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.

"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/

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

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/

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

"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...

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

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

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

"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.

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

Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Patent Attorney at Proskauer Rose Law Firm CONSPIRES with MPEG LA to Commit Massive Fraud and Anti-Trust Violations

MPEG-LA hit by antitrust suit over video codecs. Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Patent Attorney Proskauer Rose DOES it Again...

MPEG LA has been in the Illegal - Unethical
Patent Pooling Business for Years.

Proskauer Rose Law Firm has made a Living and Lifetime Business of Billion Dollar Corruption Schemes and screwing over investors. And Well Proskauer Rose's Patent Department has a Billion Dollar Patent Pooling Scheme going on with the help of Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein and the Illegal, Secret Patent Pool technology Stealing Schemes of MPEG LA.

Corrupt Law Firm ... Proskauer Rose Corrupt Law Firm...

MPEG-LA hit by antitrust suit over video codecs - MPEG LA is Corrupt, it is my understand that MPEG LA Stole a Trillion Dollar Patent with the Aid of Corrupt Law Firms, Tech Companies, Patent Attorneys and Executives

"MPEG-LA hit by antitrust suit over video codecs

German software maker Nero has filed an antitrust complaint against MPEG-LA, the company that oversees licensing for the H.264 video codec favoured by Microsoft and Apple.

MPEG-LA (MPEG Licensing Authority) controls the licenses for the pools of patents needed to use the MPEG-2, MPEG-4 and AVC/H.264 video standards.

As such, it collects royalties from the sale or distribution of almost every PC, DVD, DVD player, digital TV set, TV set-top box, still camera, video camera, iPhone and BlackBerry in the world.

Nero, best known for its CD burning software, alleges that MPEG-LA abuses its monopoly power in these technology markets.

The company filed its antitrust complaint in California district court in Los Angeles on 14 May, seeking unspecified monetary damages and an injunction to halt the alleged anti-competitive actions.

"Absolute power has corrupted MPEG-LA absolutely,"

Nero maintained in its complaint.

"Once MPEG-LA obtained monopoly power in the relevant technology markets, it used that power to wilfully maintain or extend its monopolies for years beyond their natural expiration... and administer its licences in an unfair, unreasonable, and discriminatory manner that stifles competition and innovation, and harms consumers."

MPEG-LA charges licensees different amounts for the same MPEG-2 patent, collects administration fees and royalties multiple times for the same device, and does not communicate its policies adequately to certain licensees, according to Nero.

"By remaining silent on vital aspects of its licensing programs, MPEG-LA has created a system that favours some licensees, such as insiders (ie, licensors), and disfavours others, such as outsiders (ie, non-licensor licensees)," Nero's complaint read.

"As a result, outsiders such as Nero have great difficulty planning technology changes and embarking on programmes to research, develop and implement technological innovations — and are charged supracompetitive royalties on distributions as to which they never agreed to pay royalties — while other licensees, such as insiders, do not face such problems."

According to Nero's complaint, MPEG-LA only obtained monopoly power in the relevant audio and video codec markets after getting assurances in 1997 that the Department of Justice (DoJ) would not launch antitrust proceedings against it.

These assurances were conditional on patent pools not being used to stifle competition, Nero stated. It added that MPEG-LA suggested to the DoJ at the time that the pool for MPEG-2 contained no more than 53 essential patents.

MPEG-LA subsequently added around 800 patents it deemed to be essential to the MPEG-2 pool, so as to extend the duration of the codec's licence, Nero said.

The company did the same thing with the MPEG-4 pool, which now includes more than 1,000 patents, and the AVC/H.264 pool, now with over 1,300 patents, according to the filing.

AVC/H.264 is the video codec of choice for Microsoft, which will support it natively in Internet Explorer 9, and for Apple, which is backing it as a superior alternative to Flash.

While Google also supports H.264 in Chrome, it recently open-sourced its own alternative, VP8, in a bid to provide a free alternative to the proprietary and paid-for H.264.

As part of its complaint, Nero said that MPEG-LA used its own patent counsel, Kenneth Rubenstein, as "a so-called 'independent' expert" to evaluate the essentiality of patents.

MPEG-LA had not responded at the time of writing to a request on Tuesday for comment on Nero's allegations. The next stage in the case will be for MPEG-LA to answer Nero's complaint. ""

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2010/05/25/mpeg-la-hit-by-antitrust-suit-over-video-codecs-40089042/

Lets See How German Tech Companies Handle the Corrupt,
UnEthical and Illegal Behavior of MPEG LA....

Ok so a Decade after Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt MPEG LA - Proskauer Rose Law Firm Patent Attorney, helped MPEG LA to steal the Holy Grail of Video / Technology inventions in which we all use every day and have for years upon years, well now this same Corrupt Patent Attorney is involved in more patent theft and illegal patent pool... why is Proskauer Rose standing with Kenneth Rubenstein?

I mean Christopher Wheeler was involved in this stolen patent and he was pushed out.. Kenneth Rubenstein was not even at Proskauer Rose when he first started his patent theft FOR MPEG LA to illegally pool the iviewit technologies in patent pools to hide their existence.. then Corrupt Law Firm Proskauer Rose hired Kenneth Rubenstein after he already lied to the Iviewit Company and said that he was with Proskauer Rose.. so Corrupt Law Firm - Proskauer Rose must be getting billions from MPEG LA dirty dealings or they would not have harbored a CRIMINAL for so long.. also see.. Proskauer ROSE was the reason for the Fall of Enron with this patent .. this technology theft.. and no accountable?

Well that day has come... Unless of Course Corrupt Proskauer Rose also owns judges, ethics committees, supreme courts, and patent officials in Germany as Well as the US?

I will discuss a WHOLE lot more about MPEG LA, Kenneth Rubenstein and Proskauer ROSE and the Horrible Injustice, Flat Out Fraud, Shareholder Deception, and more that surrounds MPEG LA - Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Patent Attorney STEALING a Trillion Dollar Technology and Illegally Pooling this Technology in MPEG patent Pools.. all orchestrated by ONE very Corrupt Patent attorney Kenneth Rubenstein..

PS don't forget.. MPEG and APPLE are seeming quite cozy and Bruce Sewell knew about Iviewit .. while at Intel and when informed went to APPLE.. more on that later..

Collecting Royalties from Stolen Technologies and Illegal Patent Pooling,
What an Incredible Racket... Billions hand over Fist on Someone Else's Invention .. and many of these inventors are harassed, bankrupted, their cars bombed and well just plain ol' SHUT Up..

Here are some Sites for more information in the iViewit Stolen Technology and the Illegal Patent Pooling Tricks and Schemes at MPEG LA with the Help of Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein that has created Massive Shareholder Fraud that is now a High Profile SEC Complaint and a Federal RICO Lawsuit .. still undisclosed to unsuspecting shareholders of IBM, Intel Corp, AOL, Time Warner Inc. , Lockheed Martin, Warner Bros. , SGI, and More involved in the Blatant Theft of a Trillion Dollar Technology that We all used Every Day...

www.Iviewit.TV

www.DeniedPatent.com
www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

Proskauer Rose bio Clip on Kenneth Rubenstein"


" Kenneth Rubenstein is co-head of the Patent Law Group and a Partner in the New York office. He also is a registered patent attorney before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office and a former member of the legal staff at Bell Laboratories. While there are numerous patent law groups at various firms, Ken and his group distinguish themselves from competitors by being able to deal with very sophisticated technology. "


Source
http://www.proskauer.com/professionals/Detail.aspx?professional=0eae1af8-e822-4a75-9414-d8ee3f87e890&tabId=0


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

more on the MPEG LA stealing and pooling patents
.. at www.iViewit.tv/
and at www.DeniedPatent.com

MPEG LA is a still in Business? How? Illegal Patent Pooling? Participating in Technology theft with Proskauer Rose and Still In Business??

It is not accusations, or speculation. .. it is Cold Hard Facts that MPEG LA pools patents that they have NO RIGHT to and then sells licensing agreements to patents they have no legal right to do so. Look at the www.IViewit.TV website and you will see that Proskauer Rose - Kenneth Rubenstein helped MPEG LA to steal the Iviewit Technologies Patent and to pool this technology with other patents to cover up a Trillion Dollar Fraud...

MPEG LA has been covering up this Trillion Dollar Technology Fraud for around a decade, and MPEG LA has certainly created massive fraud to investors and those who own stock in technology companies and all kinds of companies in which use the Iviewit Technology Illegally.

Question is How Long Will MPEG LA be able to cover up their lies and deceit? How long will license holders, tech companies and all using these Patent Pools buy into the MPEG LA scandal?

Some MPEG LA Bull in the News and Blogs..

""Per Section 3.1.2 of the AVC License (Title-by-Title AVC Video), the royalty for each title greater than 12 minutes in length is 2.0 percent of the remuneration paid to the Licensee or $0.02 per title, whichever is lower. In other words, the royalty would not exceed $0.02 per disc for the videographer," said MPEG LA spokesman Tom O'Reilly.

But practical matters also factor into the likelihood of actual enforcement--for example in the situation in which a Windows 7 user watches H.264 video.

"Realistically, it's unlikely that a consumer who unwittingly plays a video clip from an unlicensed source is going to be pursued by MPEG-LA or by patent owners. The legal framework for patent damages is different than it is in the copyright area, so you're not likely to see lawsuits against ordinary consumers, like some of the highly publicized suits filed by the RIAA [Recording Industry of America] in the United States," Homiller said.

Another way where professionals can get off the hook for payments is if the video is broadcast for free over the Internet. Earlier this year, MPEG LA extended through 2015 a provision that means streaming H.264 video over the Net requires no royalty payments as long as anyone can see the video without paying.

Ultimately, for the license terms one sees in software, MPEG LA errs on the side of sounding tough.

"The purpose of the provision in the MPEG LA license is to ensure that the license doesn't cover commercial distribution of H.264-encoded video," Homiller said. "It would be nice if there were a 'gentler' way to convey this, but it might be challenging to do so without opening up some loopholes that the licensers would regret.""

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20000101-264.html?tag=mncol
Seems to me that MPEG LA is pretty high and mighty and throwing their weight around on patents and technology rights that MPEG LA Really has no Right to.

MPEG LA Charging Royalties - what a Joke... Look Deeper Folks - Knowledge is Power.

""Apple is missing because it put its full support behind another video codec, H.264. H.264 is not an open standard. H.264 is free to use for the next five years, but after that MPEG LA plans on charging a royalty for using it.

It is a proprietary standard, owned by a consortium of tech companies called MPEG LA. Apple and Microsoft have both contributed patents to MPEG LA, so they are part of the consortium.""

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/05/20/businessinsider-google-apple-webm-vp8-h264-2010-5.DTL#ixzz0oZy83rPY
This article is interesting in that Apple and MPEG LA seem to be in bed together .. hmmm on Trillions of Dollars in Video licensing and technology schemes... it is my understanding that Bruce Sewell was at Intel as their general council when Kenneth Rubenstein - Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney participated in MPEG LA illegally pooling the iViewit stolen Technologies into MPEG LA Patent Pools - in connection with Warner Bros. - Time Warner Inc.

Bruce Sewell then General council of Intel knew of the Fraud against the Iviewit Technologies Inventors and his solution seemed to be to do nothing, there by aiding and abetting Illegal activity and Massive Shareholder Fraud on the shareholders of Intel and in turn the shareholders of Time Warner Inc. , Warner Bros. and on AOL - which has massive financial consequences to the shareholders and insurance providers and to this day has not been disclosed.. though Jeffrey Bewkes CEO and Curtis Lu General Counsel are fully aware of this Massive Fraud on the Shareholders.

Anyway Bruce Sewell left Intel under very odd circumstance... and well I believe that Bruce Sewell had more than just General Council Skills to bring to the table when Bruce Sewell went to Apple... and now it seems that Apple and MPEG are very close even to the point of going up against google together.. hmmmm..

Bruce Sewell Knew... Click Below
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090306%20Intel%20Demand%20Letter%20&%20Liability%20Exposure%20%20Signed%203549l.pdf

More on this connection at http://www.deniedpatent.com/ and at http://www.brucesewell.com/ as well as http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/ and http://www.ceopaulotellini.com/

MPEGLA claims to Be Revolutionizing Intellectual Property Rights Management

What Does this Mean Really? If you go to www.Iviewit.TV or www.DeniedPatent.com you see that MPEGLA is creating HUGE shareholder Liability, involved in connection with patent theft and Fraud on the USPTO and has Stolen Technology from the Rightful Inventors and to me this is certainly not to be touted as "Revolutionizing Intellectual Property Rights" - it is Flat Out Lying about and Stealing Intellectual Property Rights.

http://www.mpegla.com/main/Pages/About.aspx
MPEG LA says they are "Preparing the market for mass adoption" what does that really mean, check out the link about and KNOW there is a Whole Lot more Behind the Kind of Business that MPEG LA Does.


MPEG LA has been named in an SEC Scandal that creates Massive Shareholder Liability and Fraud. MPEGLA LLC. has been accused of illegal patent pooling, being part of stealing a Trillion Dollar Patent and of putting shareholders at possible Massive Financial Damage...

Click Here for SEC Report on MPEG LA

MPEG LA Court Case Googled by Electronics Nederland B.V.

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Electronics Nederland B.V. (80.127.166.83)

Why?
Email Me at Crystal@CrystalCox.com
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

Baryn Futa - MPEG LA - Googling Baryn Futa

MPEG LA So Darned Interested... and Searching Baryn Futa
you know why ? Email Me.. Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Investigative Blogger...

MPEGLA LLC - Sony - Columbia University - Fujitsu Limited - Lucent Technologies Inc. - Matsushita - Mitsubishi - Philips - Scientific Atlanta

Columbia University; Fujitsu Limited; General Instrument Corp; Lucent Technologies Inc.; Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.; Mitsubishi Electric Corp.; Philips Electronics N.V. (Philips); Scientific Atlanta, Inc.; Sony Corp. (Sony);

EXTENDED LIST OF MPEGLA LICENSEES AND LICENSORS; any other John Doe MPEGLA, LLC. Partner, Associate, Engineer, Of Counsel or Employee; any other John Doe ("John Doe") MPEGLA, LLC partners, affiliates, companies, known or not known at this time; including but not limited to MPEGLA, LLC and any other MPEGLA, LLC related or affiliated entities both individually and professionally.

Hereinafter, collectively referred to as ("MPEGLA").

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/rico/CRIME%20ORG%20CHARTS%201.htm
MPEGLA LLC

MPEGLA PATENT EVALUATOR - KENNETH RUBENSTEIN OF PROSKAUER ROSE

MPEGLA PATENT EVALUATOR - KENNETH RUBENSTEIN OF PROSKAUER ROSE ORDERED FOR INVESTIGATION BY THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK - UNANIMOUS ORDER BY 5 JUSTICES OF THE FIRST DEPARTMENT FOR CONFLICT AND APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2008%2011%20new%20york%20first%20department%20orders%20investigation%20Krane%20Rubenstein%20Joao.pdf


WHO IS THE MPEG LA ATTORNEY AND

SOLE PATENT EVALUATOR FOR THE MPEG PATENT POOL???

AND

A PROSKAUER ROSE LLP ATTORNEY, IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DIVISION OF PROSKAUER FORMED IMMEDIATELY AFTER LEARNING OF THE IVIEWIT INVENTIONS?

AND

FORMER IVIEWIT PATENT COUNSEL?

AND

A FORMER IVIEWIT BOARD MEMBER?

AND

AN IVIEWIT SHAREHOLDER?

AND

WHAT DO ALL THESE HAVE IN COMMON?

MEET KENNETH RUBENSTEIN, ESQ.

OF PROSKAUER ROSE LLP

MPEGLA PATENT EVALUATOR

Enter the Law Firm Proskauer Rose - Christopher Clarke Wheeler of Proskauer Rose "Protecting Intellectual Property" - What a Joke.

"First on the scene of these Historical Inventions in Boca Raton, Florida, Christopher Clarke Wheeler of Proskauer, Proskauer Rose was then retained for protecting the Intellectual Properties, including protecting them worldwide via Patents, Trademarks, Trade-Secrets and Copyrights. For example, Wheeler misrepresented to the Iviewit companies that attorney Kenneth Rubenstein was a Partner at Proskauer when introducing him.

Yet, to the contrary, investors found Kenneth Rubenstein was instead at the law firm of Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolfe & Schlissel ( Meltzer ) on Long Island at the time, Kenneth Rubenstein , now one of the many named Defendants in my Twelve Trillion dollar RICO and Anti-Trust suit “legally related” to Anderson. Why would Proskauer misrepresent that Rubenstein was a partner who would protect the properties when in fact he was with another firm?

The answer revolves around the fact that Proskauer at the time of learning of the inventions had NO Patent or Intellectual Property Department and was mainly a real estate law firm. If they were planning from the start to steal the “Holy Grail” technologies, they would need a patent department to monetize the royalties for themselves.

Turns out that Kenneth Rubenstein, an attorney admitted and regulated by the NYS First Dept, while at Meltzer, simultaneously was involved with the MPEGLA Patent Pool that he was in house counsel for and one of the founders of the MPEGLA pooling scheme.

Proskauer then set about to find for their benefit, not their clients benefit, Rubenstein, to apply the technologies to the MPEGLA patent pools and more for themselves. After finding Rubenstein, Proskauer introduced him as Proskauer’s Partner for the Oversight and Protection of the Inventions and the main IP Litigator who would get the IP protected and then placed in the MPEGLA pools for royalties to the Iviewit investors.

Misrepresented Proskauer partner Raymond Joao was retained to complete the Intellectual Property filing work in the US and every country around the world for IP protections.

Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao thought initially to be Proskauer Rose partners in New York working to protect the Iviewit Inventions took invention disclosures from the inventors, opined on the technologies under Proskauer’s retainer for services at the time, while they were actually working on the MPEGLA Patent Pools at Meltzer and were not with Proskauer Rose at all.

Once investors discovered Proskauer’s misrepresentation of Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao as Proskauer partners, when instead with the law firm Meltzer, Kenneth Rubenstein quickly switched firms to Proskauer Rose LLP.

Christopher Wheeler claiming that Proskauer ROse was in the process of acquiring Kenneth Rubenstein and virtually overnight Kenneth Rubenstein jumped ship with almost the entire Meltzer IP group to Proskauer Rose.

Details of Kenneth Rubenstein’s transfer were not clear to Rubenstein or Wheeler in their depositions related to these matters; in fact, Rubenstein was even unclear as to the terms of his partnership deal.

The net result of these fraudulent misrepresentations was that it now gave Proskauer, Iviewit Patent Counsel, control of the MPEGLA patent pooling schemes, putting Proskauer in direct competition with Iviewit via control of MPEGLA.

MPEGLA now the largest infringer of the Iviewit technologies through this massive Conflict of Interest created by Violations of Virtually All Attorney Conduct Codes and Law by the Attorneys.

A Conflict of Interest almost surreal in nature since attorneys are typically retained as “trusted” advisors considering there are supposed to be very strict federal Patent Bar and State Bar Association rules that presumably prevent lawyers and law firms from these type of conflicts with their trusting clients.

Raymond Joao on the other hand, also misrepresented as Kenneth Rubenstein’s Proskauer Partner and filing lackey was also instead working with Rubenstein at the Meltzer firm but he did not transfer from Meltzer to Proskauer Rose with Kenneth Rubenstein and the rest of the Meltzer team. Raymond Joao was to transfer to Proskauer Rose after cleaning up loose ends at Meltzer according to Wheeler.

Yet, Raymond Joao never made it that far, as within the first year of his work on the IP, it became learned that Joao might have been patenting inventions in his own name, inventions learned under disclosure and retainer with Iviewit and the Inventors.

Proskauer Rose and Christopher Wheeler confronted with the initial rumors that Raymond Joao, their operate, was filing patents wrongly on behalf of the Inventors and perhaps the right ones for himself instead. Wheeler of Proskauer volunteered to investigate Joao and was then further retained and billed for investigating the initial allegations that Joao was missing filings for Iviewit while busy patenting them in his name.

Raymond Joao the attorney Proskauer Rose referred and retained for Iviewit whom they had misrepresented to Investors and Board Members initially as a Proskauer partner, never made the conversion to Proskauer, terminated by Proskauer from Iviewit and then Raymond Joao left Meltzer and took a new position with now recently Convicted Felon Marc S. Dreier ( Dreier ). Marc Dreier convicted in a Ponzi scheme second only to that of Bernard Madoff ( Madoff ) and Sir Robert Allen Stanford ( Stanford ).

While advising the Iviewit companies on the Intellectual Properties, which posed a competitive threat to MPEGLA, including possible extinction of the MPEGLA pool without a license from Iviewit; Rubenstein, Proskauer and Meltzer then failed to put up a China Wall to protect the Inventions from this MASSIVE Conflict of Interest between Proskauer, Rubenstein and Proskauer’s new client MPEGLA & Iviewit.

Instead, they did the exact opposite and allowed MPEGLA to use the IP for their benefit while using Anti-Competitive Monopolistic practices to eliminate the Inventors and the Iviewit Companies and Shareholders. Perhaps, Joao’s 90+ patents were to be included in the MPEGLA patent pooling scheme by Kenneth Rubenstein, so that royalties could then be shared disproportionately with other inventors in the pool, 90+ patents giving a large share of the divided license royalties from the pool.

With Kenneth Rubenstein as Patent Counsel and the sole Patent Gatekeeper to the MPEGLA IP pools, it would be a no brainer, if Joao had not happened to get caught and a snowball of other crimes began surfacing at about the same time which led to uncovering evidence of a massive criminal enterprise operating within and controlling certain government agencies, law enforcement agencies and courts.

No wonder the Justice Department has historically broken up patent pooling schemes using Anti-Trust regulations, as this form of pooling works to deny ma and pa inventors of their Article 1, Sec 8, Clause 8, inventor rights.

Intellectual Property Rights protected at the top of the Constitution, I quote,

United States Constitution Article 1, Sec 8, Clause 8

The Congress shall have power To…Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

These Inventor Protections are the cornerstone of Free Commerce in the United States. In the past, allegations of pooling schemes actually in the business of murdering inventors to steal their inventions or other such heinous crimes discovered have led to the breakup of patent pools like RCA’s and Singer Sewing’s in order to protect inventors.

Typically Inventors need Constitutional Protection, the only civil job protected explicity by the Constitution, is due to corporations attempting to deny royalties through heavy handed methods not ones lawyers trying to steal their clients inventions. "

Source of This Post
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:ktIVkVh6K68J:www.iviewit.tv/20091005%2520NY%2520Judiciary%2520Committee%2520Prepared%2520Statement.doc+site://www.iviewit.tv+Reardon&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Proskauer ROse Sucks

Trillion Dollar Patent Heist.

Proskauer Rose Sucks