potential liabilities, through establishing materially false record of fact, while transacting volumes of individual and corporate securities, prompted this action to the SEC and others addressed herein.

The timeline and supplementary evidence herein should establish for the SEC and others addressed herein that Smith’s recent claim in his December 23, 2009 communication, already exhibited herein, claiming, “Your time-barred claims hinge almost entirely on an internal email written by David Colter on January 15, 2002 - an email he subsequently disavowed and admitted that he had written (and improperly provided you with a copy) only as a personal favor to you” is both False and Misleading.

False and Misleading in light of the substantial evidence refuting this claim presented and exhibited herein regarding the Binding Contractual relations between Warner Bros et al. and Iviewit. Smith’s statements attempt to dismiss the liabilities as based on a single letter from a Warner Bros. employee and that the claims are somehow time barred.

The SEC and other investigators addressed herein however are presented with a far more complete and truthful picture of the long and contractual relationship between Iviewit and Warner Bros et al.

A relationship based on thousands of pages of documented evidence and legal binding contracts, many with Smith center stage.

The need to DENY the extensively documented and binding contractual relationship that Smith is aware of obviously is an effort to cover up why he and Warner Bros et al. have failed properly to report to Shareholders, Regulators and Auditors these material facts.

Facts that will likely result in Catastrophic Liabilities triggering Rescissory Rights of Shareholders due to fraud, concealment, securities fraud and other violations of law.

The SEC should also note that there are no time-barred claims on patent infringement, especially where the patents remain suspended by the US Patent Office and that the matter of time for Iviewit to file actions for infringement will remain open for Twenty years from the time the patents issue and from time of filing in 1998-2001. "

Source and Full SEC Complaint Against Curtis Lu, Time Warner Inc., Warner Bros., AOL, Intel Corp., Proskauer Rose LLP, MPEG LA and More Click Here.

Massive Liabilities exist for Warner Bros. for their involvement in criminal RICO and ANTITRUST activities over Iviewit Scandal

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 00:03:00 +0000

Iviewit SEC Complaint NAMING Warner Bros. - Time Warner Inc. - Curtis Lu, now General Cousel of Lightsquared and Many Others over a Massive Shareholder Fraud in the Blatant, Obvious Theft of Iviewit Technologies.

" Pages 3-9

o Please note that the correspondence exhibited above refers to a notification issued to Warner Bros. at that time, which provided Warner Bros et al. further notice at that time that Cease and Desist letters and threatened litigation would be forthcoming regarding the technology infringements.

Warner Bros et al. already was given notice of Breach of Contracts regarding the Intellectual Properties in prior communiqués exhibited and these letters certainly cite specific liabilities Warner was aware of going forward.

Liabilities exist for Warner Bros et al. for their involvement in the alleged Criminal RICO and ANTITRUST activities initially discovered from information partially uncovered by Warner Bros et al. in 2001, as they were on the verge of investing $25 Million Dollars of capital to my companies.

When doing their due diligence on a $12 Million Dollar Private Placement with Wachovia Securities, corporate and intellectual property frauds were uncovered, including discoveries by Smith regarding the Proskauer/Rubenstein/Joao filed patents and Calkins discovered initial evidence of corporate and bankruptcy frauds.

At that time, Warner Bros et al. counsel, including Smith, employees and personnel became aware of frauds relating to both the patents filed with the US Patent Office and additional corporate fraud, additional information regarding similar corporate frauds was also being unearthed at that time in an audit being conducted by Arthur Andersen (“Andersen”) which will be discussed further herein.

This information of what Smith and Calkin’s had discovered was relayed to Iviewit by Colter on behalf of both Wayne Smith and John Calkins as rational for not going forward on the Private Placement investment.

Colter relayed that Warner Bros et al. uncovered fraud, including fraudulent statements made by Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner, former Iviewit counsel, regarding statements made in the Wachovia Private Placement whereby the bankruptcy and lawsuits were not disclosed that were later discovered.

The Private Placement Memorandum completed by, billed for and circulated to potential Iviewit investors, including Warner Bros et al., by Proskauer Rose.

The Fraudulent Statements by counsel and others contained in the Wachovia Private Placement, distributed for capital investment is cause for further SEC investigations of these criminal and SEC violations. Further questions arise as to Wachovia’s actions once they too were aware of the Fraud.

Per Colter, Warner Bros et al. and Smith uncovered Intellectual Property Frauds involving fraudulent oaths to the US Patent Office and Worldwide Patent Authorities, which has in part led to suspension of my Intellectual Properties by the US Patent Commissioner pending investigations by the US Patent Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

This series of events led to further uncovering Patent Fraud by my former counsel Proskauer, Foley and Meltzer and others that are subject to several state, federal and international ongoing investigations and legal actions.

Investigations now include one by Harry I. Moatz (“Moatz”), Director of the United States Patent & Trademark Office – Office of Enrollment and Discipline (“OED”), charged with oversight of the Federal Patent Bar and patent attorney criminal issues.

Harry Moatz confirmed that W. Palm Beach FBI Special Agent, Stephen Lucchesi had joined his investigation of FRAUD ON THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE allegedly committed by attorneys registered with the Federal Patent Bar.

Harry Moatz also directed me to file claims of Fraud on the USPTO with the Commissioner of the US Patent Office that resulted in the exhibited herein patent suspensions.

Harry Moatz assembled a team of Patent Office Officials to aid me in getting the Intellectual Properties ready for suspension while investigations proceeded, as he removed all prior counsel from access to the IP.

Amazingly, the patent office initial information which led to suspension proved that materially false information on the patents was not only given to the US Patent Office but that similar false information was given by Proskauer, Foley and Meltzer to Wachovia Securities for inclusion into the Private Placement Memorandum.

Per Colter, Calkin’s had found fraud involving a fraudulent billing lawsuit against the Iviewit companies by counsel Proskauer.

Prior to Calkin’s information Iviewit corporate officers, directors and management did not know about such lawsuit, except those now charged with the RICO and ANTITRUST crimes and therefore it was not disclosed by Proskauer or Iviewit Accountants to Wachovia Securities for their due diligence and therefore not reflected in the Private Placement, further false statements in a securities document.

At the time, I retained independent counsel, Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esquire to investigate the corporate and patent fraud allegations and it was confirmed that there was a bankruptcy filing and lawsuit that were not disclosed to Wachovia or Iviewit’s Board and Management that were not part of the conspiratorial efforts.

It was later learned that the companies sued by Proskauer Rose were companies fraudulently set up by former counsel Proskauer Rose and had stolen Intellectual Properties in them, this was learned from information discovered directly from the US Patent Office OED Investigations.

Whereby, Arthur Andersen on or about this time, while auditing the Iviewit companies for the largest investor Crossbow Ventures of West Palm Beach Florida, whose investment funds were two-thirds SBA SBIC funds, found identical and similarly named companies to the Iviewit companies.

The Fraud involving the stolen Small Business Administration Funds is under ongoing investigation with the SBA Inspector General’s office, the SEC through actions involving the Boca Raton Police Department (“Boca PD”) to be discussed in detail herein and other investigators.

Per Colter, Smith discovered Fraud involving Kenneth Rubenstein, a Proskauer Rose Law Firm partner and sole patent evaluator for one of the largest infringers and criminal suspects in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit and this was the supposed reason he want Kenneth Rubenstein, MPEG LA Patent Attorney... to re-opine.

The SEC should note here that in addition to the US Patent Office OED investigation of Rubenstein, Rubenstein also is under investigation with other attorneys, including Joao, all ordered for investigation by unanimous consent of Five Justices of the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department.

Investigations ordered for “Conflicts of Interest and the Appearance of Impropriety” when a Proskauer partner, Steven C. Krane, violated public office rules at the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department – Departmental Disciplinary Committee.

Krane caught handling Iviewit/Proskauer complaints, in order to block the complaints against his partner Kenneth Rubenstein and his firm Proskauer Rose, concealing the massive conflict he had as an Officer of the First Department Disciplinary Committee and other conflicts from other ethical public office positions he maintains in New York, while remaining a Proskauer partner.

After discovery of the alleged Intellectual Property fraudulent filings, Iviewit learned later that Smith, IP counsel for Warner Bros., was now working with Rubenstein who was Iviewit’s former IP counsel, MPEGLA counsel and Warner Bros. counsel.

Whereby, upon Smith’s request for Kenneth Rubenstein to re-opine, Rubenstein claimed he was conflicted with Warner Bros. et al. and Iviewit and therefore could not opine, including even to reiterate his prior opinion, as already evidenced herein.

Whereby Warner Bros. et al. then breached their contracts and began illegally using and licensing the technologies to others in violation of the Binding Signed Agreements.
The DVD6C, MPEGLA LLC and other patent pooling schemes, where Warner Bros. and Proskauer are major participants[10], for example in the DVD6C pool which are managed and monetized by Warner Bros., Proskauer and Rubenstein.

The pooling schemes are alleged to be merely artifices to STEAL INVENTIONS FROM INVENTORS in violation of multiple Antitrust laws and have illegally precluded me from market in classic RICO and ANTITRUST activities, including death threats and a car bomb.

The Patent Pooling Schemes that Warner Bros. is directly involved in and inuring benefit from are also using the technologies in violation of Signed and Binding Contracts and Licensing Agreements, admittedly.

Yet, since that time Warner Bros. have also excluded Iviewit from market tying and bundling the technologies in their licensing schemes, again in classic RICO and ANTITRUST activities and not only failed to pay Iviewit royalties but have failed to account for the 10 years of knowing infringement and the Massive Liabilities to Shareholders that mounts daily.

Click Here for Official Fingerprinted Iviewit Document "

More on Iviewit Patent Theft

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.DeniedPatent.com

www.iViewit.TV

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

www.BruceSewell.com

Philip Falcone, Harbinger Capital Partners about to get Billions Recalled over the Lightsquared - Curtis Lu Scandal.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 00:02:00 +0000

Poor Billionaire Philip Falcone, Harbinger Capital Partners - he seems to be worried about Media talking trash about Harbinger Capital Partners.

Why? Well Because he is about to Lose Billions ... If ONLY those Savvy Investors would Just Sit down and Shut up.. and Please Stop Asking Harbinger Capital and Philip Falcone about that " LightSquared " - "Curtis Lu" Fiasco.

Philip Falcone, Harbinger Capital Partners SEEMS to Urging his "Wealthy Clients" not to talk to Reporters.. hmm.. well there ya go. .that's a Solution for ya.

Philip Falcone, the hedge fund manager, Harbinger Capital Partners has $9 billion at stake.. and needs the Media to Silence the Trash Talk and NOW !!

"In a roughly 45-minute investor call on Wednesday, Falcone was critical of news stories that have characterized the New York hedge fund’s nearly $3 billion investment in an upstart mobile broadband company as a risky gamble, said three people who listened to the morning investor call. Falcone also expressed dismay that some investors had been talking to reporters and he urged his wealthy clients to stop doing so. "

Lightsquared is MORE then Risky - it is NOW a Multi-Trillion Dollar Liability brought to Lightsquared by the Fateful Hiring of Curtis Lu - Former Time Warner Inc.

Link to the Philip Falcone, Harbinger Capital Partners Whining..

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/harbinger-manager-falcone-hits-out-at-media/

***********

More on the Harbinger Capital Partners - Lightsquared Multi-Billion Dollar Fiasco
My Comments are in Red... ( Just for Fun )

""Harbinger's Falcone has a beef with the media ""

"The investor call comes as some of Falcone's wealthy investors are getting anxious over the poor performance of several of his four main funds. His flagship Harbinger Capital Partners fund is down about 13 percent for the year. A $2 billion fund holding hard-to-sell assets is down more than 18 percent this year.

Investors Better Do More than get "anxious" - the Iviewit Techology Liability now at Lightsquared is a Multi-Trillion Dollar Disaster waiting to Happen - Do your Homework.

Friday is the deadline for investors in the flagship fund to submit a notice to redeem all or some of their money.

One investor who listened to the call said he thought Falcone's intent was "to be reassuring to investors."

Falcone told investors he was disappointed it has taken longer than he anticipated to give back money in the fund holding hard-to-sell assets. But people who listened to the call said Falcone said he expected that to change soon.

I Don't Think So.. I Think THINGS are Going to Get a Whole lot worse for Philip Falcone - Harbinger Capital Partners. You Just watch and SEE.. if you Can Afford it.

Some investors also are uneasy with Harbinger's ownership of an upstart high-speed Internet company called LightSquared, which plans to use satellites and array of land-based cell towers to bring broadband service to every corner of the United States.

Look Close at the Scandal Brewing over Curtis Lu - Lightsquared General Counsel and the SEC Complaint, Federal RICO Lawsuit and Massive Sharefholder Fraud over the Iviewit Scandal.

Harbinger's two largest investment funds have sunk nearly 40 percent of their assets into LightSquared. And even with that big equity commitment, industry analysts say LightSquared may need to raise an additional $5 billion to build out the so-called 4G telecom network.

Falcone, in an email exchange with Reuters prior to the investor call, said he will likely have another investor call in the next few weeks to specifically discuss LightSquared and the hedge fund's telecom strategy.

Wouldn't You Just Love to be a Fly on the Wall and See how Philip Falcone, Harbinger Capital Partners Sooths, Comforts those Nervous Billionaires and Possibly even Flat Out lies to them..

In November, LightSquared hopes to launch the first of two satellites that are critical to the success of its network.

Investment bank UBS (UBS.N) is in the process of putting together a $750 million loan package for LightSquared to pay-off some of its existing debt and pay expenses, said people familiar with the deal.

UBS Bank KNOWS of the Iviewit Liability they are ALL over My Blogs on the Curtis Lu - Lightsquared Liability.. Look Close Billionaires. .Your About to LOSE it ALL..

Falcone, who made billions for his investors in 2007 by betting against the subprime mortgage market, said in his email exchange with Reuters that his funds began to turn a corner in September. He wants his investors to have a bit more patience.

Yes Just be Patient, hang on a bit longer and you WILL lose it all as Philip Falcone, Harbinger Capital Partners DID no Homework - Investigations at all before he brought a Multi-Trillion Dollar Liability to LightSquared in the hiring of Curtis Lu as the Lightsquared General Counsel - Formerly the General Counsel of Time Warner Inc.

"The good news," he said in the email, "we actually are making money this month. Yes, we are turning it around."

Falcone declined to talk specifics. But he may be alluding to Harbinger's Credit Distressed Blue Line fund, which has about $1 billion in assets and is said to be posting positive returns this year, according to people familiar with the fund.

Even his flagship fund, despite being one of the hedge fund industry's worst performers, is up nearly 3 percent in September.

Still, some investors are beginning to walk away.

Smart.. but don't Walk - RUN !!!

The New York State Common Retirement Fund, as first reported by Bloomberg Markets, is pulling its $68 million investment from Harbinger.

The state pension fund recently submitted a request to Falcone to redeem $41 million from Harbinger. Pension fund spokesman Dennis Tompkins said a request to redeem an initial $27 million was submitted to Falcone in January.

Harbinger requires investors in the flagship fund to give 90 days' notice before redeeming their money. Falcone has been returning about 25 percent of an investor's money in the fund each quarter -- meaning it can take up to a year for investors to fully exit Harbinger."

Source of Quotes Above ( My Words were in RED )

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68S5M320100929?=dbk

******

Links to Harbinger Capital Partners POSTS on the Curtis Lu - LightSquared Liability

http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/2010/10/harbinger-capital-partners-money-behind.html
Harbinger Capital Partners - Listens to Iviewit Technologies Call with Curtis Lu, now the General Counsel at Lightsquared and Harbinger Capital Partners KNOWS of the Liability.

Lightsquared - General Counsel Curtis Lu Named in SEC Complaint
https://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgvpzjzw_9ghxg4km9

http://www.ethicscomplaint.com/2010/10/curtis-lu-time-warner-general-counsel.html

www.JeffreyBewkes.com
Time Warner Inc. CEO Ignores
Massive Shareholder Fraud

www.DeniedPatent.com
more on the Iviewit Stolen Technology

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

Proskauer Rose Law Firm involved in Mass Cover Ups of Multi-Trillion Dollar Patent.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 02:22:00 +0000

"Where once caught stealing the patents, Proskauer Rose 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.

The counter complaint was denied to be allowed and in this civil billing case Proskauer Rose won through a default judgment after the judge dismissed two sets of Iviewit counsel and granted Proskauer Rose 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 Rose appears to have sued the companies they fraudulently set up to own the stolen patents.

That once caught stealing the patents, Proskauer Rose 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.

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.

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. 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.

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.

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 Rose learned of the inventions directly from the inventors?

In fact, Proskauer Rose 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 (Kenneth Rubenstein Deposition) and sworn statements to a civil court.

Where evidence shows Rubenstein's direct involvement, Kenneth Rubenstein is found to be a BIG FAT LIAR..

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 Rose and hosts of other evidence clearly showing his knowledge and involvement.

When confronted under deposition with such evidence, Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose LLP 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.

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).

Source and More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm

More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent
and the Massive Shareholder Fraud

www.DeniedPatent.com

www.Iviewit.TV

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

Perjured Deposition by Corrupt Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein - MPEG LA Corrupt Patent Pooling.

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Sat, 02 Oct 2010 22:53:00 +0000

Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt Patent Attorney from Proskauer Rose LLP - Working with MPEG LA. Kenneth Rubenstein Perjured himself in Depositions Regarding the Iviewit Technologies Patents in Which Kenneth Rubenstein was Directly Involved in Derailing the Rightful Inventors to Getting their Rightful Patent.

MPEG LA - with the Help of Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney, Pooled the Technology in patents and well the Iviewit Inventors NEVER got rights or any compensation for the Mult-Trillion Dollar Invention that WE ALL USE.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6 - Final

www.Iviewit.TV
For More on Iviewit

www.ProskauerSucks.com
more on Proskauer Rose Corruption

http://www.kennethrubenstein.com/
more on MPEG LA Corruption and Kenneth Rubenstein
Corrupt Patent Attorney.

posted by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Curtis Lu Time Warner Inc. General Counsel LEAVES without Disclosing Massive Liability to Time Warner Board and Shareholders

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Sat, 02 Oct 2010 21:28:00 +0000

Before Curtis Lu Left Time Warner, Curtis Lu Called Iviewit Founder Eliot Bernstein. How Much Risk Does Harbinger Capital Partners Investors Now Have ?

LightSquared now has Massive Liability in Curtis Lu as their General Counsel.

The Investors of Harbinger Capital Partners Will Pay the Price.

Do your Homework - it's YOUR Money ~ It's Your Life.

Curtis Lu Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) Contacts Eliot Bernstein April 15, 2010, after OVER a Decade in which Time Warner NEW of the Iviewit Technologies Massive Liability to the Time Warner Inc. and Related Companies.

Time Warner used this Technology and Continues
to VIOLATE Signed Agreements to This Day.

Time Warner has Violated Licensing Agreements with Iviewit Tech., and Violated NBA agreements. Curtis Lu - Time Warner IGNORES Massive Shareholder FRAUD then Conveniently Leaves Time Warner for the Harbinger Capital Partners - Philip Falcone investment of LightSquared.

Marc Garber of Flaster Greenberg and Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies Speaks with Curtis Lu of Time Warner Inc. About the RISK and Liability that Time Warner Faces over the Massive Fraud of the Stolen Iviewit Technology.

Curtis LU admitted he was familiar with the situation, and KNOWS all the Details and Liabilites and FAILED to Warn the Time Warner Board, Time Warner Shareholders.

"April 15, 2010 call prior to filing formal SEC Complaint and giving Time Warner a last chance to pay the true and proper inventor of Digital Imaging and Video Scaling Inventions and avoid further actions. "

After all is Said and Done, Curtis Lu Time Warner Inc. General Counsel - Now the General Counsel at Harbinger Capital Partners - Lightsquared.. well at the end Curtis Lu says he is Going to Go Back to His "Client" and Get THEIR "Reaction"

Well you Sure Gotta wonder what the Clients Reaction Was - I Mean that Next Month Curtis Lu went to some Convention where he talked about future issues and potential problems with Intellectual Property Rights - what a Joke that was.. and a few months later Curtis Lu, Time Warner Inc. Leaves Time Warner to be the General Counsel of Harbinger Capital Partners - Philip Falcone Multi-Billion Dollar Investment of a Company Called "Lightsquared" - which seems to think they will take over as the Leading Wireless, Internet Company in a couple of short years.

Ok so did Jeffrey Bewkes FIRE Curtis Lu, Time Warner Inc. - or Did They Cut a Deal where Curtis Lu would Leave with benefits and a good record? Did Jeff Bewkes WARN the Board of Directors at Time Warner Inc. or the Shareholders of Time Warner Inc. ?

WHO Did "Curtis Lu" - General Council of Time Warner actual "Get Back To?" and what did THEY really say to Curtis Lu, Time Warner Inc. General Counsel.

Curtis Lu is Involved in the SEC Complaint and Suit and will CERTAINLY call Eliot.. well Curtis Lu never did get back to Eliot. So What REALLY Happened?

Eliot Gave Time Warner, Curtis Lu Very Good Options and Well Curtis Lu was either FIRED or Simply Left Time Warner Inc. Right After This. Why? What is the REAL truth of Curtis Lu Leaving Time Warner for Philip Falcone - Harbinger Capital Partners, Star Investment LightSquared?

How Much Risk Does Harbinger Capital Partners Investors Now Have ?

Why is the NEW Time Warner General Counsel Paul T. Cappuccio IGNORING this Massive Shareholder Fraud and Failing to Disclose this Multi-Trillion Dollar Liability?

Well this is Massive Fraud and it is Easily PROVEN though Mary L. Schapiro the Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission seems to so far Ignore over 1200 documents and 10 years of proof, it is still proven and the Shareholders of Time Warner Inc., AOL, Warner Bros., Sony, Intel Corp., Lockheed Martin, IBM, and Many more will pay Trillions.. oh WEll Right .. Jeffrey Bewkes and Mary Schapiro and all the Others at the Top will not pay,odds are they have already hid their assets, I mean they have known this was coming for a VERY long time and STILL they sit on it. .the MOTIVE?

TO make sure they get THEIRS before the Investors / Shareholders take the inevitable financial hit that they will indeed take. .

So what did Jeffrey Bewkes, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer really have to say about the now famed call from Time Warner Inc. - General Counsel Curtis Lu to Eliot Bernstein Iviewit Founder and One of the Inventors of the Mult-Trillion Dollar Iviewit Technology that Time Warner has made Billions on Top of Billions on and all the while knowing they had STOLEN the Technology and Violated SIGNED agreements with Iviewit. Where is Jeffrey Bewkes, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer on this?

"Jeff Bewkes is Chairman and CEO of Time Warner Inc. He was elected Chairman of the Board of Directors in January 2009, having served on the Board since January 2007. He was elected CEO of the Company in January 2008. "

Jeff Bewkes KNOWS of Massive Fraud and Neglects to TELL the Time Warner Board. Jeff Bewkes is GUILTY of Massive Shareholder Fraud and WILL BE indicted. This is Criminal, this is Immoral and Folks.. there is over 1200 Documents of Proof on top of other massive information. This is Fact, Jeff Bewkes Time Warner KNOWS it and DOES nothing to Warner you THE board, the investors of Time Warner Inc. - Why?

Part 1 - Curtis Lu for Time Warner Inc.

Part 2 Curtis Lu - Time Warner General Counsel

Part 3 - Curtis Lu - Time Warner General Council FAILS
to Disclose Massive Shareholder Liability.

So Curtis Lu, Ask Yourself, How Much "Risk" - Liability did you Bring to Philip Falcone and to LightSquared which is raking in billions of investors money to be the NEW "internet network" that takes over all others.

Yet Curtis Lu is their General Council and is named in a Federal RICO Lawsuit and an SEC Complaint and KNOWS of a Mult-Trillion Dollar Shareholder Fraud involving his Former Employer Time Warner Inc. - Well Curtis Lu, Lightsqared General Counsel is Sure in Deep on this.

Time Warner Massive Liability - There is Proof that Time Warner Inc. was Infringing on this Technology, tons of the proof, and Yet Time Warner Inc. DOES not have This Liability Reported on the Books, WHY?

"We Should Have Been Disclosing?" - Curtis Lu asks.. GEE .. umm.. hmm..

"So Uh, are we.. uh is Time Warner a Defendent in all this? "

Time Warner Inc. has a Massive Undisclosed Liability...

So What Does the Time Warner Inc. Board have to Say about all this?

Jeffrey L. Bewkes
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Time Warner Inc.

James L. Barksdale
Chairman and President, Barksdale Management Corporation

William P. Barr
Former Attorney General of the United States

Stephen F. Bollenbach
Former Co-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Hilton Hotels Corporation

Frank J. Caufield
Co-Founder and Partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield &; Byers

Robert C. Clark
Distinguished Service Professor, Harvard University

Mathias Döpfner
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, Axel Springer AG

Jessica P. Einhorn
Dean, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), Johns Hopkins University

Fred Hassan
Former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Schering-Plough Corporation

Michael A. Miles
Special Limited Partner, Forstmann Little & Company

Kenneth J. Novack
Senior Counsel, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, PC

Deborah C. Wright
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, Carver Bancorp, Inc.

What Do the Senior Corporate Executives at Time Warner Have to Say?

Jeffrey L. Bewkes
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Paul T. Cappuccio
Executive Vice President and General Counsel

Patricia Fili-Krushel
Executive Vice President, Administration

Gary L. Ginsberg
Executive Vice President, Corporate Marketing and Communications

John K. Martin
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Carol A. Melton
Executive Vice President, Global Public Policy

Olaf Olafsson
Executive Vice President

Connected Time Warner Inc. Companies

Global Media Group, HBO - Home Box Office, Warner Bros. Entertainment,Time Inc., Turner Broadcasting System, AOL - ALL Liable for this Multi-Trillion Dollar Stolen Technology.

More Links to the Iviewit Stolen Technology Story

http://www.iViewit.tv/

http://www.DeniedPatent.com/

http://www.JeffreyBewkes.com/

Is the Corrupt Ex-Supreme Court Judith Kaye Ready to Come Clean on Covering for Proskauer Rose in the Iviewit Scandal?

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 20:35:00 +0000

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom in Pacifica, California is Googling - "Iviewit Inventors" .

So is Judith Kaye Googling "Iviewit Inventors" ?

This Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Search was VERY interested in MPEG LA, in Kenneth Rubenstein - hmmmm.. Now we KNOW for FACT that Judith Kaye appointed by Mario Cuomo and lot's of Favors Owed from Andrew Cuomo .. well she Covered Up in the New York Supreme Court for her Husband's Law Firm - the Corrupt Proskauer Rose LLP, as they RUINED the Lives of the "Iviewit Inventors" - So What's Up now.. Say around 11 YEARS Later..??

Corrupt Ex-Supreme Court Judge Judith Kaye Now of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom played every card she had to to Cover for Proskauer Rose - for Stephen Kaye .. for Steven Krane .. for MPEG LA and well no doubt in my mind that Judith Kaye and Family made Billions on this Multi-Trillion Dollar Patent Theft over the last Decade, meanwhile the "Iviewit Inventors" - Now Being Googled by "Judith Kaye" of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom - well the lives of the "Iviewit Inventors" - has been HELL to say the Least.. they have Been Subject to Economic Terrorism.. BIGTIME.. Lives Ruined, Cars Bombed, Some Stabbed ... and THOUGH there is over 1200 documents and recordings of PROOF.. well the US Courts at EVERY Level STILL protects Those who Stole the Invention of the "Iviewit Inventors" - So What is "Judith Kaye" of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom up to? Got a Tip - Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Also "Judith Kaye" of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom is interested in Posts on Raymond Joao - Why?

Links..
http://www.ethicscomplaint.com/2010/01/mpeg-proskauer-stealing-inventions-by.html
"William Dick was Raymond Joao's replacement" - William Dick and Judith Kaye were both at IBM and their Connection is Seriously in Conflict of Interest.
www.ProskauerSucks.com

www.RaymondJoao.com

www.KennethRubenstein.com

www.iViewit.tv

www.DeniedPatent.com

Intel Capital and McKinsey & Co.- Trillions in Fraud - All Roads Lead Back to Proskauer Rose - DO your HOMEWORK!!

noreply@blogger.com (Crystal L. Cox) — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:41:00 +0000

Intel Capital, McKinsey and Company, Galleon Group, Intel CEO Paul Otellini - my Whistleblower sites are lit up with searches connecting these folks.. so whats the deal.. All in on the Iview Stolen Patent that's a Given.. ( www.Iviewit.TV ) - However why isn't this old news.. Intel and Mckinsey in bed together and well How many More Billions did IBM executives, Intel Executives and IBM's Robert Moffat, Mckinsey Make off with ????

Why is those involved in the Iviewit Stolen Patent protected by the SEC and seemingly all Judicial Branches.. yet some incidents like the Galleon Fraud and the Standford Billions.. the Madoff millions.. surfaces.. ?? you Have to wonder if this kind of money is told to the public of FRAUD and Deception .. well how much did they cover up and what SEC attorney helped them.. as the Business Model shows that the Attorneys at the SEC favor certain law firms.. certain companies and often times get High Political Office after their Tenure at the SEC and / or cushy high paying jobs at the law firms that represented the company that the SEC "crony" is protecting... Suck as Proskauer Rose.. who seems to be involved in ALL these Multi-Billion dollar scandals. And Never seemed to be called to the mat on the fraud and corruption that they have enabled their clients to do.. little own the money they move Offshore for hte Clients that cheat the public and the SEC Crony helps them to accomplish this..

In a down economy Corruption still pays and Behind ALL Corruption in the Billions.. well I know this is generalizing and well it is my Opinion .. however.. it seems to me that All Billion - Trillion Dollar Corruption leads back to some lawyer at Proskauer Rose..

Proskauer Rose Law firm is the Elite of the Elite. .and well just like in the movies.. they have Deep Dark Secret.. Big Time Favors Owed.. Deadly Cover Ups.. faked deaths... fraud. .corruption and well they have connection in every political party, every court, every judical branch and process in the world and WELL above the Law is an understatement when it comes to the Magical Wall of Corruption that Proskauer Rose can Pull Off.

Proskauer Rose .. Business is Good.. why not work with the Law Firm that Controls the Government, Controls the Judges, the Ethics Committees, accesses or somehow controls billion dollar investments, can move money offshore for you, can get a car bomb in just the right location, can threaten witnesses to the Point of Silence.. .a Law Firm that can Control Internet Searches - Control the News... Pull of Trillion Dollar Patent Thefts such as the Iviewit Stolen Patent.. and Collapse Enron with False Investment Schemes.. Yet still the Lawyers.. the CEO's make off with Billions while hard working citizens drown in corporate elite favortism..

Just what Can't Proskauer Rose LLP pull off.. I mean a New General Counsel just months before the old one.. hmmm suddenly has a heart attack and dies.. hmmm. WHAT?

Just look at who works at Proskauer Rose, what connections and favors they bring.. and how this ties into stocks.. investments.. big money and big secrets. .now tie that into the Department of Jusice, the Attorney Bar, the SEC, the Patent Office and other Supposed agencies that are meant ot protect YOU.. that you Pay to protect you and yet they protect who Proskauer Rose Tells them to protect..

Yes my Opinion.. in which I have Because I Can Read. So Business is Good at Proskauer Rose .. and Intel Capital and McKinsey & Co Well you know that Proskauer Rose protected all .. to the best of their ability and well Of Course Proskauer Rose PROTECTS the ASS-ETS of Proskauer Rose...

Warner Bros. Fraud. Warner Bros. Shareholder Fraud. iViewit Technology Theft.

Anti-Corruption Blogger Crystal Cox Says, a Bit About the iViewit Technology Court Case. Crystal Cox regarding the Eliot Bernstein Story, and Justice for the iViewit Inventors

Lonnie Davis Department of Justice Regarding Vehicle Tampering by Marrone Volvo/Autonation/Huizenga Holdings, Volvo Cars of North America and Volvo of Sweden. IViewit Technologies Eliot Bernstein

Sony Pictures Entertainment Constantly Researching my Blogs Regarding John Calkins and iViewit. Yes, your Involved, time to come clean

Navigation Path

Proskauer Rose LLP, Proskauer Law Firm, Proskauer Rose, Chadbourne and others Charged with Conspiracy and Fraud.. IViewit is Next. 13 Trillion Dollar Scandal, USPTO, DOJ, SEC, knows of Massive Shareholder Fraud.

Ian Duggan - Anything Social Researching iViewit

Navigation Path

Iviewit Court Docket, iViewIt Technologies, - Eliot Bernstein et al v. Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee et al, Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction: Federal Question

U.S. District CourtSouthern District of New York (Foley Square)CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:07-cv-11196-SAS

Kim Dotcom, Mega Upload, Warner Bros. Steals iViewit Inventions, Uses for Over a Decade for FREE and has the Nerve to Complain about Kim Dotcom of MegaUpload? Kim Schmitz, King Kimble.

What Does Head Guy at Proskauer Rose Law Firm, Joseph Leccese have to say about Raymond Joao and connections to Proskauer Rose over the Iviewit Scandal ?

Raymond Anthony Joao

Joseph Leccese, Proskauer Rose knows full well of major liability over iViewit Scandal. Joseph Leccese chooses to harass blogger as Solution to dealing with Corrupt Proskauer Rose Attorneys.

James Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ernst & Young Fails to Disclose Massive Shareholder Fraud.

NASDAQ:INTC - Open Letter to Intel Corp Board of Directors and INTC Shareholders over Massive INTC Liability.

MPEG LA, DVD Licensing, Toshiba - Letter From DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - JOEL I. KLIEN of the Antitrust Division

Eliot Bernstein Testimony New York Senate Judiciary on Iviewit Scandal, Cover Ups, and Corruption.

Iviewit Commercial from Archives. Ellen DeGeneres Testimony - Iviewit Technologies Explained

Ex-Supreme Court Judge Judith Kaye is Corrupt and Helped Proskauer Rose Committ Patent Theft and Massive Fraud.

Foley and Larder Patent Attorney Committ Massive Fraud and is Protected by US Courts.

Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney for MPEG LA - Involves Attorney Raymond Anthony Joao.

SEC Complaint AGAINST Time Warner, Warner Bros. - Jeffrey Bewkes, Curtis Lu - Massive Shareholder Fraud. Still NOT Disclosed to Shareholders.

Massive Liabilities exist for Warner Bros. for their involvement in criminal RICO and ANTITRUST activities over Iviewit Scandal

Philip Falcone, Harbinger Capital Partners about to get Billions Recalled over the Lightsquared - Curtis Lu Scandal.

Proskauer Rose Law Firm involved in Mass Cover Ups of Multi-Trillion Dollar Patent.

Perjured Deposition by Corrupt Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein - MPEG LA Corrupt Patent Pooling.

Curtis Lu Time Warner Inc. General Counsel LEAVES without Disclosing Massive Liability to Time Warner Board and Shareholders

Is the Corrupt Ex-Supreme Court Judith Kaye Ready to Come Clean on Covering for Proskauer Rose in the Iviewit Scandal?

Intel Capital and McKinsey & Co.- Trillions in Fraud - All Roads Lead Back to Proskauer Rose - DO your HOMEWORK!!

U.S. District Court
Southern District of New York (Foley Square)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:07-cv-11196-SAS