objections filed by Special Counsel Ropes & Gray
"MOTION TO COMPEL DISQUALIFICATION OF SDNY BANKRUTCY JUDGE MARTIN GLENN 28 USC 455 AND OTHER
SGI, hereinafter the Debtors, herein, filed for Ch. 11 Bankruptcy Protection on April 1, 2009 several months after emerging from a prior Ch. 11 case.
More importantly, however, is that SGI’s filing in Ch. 11 on April 1, 2009 came within 6 days of the filing of a formal SEC complaint by myself against the Intel Corporation announcing a Trillion Dollar fraud to the SEC also involving Debtors SGI as well thru a Company which was mutually owned by Intel and SGI along with Lockheed Martin called Real3d Inc of Orlando, Florida.
That company Real3d Inc. is at the heart and central of a host of investigations and complaints as well as having been under signed NDA with myself and the Iviewit technologies dating back to 1998 or so.
The alleged “sales” transactions between Intel, the Debtors SGI, and Lockheed Martin involving Real3d Inc. were expressly made a part of the Formal SEC Complaint filed on March 25, 2009, 6 days before the SGI bankruptcy on April 1, 2009.
As referenced in my Emergency Motion filed April 9, 2009, In House General Counsel for Debtors SGI Evelyn Ramirez was expressly placed on notice of the formal SEC Intel Real3d Inc and related complaint on March 25, 2009 just days before the Ch. 11 filing herein.
Despite this express notice on March 25, 2009, the April 1, 2009 Ch. 11 filing wholly failed to List the claims of Eliot Bernstein and related claims herein amounting to a Fraud in filing by SGI upon which THIS Court, SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn, was duly noticed.
SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn was further upon direct Notice as of April 9, 2009 with my Emergency filing of the existence of ongoing and open investigations involving multiple federal offices including at the USPTO where Harry Moatz, Director of the OED of the USPTO and a federal official had specifically directed me to file Fraud against the USPTO. Further, Moatz assembled a team of patent office officials to work with myself to file to remove all former counsel from the applications and respond to outstanding issues to move the IP into a suspended status.
After review of the allegations, the Commissioner of Patents then Suspended various Patent applications herein pending investigation relating to the Trillion Dollar Technologies at issue.
Inventor change forms filed to change the fraudulent inventors and certain IP that has falsified inventors were not changeable without an Act of Congress to change existing USPTO privacy policies, Senator Dianne Feinstein has been reviewing these matters, as well as, members of the House Judiciary Committee.
SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn was further placed on express notice of actions by the Office of Inspector General Glenn A. Fine of the US DOJ, pending matters with the OPR of the FBI and the federal whistleblower case of Christine Anderson now heading to trial in the Southern District of NY which my Amended Complaint at the US District Court was marked legally “related” to by District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin.
SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Glenn was further on direct notice that the Debtors SGI had simultaneously moved at the time of filing Ch. 11 on April 1, 2009 to simultaneously Employ as Special Counsel the law firm of Davis Polk Wardell (DPW) and Ropes and Gray, LLP by an application filed on such date by Ropes and Gray, LLP including a Declaration by William Kelly of DPW and that DPW was simultaneously representing the Lockheed Martin Corporation and SGI, the Debtors herein, both of whom were Equity owners in Real3d Inc which was under signed NDA with my technologies and at the heart of my complaints and investigations herein.
Most shockingly, the Declaration of DPW attorney William Kelly places Mr. Kelly as an Inside Officer at SGI during ALL of the Relevant initial years of the Technologies theft with SGI and Real3d Inc. and later as Outside counsel for SGI while at DPW who simultaneously represents Lockheed Martin, the other Company with Intel at the heart of the Technology thefts with Real3dInc and violations of signed NDAs.
Thus, Clear Facial Conflicts appeared on the Records and Dockets of these proceedings certainly as of the date of my Emergency Motion filing on April 9, 2009 and thus SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn should be charged with knowledge of such conflicts as of at least April 9, 2009.
Additional specified conflicts made in writing prior to the Sept. 15, 2009 hearing which have been knowingly, deliberately and intentionally disregarded as part of the wall of conflicts machinery of RICO activity in legal proceedings include DPW further simultaneously representing Lockheed, SGI owners in Real3d Inc, while also simultaneously representing the Financial Accountants KPMG employed by SGI in this Ch. 11 bankruptcy while further representing other major companies under NDA with my technologies such as CIBC and Morgan Stanley creating conflict within conflict herein.
It is noted for Historical reference at this time that the Formal SEC complaint filed in March of 2009 expressly referenced failures to follow FASB No. 5 and similar Accounting Rules in this Trillion dollar fraud.
As of the filing of my Emergency Motion on April 9, 2009, the Nation ( United States ) has heard almost daily reports of Financial Fraud and related investigations after the collapse of Wall Street, the $65 Billion plus Madoff fraud, and $8 Billion Stanford fraud and more while Davis Polk Wardell simultaneously represents multiple players in the Wall Street debacle and most interestingly Recruited and Hired back to DPW former head of Enforcement at the SEC Linda Chatman Thomsen who left the SEC under fire for the failures that lead to the $65Billion Madoff fraud. Such facts involving the Madoff and SEC and Linda Chatman Thomsen matter were of such public knowledge that SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn should be presumed to have taken judicial notice herein. Published sources claim that Linda Thomsen was recruited back to DPW in April 2009 shortly after my filings herein.
Many threads tie together several of these financial schemes with the Iviewit technologies and companies, including Madoff, Dreier and Stanford, as pled in my federal RICO case, fully incorporated herein by reference, US 2nd Circ. Docket No. ( 08-4873-cv ) Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al. and USDC SDNY Docket No. ( 07cv11196 ) Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al."
Source and Full Document
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=76
For More Information
http://deniedpatent.blogspot.com/search?q=Silicon+Graphics
Thursday, May 26, 2016
Friday, May 8, 2015
Accepted as True, Statements Regarding Eliot Bernstein and the iViewit Video Technology Invention
"1. Development and Theft of the Video Technology
The story begins in 1997, when plaintiff Eliot Bernstein and others3 invented video technologies (the "Inventions").4 The Inventions permit transmission of video signals using significantly less bandwidth than other technologies.5 They also provide a way to "zoom almost infinitely on a low resolution file with clarity,"6 something that is generally believed to be impossible. The Inventions were quickly incorporated into "almost every digital camera and present screen display device" and they "played a pivotal part in changing the Internet from a text based medium to a medium filled with magnificent images and video, thought prior to be impossible on the limited bandwidth of the Internet."7 They are also used by DVDs, televisions, cable television broadcasting, certain *44 websites, and "chips," presumably integrated circuits"
In 1998, Bernstein's accountant, Gerald R. Lewin, suggested that Bernstein contact Albert T. Gortz, an attorney at Proskauer Rose LLP, regarding the Inventions.9 Gortz, an estate planner, put Bernstein in contact with Proskauer partner Christopher C. Wheeler, a real estate attorney, who told Bernstein that he would determine whether Proskauer's New York office had partners with appropriate experience in patent law.10 Several weeks later, they represented that partners Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond A. Joao would secure patents for the Inventions and would perform other trademark, trade secret, and copyright work.11 Apparently impressed by the Inventions, Proskauer agreed to accept 2.5% of the equity of Iviewit, Inc., the company that owned the Inventions, in return for its services.12 Unbeknownst to Bernstein, Rubenstein and Joao did not at the time work for Proskauer.13 Rubenstein subsequently joined Proskauer, but Joao *55 remained at the firm Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolf Schlissel, P.C. ("MLG")
Rubenstein was also counsel to MPEGLA LLC, one of the largest users of the Inventions. When he was hired by Proskauer, MPEGLA became Proskauer's client. MPEGLA bundled the Inventions in with other technologies that they license, but did not pay Iviewit any royalties.15 In fact, plaintiffs allege that Rubenstein was part of a scheme to steal the Inventions.16 Apparently as part of this scheme, Joao filed for more than ninety related patents in his own name.17 Then, to mask the theft, Proskauer created numerous *454454 illegitimate companies with names similar to that of Iviewit in various jurisdictions (the "Similar Companies").18 Proskauer filed defective patent applications for Iviewit and valid applications for the Similar Companies.
Proskauer then brought in representatives from Real (a consortium that at the time comprised Intel; Silicon Graphics, Inc.; and Lockheed Martin, and *66 that was later acquired by Intel).20 Real made use of the Inventions without first arranging for a license from Iviewit.21 Proskauer required Real and other interested parties to sign non-disclosure agreements, but did not enforce these agreements
Proskauer also distributed the Inventions to Enron Broadband. Enron "booked enormous revenue through [Enron Broadband] without a single movie to distribute," but because they lost use of the Inventions, the deal "collapsed over night causing massive losses to Enron investors" — indeed, plaintiffs allege that this may be "one of the major reasons for Enron's bankruptcy
Meanwhile, Proskauer pursued investors for the Similar Companies. Using fraudulent documents, they secured millions of dollars from the Small Business Administration, Goldman Sachs, Gruntal Co., Wachovia Securities, and various others, 24 including defendant Huizenga Holdings, Inc.25 Plaintiffs also *77 allege that in March of 2001, the Tiedemann Investment Group ("TIG") invested several hundred thousand dollars in the Similar Companies.26 Plaintiffs suggest that some of this money may have been stolen.
Almost immediately after Joao began work on the patents, Bernstein discovered that Joao had made changes to the patent applications after they were signed. Bernstein forced Joao to fix the applications, mailed them, and then dismissed Joao.28 Joao was replaced by William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, and Steven C. Becker of Foley Lardner LLP ("Foley").29 But they too filed false papers, not only with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO"), but with various foreign patent offices.
Bernstein began to discover the full extent of the scheme. To ensure Bernstein's silence, Brian G. Utley, President of one of the Similar Companies, flew to Iviewit's California office and told Bernstein that "if he did not shut up *88 about what was discovered . . . that he and law firms [sic] would destroy him, his family and his companies."31 Utley explained that if he were not made CEO, Bernstein and his family would be in danger from Proskauer and from Foley.32 In response, Bernstein told *455455 his wife and children to flee their home.33 Bernstein also attempted to have all corporate records from Iviewit's Florida office shipped to California, though defendants were able to destroy many of those documents before they could be shipped.34 Utley and Michael Reale, Vice President of Operations for one of the Similar Companies, told Iviewit's Florida employees that they were fired and should join the Similar Companies.35 Utley and Reale also stole equipment that belonged to Iviewit, leading to the filing of charges with the Boca Raton Police Department.36 Not satisfied with threats, defendants blew *99 up Bernstein's car.37 Fortunately for Bernstein, he was not in the vehicle at the time.
Plaintiffs contacted the New York Attorney General's Office and requested that the Attorney General and the New York State Disciplinary Committee open an investigation into the actions of these attorneys.39 "For his failure to respond to the earlier complaints, former [New York Attorney General] Eliot Spitzer and [the New York Attorney General] have also been included herein as defendants. . . ."
Meanwhile, in the year 2000, Arthur Andersen LLP began an audit of the Similar Companies.41 Arthur Andersen discovered some of these irregularities and requested clarifying information from certain parties, including Proskauer, which provided false information to prevent Arthur Andersen from discovering the full extent of the fraud.
Bernstein also discovered a federal bankruptcy action filed in the Southern District of Florida.43 In this case, defendant RYJO Inc., a subcontractor for Intel and Real, was attempting to steal some of the Inventions.44 Defendant Houston Shady, P.A. were counsel to Intel and Real in this action, which was filed in 2001.45 This case was dropped after it was discovered by Iviewit.
Bernstein also learned of Proskauer Rose LLP v. Iviewit.com, Inc., 47 an action in Florida state court presided over by defendant the Hon. Jorge Labarga, Justice of the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida.48 Bernstein and Iviewit fired the attorneys who claimed to be representing Iviewit, Sachs Saxs Klein, P.A., and retained new counsel, Steven Selz and Schiffrin Barroway Topaz Kessler, LLP ("SBTK"), to represent the Iviewit companies in these actions.49 Unfortunately for *456456 Iviewit, SBTK joined in *1111 the conspiracy with Proskauer.
The Complaint also alleges that Justice Labarga was part of the conspiracy and finds substantial fault with his handling of the case.51 In fact, plaintiffs suggests that the Iviewit case may have distracted Justice Labarga from his work on Bush v. Gore, leading possibly to its result.52 Labarga granted a default judgment against Iviewit.53
See id. ¶ 394 ("That on information and belief, it then became apparent that Labarga was not only part of the conspiracy but in the words of the Supreme Court Justice, Sandra Day O'Connor, in relation to the Florida Supreme Court election recount in the Bush v. Gore presidential election that Labarga was central too [sic], that he was `off on a trip of his own . . .,' perhaps referring to the Iviewit Companies matters which were consuming him at the same time.") (quoting Jan Crawford Greenburg, Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court (2007)).
In 2003, Plaintiffs filed a complaint with the Florida Bar that alleges Wheeler and Proskauer violated various ethical rules.54 However, the Florida Bar failed to give the complaints due consideration.55 Plaintiffs therefore appealed to *1212 the Florida Supreme Court, 56 but that court closed the case "without explanation or basis in law."57 The events involving Florida lasted from Spring 2003 to Spring 2004.
As mentioned earlier, plaintiffs had filed complaints with the New York Appellate Division, First Department Disciplinary Committee ("1st DDC") against Rubenstein, Joao, and Proskauer itself. But Proskauer arranged for defendant Steven C. Krane, a partner at Proskauer and member of the 1st DDC, to have the complaints delayed and then dismissed.59 Plaintiffs discovered Krane's involvement on May 20, 2004.60 They filed a complaint against Krane with the 1st DDC. Believing Krane to be conflicted in his representation of Proskauer, plaintiffs contacted Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, then the Clerk of the First Department, but the First Department took no action, allegedly because of the *1313 involvement of the judges of the First Department in the conspiracy.
In July of 2004, Plaintiffs filed a formal complaint with the First Department.
The First Department voted to begin investigating Rubenstein, Proskauer, Krane, MLG, and Joao and transferred the investigation to the Second Department Disciplinary Committee ("2d DDC"), which refused to pursue it.
Plaintiffs also contacted defendant the Hon. Judith Kaye, Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, but "she failed to intervene. . . .
Plaintiffs also requested an investigation by the New York Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection. It declined because it too was controlled by the conspiracy.
Plaintiffs had a similar experience with the State of New York Commission of Investigation.66 They then contacted Eliot Spitzer, then-Attorney General of the State of New York, but he too conspired with defendants and *1414 refused to investigate.
Similar inquiries with the Virginia State Bar were unsuccessful.
Plaintiffs allege that the conspiracy violated their rights to due process pursuant to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (count one).69 They also allege antitrust activity in violation of sections 1 and 2 of Title 15 of the United States Code (count two).
They further charge violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (count three)71 and the Racketeering and Corrupt Organizations Act (count four).
In addition, plaintiffs allege a series of state law claims, including legal malpractice, breach of contract, tortious interference, negligent interference with contractual rights, fraud, breach of fiduciary duties, misappropriation of funds, and conversion.
For each count, plaintiffs request one trillion dollars in compensatory damages and punitive damages. Plaintiffs also *1515 request an injunction to prevent the unauthorized use of the Inventions, although they acknowledge that "the granting of this prayer for relief, effectively, halts the transmission of and viewing of video as we know it. . . ."
They further request that the Court appoint a federal monitor to oversee the operations of the First and Second Department Disciplinary Committees, the Florida Bar, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States Attorney's Office, and the Virginia Bar Association.
Plaintiffs further seek an injunction to correct all past wrongdoing and ask the Court to request the Attorney General to institute civil or criminal proceedings.
The precise basis for plaintiffs' first claim is unclear. They allege:
The conspiratorial actions of the defendants in sabotaging IP applications through fraud and theft, and the ensuing white washing of attorney complaints by the defendants and other culpable parties both known and unknown with scienter, thereby continuing the violation of Plaintiffs inventive rights is contrary to the inventor clause of the Constitution of the United States as stated in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8, and the due process clauses of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Source of above
https://casetext.com/case/bernstein-v-new-york
ELIOT I. BERNSTEIN, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, V. STATE OF NEW YORK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. NO. 07 CIV. 11196 (SAS). UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, S.D. NEW YORK. AUGUST 8, 2008
The story begins in 1997, when plaintiff Eliot Bernstein and others3 invented video technologies (the "Inventions").4 The Inventions permit transmission of video signals using significantly less bandwidth than other technologies.5 They also provide a way to "zoom almost infinitely on a low resolution file with clarity,"6 something that is generally believed to be impossible. The Inventions were quickly incorporated into "almost every digital camera and present screen display device" and they "played a pivotal part in changing the Internet from a text based medium to a medium filled with magnificent images and video, thought prior to be impossible on the limited bandwidth of the Internet."7 They are also used by DVDs, televisions, cable television broadcasting, certain *44 websites, and "chips," presumably integrated circuits"
In 1998, Bernstein's accountant, Gerald R. Lewin, suggested that Bernstein contact Albert T. Gortz, an attorney at Proskauer Rose LLP, regarding the Inventions.9 Gortz, an estate planner, put Bernstein in contact with Proskauer partner Christopher C. Wheeler, a real estate attorney, who told Bernstein that he would determine whether Proskauer's New York office had partners with appropriate experience in patent law.10 Several weeks later, they represented that partners Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond A. Joao would secure patents for the Inventions and would perform other trademark, trade secret, and copyright work.11 Apparently impressed by the Inventions, Proskauer agreed to accept 2.5% of the equity of Iviewit, Inc., the company that owned the Inventions, in return for its services.12 Unbeknownst to Bernstein, Rubenstein and Joao did not at the time work for Proskauer.13 Rubenstein subsequently joined Proskauer, but Joao *55 remained at the firm Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolf Schlissel, P.C. ("MLG")
Rubenstein was also counsel to MPEGLA LLC, one of the largest users of the Inventions. When he was hired by Proskauer, MPEGLA became Proskauer's client. MPEGLA bundled the Inventions in with other technologies that they license, but did not pay Iviewit any royalties.15 In fact, plaintiffs allege that Rubenstein was part of a scheme to steal the Inventions.16 Apparently as part of this scheme, Joao filed for more than ninety related patents in his own name.17 Then, to mask the theft, Proskauer created numerous *454454 illegitimate companies with names similar to that of Iviewit in various jurisdictions (the "Similar Companies").18 Proskauer filed defective patent applications for Iviewit and valid applications for the Similar Companies.
Proskauer then brought in representatives from Real (a consortium that at the time comprised Intel; Silicon Graphics, Inc.; and Lockheed Martin, and *66 that was later acquired by Intel).20 Real made use of the Inventions without first arranging for a license from Iviewit.21 Proskauer required Real and other interested parties to sign non-disclosure agreements, but did not enforce these agreements
Proskauer also distributed the Inventions to Enron Broadband. Enron "booked enormous revenue through [Enron Broadband] without a single movie to distribute," but because they lost use of the Inventions, the deal "collapsed over night causing massive losses to Enron investors" — indeed, plaintiffs allege that this may be "one of the major reasons for Enron's bankruptcy
Meanwhile, Proskauer pursued investors for the Similar Companies. Using fraudulent documents, they secured millions of dollars from the Small Business Administration, Goldman Sachs, Gruntal Co., Wachovia Securities, and various others, 24 including defendant Huizenga Holdings, Inc.25 Plaintiffs also *77 allege that in March of 2001, the Tiedemann Investment Group ("TIG") invested several hundred thousand dollars in the Similar Companies.26 Plaintiffs suggest that some of this money may have been stolen.
2. Discovery of the Theft
Almost immediately after Joao began work on the patents, Bernstein discovered that Joao had made changes to the patent applications after they were signed. Bernstein forced Joao to fix the applications, mailed them, and then dismissed Joao.28 Joao was replaced by William J. Dick, Douglas A. Boehm, and Steven C. Becker of Foley Lardner LLP ("Foley").29 But they too filed false papers, not only with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO"), but with various foreign patent offices.
Bernstein began to discover the full extent of the scheme. To ensure Bernstein's silence, Brian G. Utley, President of one of the Similar Companies, flew to Iviewit's California office and told Bernstein that "if he did not shut up *88 about what was discovered . . . that he and law firms [sic] would destroy him, his family and his companies."31 Utley explained that if he were not made CEO, Bernstein and his family would be in danger from Proskauer and from Foley.32 In response, Bernstein told *455455 his wife and children to flee their home.33 Bernstein also attempted to have all corporate records from Iviewit's Florida office shipped to California, though defendants were able to destroy many of those documents before they could be shipped.34 Utley and Michael Reale, Vice President of Operations for one of the Similar Companies, told Iviewit's Florida employees that they were fired and should join the Similar Companies.35 Utley and Reale also stole equipment that belonged to Iviewit, leading to the filing of charges with the Boca Raton Police Department.36 Not satisfied with threats, defendants blew *99 up Bernstein's car.37 Fortunately for Bernstein, he was not in the vehicle at the time.
Plaintiffs contacted the New York Attorney General's Office and requested that the Attorney General and the New York State Disciplinary Committee open an investigation into the actions of these attorneys.39 "For his failure to respond to the earlier complaints, former [New York Attorney General] Eliot Spitzer and [the New York Attorney General] have also been included herein as defendants. . . ."
Meanwhile, in the year 2000, Arthur Andersen LLP began an audit of the Similar Companies.41 Arthur Andersen discovered some of these irregularities and requested clarifying information from certain parties, including Proskauer, which provided false information to prevent Arthur Andersen from discovering the full extent of the fraud.
Bernstein also discovered a federal bankruptcy action filed in the Southern District of Florida.43 In this case, defendant RYJO Inc., a subcontractor for Intel and Real, was attempting to steal some of the Inventions.44 Defendant Houston Shady, P.A. were counsel to Intel and Real in this action, which was filed in 2001.45 This case was dropped after it was discovered by Iviewit.
Bernstein also learned of Proskauer Rose LLP v. Iviewit.com, Inc., 47 an action in Florida state court presided over by defendant the Hon. Jorge Labarga, Justice of the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida.48 Bernstein and Iviewit fired the attorneys who claimed to be representing Iviewit, Sachs Saxs Klein, P.A., and retained new counsel, Steven Selz and Schiffrin Barroway Topaz Kessler, LLP ("SBTK"), to represent the Iviewit companies in these actions.49 Unfortunately for *456456 Iviewit, SBTK joined in *1111 the conspiracy with Proskauer.
The Complaint also alleges that Justice Labarga was part of the conspiracy and finds substantial fault with his handling of the case.51 In fact, plaintiffs suggests that the Iviewit case may have distracted Justice Labarga from his work on Bush v. Gore, leading possibly to its result.52 Labarga granted a default judgment against Iviewit.53
See id. ¶ 394 ("That on information and belief, it then became apparent that Labarga was not only part of the conspiracy but in the words of the Supreme Court Justice, Sandra Day O'Connor, in relation to the Florida Supreme Court election recount in the Bush v. Gore presidential election that Labarga was central too [sic], that he was `off on a trip of his own . . .,' perhaps referring to the Iviewit Companies matters which were consuming him at the same time.") (quoting Jan Crawford Greenburg, Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court (2007)).
In 2003, Plaintiffs filed a complaint with the Florida Bar that alleges Wheeler and Proskauer violated various ethical rules.54 However, the Florida Bar failed to give the complaints due consideration.55 Plaintiffs therefore appealed to *1212 the Florida Supreme Court, 56 but that court closed the case "without explanation or basis in law."57 The events involving Florida lasted from Spring 2003 to Spring 2004.
3. Further Cover-up
As mentioned earlier, plaintiffs had filed complaints with the New York Appellate Division, First Department Disciplinary Committee ("1st DDC") against Rubenstein, Joao, and Proskauer itself. But Proskauer arranged for defendant Steven C. Krane, a partner at Proskauer and member of the 1st DDC, to have the complaints delayed and then dismissed.59 Plaintiffs discovered Krane's involvement on May 20, 2004.60 They filed a complaint against Krane with the 1st DDC. Believing Krane to be conflicted in his representation of Proskauer, plaintiffs contacted Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, then the Clerk of the First Department, but the First Department took no action, allegedly because of the *1313 involvement of the judges of the First Department in the conspiracy.
In July of 2004, Plaintiffs filed a formal complaint with the First Department.
The First Department voted to begin investigating Rubenstein, Proskauer, Krane, MLG, and Joao and transferred the investigation to the Second Department Disciplinary Committee ("2d DDC"), which refused to pursue it.
Plaintiffs also contacted defendant the Hon. Judith Kaye, Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, but "she failed to intervene. . . .
Plaintiffs also requested an investigation by the New York Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection. It declined because it too was controlled by the conspiracy.
Plaintiffs had a similar experience with the State of New York Commission of Investigation.66 They then contacted Eliot Spitzer, then-Attorney General of the State of New York, but he too conspired with defendants and *1414 refused to investigate.
Similar inquiries with the Virginia State Bar were unsuccessful.
B. Claims
Plaintiffs allege that the conspiracy violated their rights to due process pursuant to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (count one).69 They also allege antitrust activity in violation of sections 1 and 2 of Title 15 of the United States Code (count two).
They further charge violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (count three)71 and the Racketeering and Corrupt Organizations Act (count four).
In addition, plaintiffs allege a series of state law claims, including legal malpractice, breach of contract, tortious interference, negligent interference with contractual rights, fraud, breach of fiduciary duties, misappropriation of funds, and conversion.
For each count, plaintiffs request one trillion dollars in compensatory damages and punitive damages. Plaintiffs also *1515 request an injunction to prevent the unauthorized use of the Inventions, although they acknowledge that "the granting of this prayer for relief, effectively, halts the transmission of and viewing of video as we know it. . . ."
They further request that the Court appoint a federal monitor to oversee the operations of the First and Second Department Disciplinary Committees, the Florida Bar, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States Attorney's Office, and the Virginia Bar Association.
Plaintiffs further seek an injunction to correct all past wrongdoing and ask the Court to request the Attorney General to institute civil or criminal proceedings.
The precise basis for plaintiffs' first claim is unclear. They allege:
The conspiratorial actions of the defendants in sabotaging IP applications through fraud and theft, and the ensuing white washing of attorney complaints by the defendants and other culpable parties both known and unknown with scienter, thereby continuing the violation of Plaintiffs inventive rights is contrary to the inventor clause of the Constitution of the United States as stated in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8, and the due process clauses of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Source of above
https://casetext.com/case/bernstein-v-new-york
ELIOT I. BERNSTEIN, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, V. STATE OF NEW YORK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. NO. 07 CIV. 11196 (SAS). UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, S.D. NEW YORK. AUGUST 8, 2008
Monday, May 4, 2015
Judge Martin Colin and the case of the Simon Bernstein Estate where a deceased man signed probate documents. A case of alleged murder, a heavy metal toxin coroner''s report and millions paid in insurance by Heritage Life (Jackson National) and with NO POLICY.
''41. That Eliot has alleged that further retaliation comes from the recent Estate and Probate
crimes being committed against his family, which once again are crimes again done primarily
by attorneys at law and judges acting in conspiracy against Eliot’s rights and designed to deny him
his inheritances and where the crimes now include the alleged murder of Simon
(alleged by Ted the day his father died.)
42. That Eliot alleges that the theft of the insurance policy that is the subject of the lawsuit before
this Court is yet further retaliation to deny him expectancies, where Eliot was initially NOT
told of this lawsuit and was not made party to the original complaint and is yet another effort
to steal the estate property and deny him inheritances through fraud committed again by
attorneys at law, Donald R. Tescher, Esq. and his junior partner Robert L. Spallina, Esq., in
concert with Ted, designed to steal millions of dollars of monies for Eliot’s family.
43. This insurance policy theft scheme is to further disable any chance of Eliot getting monies,
which could be used to get counsel to defend his family’s inheritance (he has not received a
dollar from the Estates and Trusts in over two years due to frauds committed that have
delayed their expectancies) and where the inheritance could also be used to pursue his and
others Intellectual Property rights and his RICO, feed his children and more.
44. Eliot and his family were wholly dependent on their inheritances for income as Simon had
set up elaborate estate plans for Eliot’s family to continue to receive monthly income that
Simon and Shirley Bernstein had set up and begun many years before their deaths to protect
Eliot and his family due to the dangerous situation their lives became entangled in and their
inability to seek employment with the onslaught against them.
45. The danger prevented Eliot from gaining employment, as not many employers want to hire
people who have bombs put in their cars and are in the middle of complex RICO litigation
and these funds Simon and Shirley set up paid for all basic living and household expenses for
the home that Eliot’s children own, private school tuitions for the children and all of their other expenses and needs, including but not limited to Health Insurance, Food, Clothing,
Entertainment, etc.
46. That Simon had set up continuation of these payments to occur long into the future upon his
death through his Estate plans and took many precautions to make sure Eliot and his family
would have no problems once he died with income to survive many years and through all the
children’s college educations. That the hijacking and theft of these funds via the crimes in
the probate court are fully intended to cause grave harm and damage to Eliot to keep him
from pursuing his whistleblowing efforts.
47. That Eliot must now protect his family without help from authorities who have been virtually
silent for years on ongoing investigations and silent since being noticed regarding the recent
threat of imminent danger to his family made by a licensed attorney at law, Schwager, and
where Eliot alleges this delay may also be intentional and created by lawyers who are in
prosecutorial roles and controlled by the law firms that are against Eliot, in direct efforts to
deny Eliot and his family state and federal protections.
48. However, it appears that wherever attorneys at law in whatever role they play (private
attorneys, prosecutors, judges, etc.) become involved in Eliot’s life there is no relief and in
fact further retaliations and denials of due process and procedure to Obstruct any chance at
Justice. Hence, there should be an Injunctive Relief that: 1) the Bar Associations or any of
the judges against whom the whistle is being blown on cannot take any action against Eliot or
his family for publishing the truth and 2) the courts must refrain from restricting our
pleadings and motions to protect the innocent.
Wherefore, Eliot request that Eliot be designated with the status of a Whistleblower
and afford all the state and federal Whistleblower protections and provide federal witness
protection.
STAY OF ALL PROCEEDINGS IN THE FLORIDA PROBATE COURT AND
TRANSFER OF ALL FLORIDA PROBATE MATTERS TO THIS COURT
49. The denial of due process, equal protection and obstruction of justice and retaliatory acts
proliferate because the Florida Bar protects the corruption and criminal actions of its
members instead of holding them accountable and issuing strong sanctions as it appears the
enterprise has infiltrated any agency that can investigate them and their self-policing Bar
Association.
50. The Bar Association’s reprobate attorneys at law in charge of disciplinary sanctions against
members appears steeped in corruption and is used to retaliate against honest members doing
the right thing by reporting the corruption they witness that they are duty bound under Oath
of G-d to report and instead promote the bad actor members reported who are acting outside
the color of law for personal gain and who aid and abet the racketeering enterprise.
51. Victims who are turned to the Florida Bar for relief when they report civil, ethical and
criminal misconduct of attorneys at law and judges are subjected to the same retaliatory acts
by the Florida Bar as their member whistleblowers and in giving their complaint information
to the Florida Bar they have basically turned their evidence over to those they are
complaining against as the Florida Bar then gives that information to the accused parties and
again this deprives rights to victims ingrained in traditional investigations.
52. The Florida Bar then typically issues letters to victims of how they reviewed the matters and
found no cause to investigate further and that you owe your attorney fees or words to that
effect. In Eliot’s case, the goodbye good luck letters were found to be written by or aided by
Proskauer Rose attorneys who were violating Florida Bar rules by interfering in the
complaints filed against their firm, which is what led to the investigations in New York and
that led Eliot to the Florida Supreme Court and then the US Supreme Court, where it appears
the attorney protections go all the way up the chain, as neither would review the bar
associations misconduct and thus no remedy avails victims.
53. There is a conflict of interest inherent in the Florida Bar’s self-disciplinary regulatory body
policy for how can a state organization regulate itself and its members and skirt traditional
discipline from criminal investigation, as the bar association disciplinary agencies cannot
investigate or regulate the criminal misconduct of its members and only investigate their
ethical misconduct and sanction or disbar them.
54. The self-policing policy of the Florida Bar does not work – Florida Bar members cannot
unbiasedly investigate the actions of other Florida Bar members and victims complaining
about their members or be counted on to report them to criminal authorities when necessary,
as a protection of brethren members is inherent.
55. Therefore, a loophole in justice is created whereby lawyers committing crimes may evade
criminal prosecution if the state bar fails to contact criminal authorities to investigate claims
made by victims that involve criminal elements and this covers up the felony misconduct
instead. When citizens have complaints, criminal or civil, against judges, prosecutors and private
attorneys at law they are directed by law enforcement to contact the Florida Bar or the
Judicial Qualification Committee to report the criminal or civil misconduct of bar members.
56. These bar association and judicial commissions have regulatory bodies (which have no
criminal jurisdiction or powers to prosecute or investigate criminal acts), which are then
supposed to review the victims complaints and report any criminal misconduct they find to
the proper criminal authorities for investigation.
57. If they find criminal misconduct and fail to report the felonies alleged the loophole to evade
justice is fulfilled, as no criminal investigations are instituted because they have been
blocked. Every once in a while an attorney may be disbarred or a judge suspended when
they are involved in criminal misconduct but no criminal prosecution of them is made and
the victim is left helpless with no due process for the crimes against them.
58. If the victims turn back to criminal authorities after the regulatory agencies determine no
cause to investigate the complaint, law enforcement then states that the agencies did not find
wrong doing and that they do not want to review the matter as it will be taken to a prosecutor
member of the Florida Bar in the end who will review and work with the State Bar and thus
the effort will be futile.
59. That Eliot states that victims should never seek State Bar sanctions or disbarment of the
attorneys who have committed crimes against them and only work with criminal authorities
who are often not associated with the Florida Bar, as there is nothing sexier in a prison
environment than a lawyer with a license who everyone wants as a cellie at night to do his
pleadings and so disbarment for criminal acts of lawyers is not good, as if a lawyer is guilty
of a criminal act against a client, it would serve well the victim to know that the lawyer is not
only criminally charged, prosecuted and sentenced but that he is then being worked to death
while serving his sentence in the pen by everyone who needs a lawyer in jail.
60. This “Get Out of Jail Free” card that lawyers and judges have written themselves by creating
the state bar associations and disciplinary departments to have regulatory power over their
members in ethical and criminal complaints filed by citizens and whistleblowers and move
the matters to their organization for improper adjudication is unconstitutional.
61. This perversion of the system allows bar members who commit felony acts to be first
reviewed by the bar association and determinations made that can evade criminal authorities,
such as intentionally failing to report the criminal acts of their members in victim complaints
(Misprision of a Felony or Aiding and Abetting) to criminal authorities and this directly
impacts the victims’ rights to fair and impartial due process of parties that committed
criminal acts against them.
62. The complaints get moved from criminal authorities to the very organization where the
complained members are beholden to for their livelihoods and who may be part of the
organized criminal element within the bar association and regulatory body and this is like
going to the Gestapo and complaining camp guards are beating you and anticipating justice
will be served and the guards will now treat you with respect.
63. ANY OTHER AMERICAN without legal title who has to face criminal authorities for
crimes alleged against them by a victim have no place or organization they are members of
that they can go to and try and wiggle out of criminal misconduct by the organization they
belong to failing to pursue criminal misconduct against them by failing to report the crimes
and instead charge them with a slap on the wrist with useless disciplinary sanction,
suspension from profession such as disbarment and evade criminal prosecution.
64. The state bars are NOT a law enforcement agency. This ability to evade criminal authorities
and punishments creates unequal protections in the application of law and places certain
parties above the law and getting preferential treatment, while denying their victims fair and
impartial due process.
65. Florida Bar members should be conflicted out from investigating any another attorney who is
a member of the Florida Bar, which is a patent denial of due process through conflict that
obstructs justice and creates an overwhelming Appearance of Impropriety to the general
public that lawyers and judges are untouchable or immune to the criminal misconduct they
do and the reason lawyers and judges have the lowest approval rating of any professional
organization in America next to Congress (again made up primarily by attorneys at law.)
66. The self-policing aspect of the Florida Bar becomes even more inherently biased, conflicted
and unjust when the complaint is made by another Florida Bar member against another
Florida Bar member that is connected and the investigator is yet another connected Florida
Bar regulatory member. In this instance, the lawyer complaining can be threatened with
disbarment the ole Hollywood mob line modified to, “you’ll never practice or rule in this
state again,” forcing them to give up their complaint or go against the organization that holds
their livelihood and be destroyed.
67. The same inherent conflict of interest that exists with the Florida Bar also exists with the
Judicial Qualifications Commission. Florida Bar members again regulate Judges, who are
other Florida Bar members when a Florida Bar member whistleblower or a victim of judicial
injustice files a complaint against a Florida State Judge with the Judicial Qualifications
Commission.
68. For these reasons Florida Bar members and the Florida Bar are inherently conflicted from
handling any aspect of Eliot’s Whistleblower matters or other civil actions due to these
conflicts from Eliot’s pursuit of the organization that conflict him with every member,
whether they are directly involved or not, as Eliot cannot know which members are involved
in the conspiracy against him due to the secretive nature of a conspiracies members who
conceal their criminal intent or know who the good lawyers trying to help him who are then
being threatened to drop his matters or else.
69. Due to the inherent conflict in the Florida Bar self-policing its members, it has manifested
into an criminal protection agency composed of reprobate attorneys who threaten and extort
members and victims who play by the rules seeking justice and protection and where it is in
no way a consumer protection agency in the way it operates.
70. That due to Eliot’s exposing reprobate members of the Florida Bar, he is also perusing
attorneys at law and judges in three states and their bar associations (PA, NY & VA) and
Eliot’s complaints allege collusion by a host of judges and he is now being legally abused by
misuse of the Florida Probate courts and aided and abetted by the courts acting as accomplice
and facilitator to ongoing crimes against him in Florida and this Court.
71. All of these new crimes taking place in this Court and the Florida Probate court are again
done by reprobate attorneys at law and all intended to deprive Eliot of his properties by legal
schemes and disabling his rights, including his right to counsel (as everyone of over 100
lawyers contacted to help him have declined, most expressing fear of retribution by their bar
associations or stating it was too complicated to sue attorneys.)
72. After the Candice Schwager, Esq. warning call, no attorneys after learning of that even want
to talk about representation, as if telling them about the car bombing up front does not scare
them away. After the call, Schwagger had to decline further representation to Eliot’s minor
children as she too is fearful of retribution and now suffering from the legal process abuse
directed at her for efforts to expose the corruption and truly help and provide justice to
victims.
73. Eliot, his wife Candice and their minor children are all afraid for their lives and in need of
immediate protections. All court proceedings in all Florida court cases should be
immediately stayed by this Court while they are transferred to this Court to prevent further
mis-adjudication, Fraud on the court, Fraud in the court and Fraud by the court and to prevent
further criminal activities from occurring against Eliot.
74. Eliot also seeks this Court to federally intervene in all prosecutorial and criminal
investigations due to the influence on these agencies by members of the Florida Bar and
Florida Supreme Court who Eliot is suing and pursuing in criminal and civil complaints filed
with state and federal agencies and to ensure and provide conflict free investigations and
prosecutions.
75. Eliot is pursuing all of the following parties that are members of the Florida Bar, Florida
Supreme Court and other reprobate bar members acting in private practices (and this is only a
partial list in Florida and Eliot has three other similar states he sued with a similar cast of
criminals in each.
Properties theft, including but not limited to the following Defendants sued in the RICO
filed. These bar members were public officials involved at the time of filing the RICO in the
cover up and subsequent crimes: ''
Source and Lot's More
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkiMjlfV2lDNmNJdHM/edit
crimes being committed against his family, which once again are crimes again done primarily
by attorneys at law and judges acting in conspiracy against Eliot’s rights and designed to deny him
his inheritances and where the crimes now include the alleged murder of Simon
(alleged by Ted the day his father died.)
42. That Eliot alleges that the theft of the insurance policy that is the subject of the lawsuit before
this Court is yet further retaliation to deny him expectancies, where Eliot was initially NOT
told of this lawsuit and was not made party to the original complaint and is yet another effort
to steal the estate property and deny him inheritances through fraud committed again by
attorneys at law, Donald R. Tescher, Esq. and his junior partner Robert L. Spallina, Esq., in
concert with Ted, designed to steal millions of dollars of monies for Eliot’s family.
43. This insurance policy theft scheme is to further disable any chance of Eliot getting monies,
which could be used to get counsel to defend his family’s inheritance (he has not received a
dollar from the Estates and Trusts in over two years due to frauds committed that have
delayed their expectancies) and where the inheritance could also be used to pursue his and
others Intellectual Property rights and his RICO, feed his children and more.
44. Eliot and his family were wholly dependent on their inheritances for income as Simon had
set up elaborate estate plans for Eliot’s family to continue to receive monthly income that
Simon and Shirley Bernstein had set up and begun many years before their deaths to protect
Eliot and his family due to the dangerous situation their lives became entangled in and their
inability to seek employment with the onslaught against them.
45. The danger prevented Eliot from gaining employment, as not many employers want to hire
people who have bombs put in their cars and are in the middle of complex RICO litigation
and these funds Simon and Shirley set up paid for all basic living and household expenses for
the home that Eliot’s children own, private school tuitions for the children and all of their other expenses and needs, including but not limited to Health Insurance, Food, Clothing,
Entertainment, etc.
46. That Simon had set up continuation of these payments to occur long into the future upon his
death through his Estate plans and took many precautions to make sure Eliot and his family
would have no problems once he died with income to survive many years and through all the
children’s college educations. That the hijacking and theft of these funds via the crimes in
the probate court are fully intended to cause grave harm and damage to Eliot to keep him
from pursuing his whistleblowing efforts.
47. That Eliot must now protect his family without help from authorities who have been virtually
silent for years on ongoing investigations and silent since being noticed regarding the recent
threat of imminent danger to his family made by a licensed attorney at law, Schwager, and
where Eliot alleges this delay may also be intentional and created by lawyers who are in
prosecutorial roles and controlled by the law firms that are against Eliot, in direct efforts to
deny Eliot and his family state and federal protections.
48. However, it appears that wherever attorneys at law in whatever role they play (private
attorneys, prosecutors, judges, etc.) become involved in Eliot’s life there is no relief and in
fact further retaliations and denials of due process and procedure to Obstruct any chance at
Justice. Hence, there should be an Injunctive Relief that: 1) the Bar Associations or any of
the judges against whom the whistle is being blown on cannot take any action against Eliot or
his family for publishing the truth and 2) the courts must refrain from restricting our
pleadings and motions to protect the innocent.
Wherefore, Eliot request that Eliot be designated with the status of a Whistleblower
and afford all the state and federal Whistleblower protections and provide federal witness
protection.
STAY OF ALL PROCEEDINGS IN THE FLORIDA PROBATE COURT AND
TRANSFER OF ALL FLORIDA PROBATE MATTERS TO THIS COURT
49. The denial of due process, equal protection and obstruction of justice and retaliatory acts
proliferate because the Florida Bar protects the corruption and criminal actions of its
members instead of holding them accountable and issuing strong sanctions as it appears the
enterprise has infiltrated any agency that can investigate them and their self-policing Bar
Association.
50. The Bar Association’s reprobate attorneys at law in charge of disciplinary sanctions against
members appears steeped in corruption and is used to retaliate against honest members doing
the right thing by reporting the corruption they witness that they are duty bound under Oath
of G-d to report and instead promote the bad actor members reported who are acting outside
the color of law for personal gain and who aid and abet the racketeering enterprise.
51. Victims who are turned to the Florida Bar for relief when they report civil, ethical and
criminal misconduct of attorneys at law and judges are subjected to the same retaliatory acts
by the Florida Bar as their member whistleblowers and in giving their complaint information
to the Florida Bar they have basically turned their evidence over to those they are
complaining against as the Florida Bar then gives that information to the accused parties and
again this deprives rights to victims ingrained in traditional investigations.
52. The Florida Bar then typically issues letters to victims of how they reviewed the matters and
found no cause to investigate further and that you owe your attorney fees or words to that
effect. In Eliot’s case, the goodbye good luck letters were found to be written by or aided by
Proskauer Rose attorneys who were violating Florida Bar rules by interfering in the
complaints filed against their firm, which is what led to the investigations in New York and
that led Eliot to the Florida Supreme Court and then the US Supreme Court, where it appears
the attorney protections go all the way up the chain, as neither would review the bar
associations misconduct and thus no remedy avails victims.
53. There is a conflict of interest inherent in the Florida Bar’s self-disciplinary regulatory body
policy for how can a state organization regulate itself and its members and skirt traditional
discipline from criminal investigation, as the bar association disciplinary agencies cannot
investigate or regulate the criminal misconduct of its members and only investigate their
ethical misconduct and sanction or disbar them.
54. The self-policing policy of the Florida Bar does not work – Florida Bar members cannot
unbiasedly investigate the actions of other Florida Bar members and victims complaining
about their members or be counted on to report them to criminal authorities when necessary,
as a protection of brethren members is inherent.
55. Therefore, a loophole in justice is created whereby lawyers committing crimes may evade
criminal prosecution if the state bar fails to contact criminal authorities to investigate claims
made by victims that involve criminal elements and this covers up the felony misconduct
instead. When citizens have complaints, criminal or civil, against judges, prosecutors and private
attorneys at law they are directed by law enforcement to contact the Florida Bar or the
Judicial Qualification Committee to report the criminal or civil misconduct of bar members.
56. These bar association and judicial commissions have regulatory bodies (which have no
criminal jurisdiction or powers to prosecute or investigate criminal acts), which are then
supposed to review the victims complaints and report any criminal misconduct they find to
the proper criminal authorities for investigation.
57. If they find criminal misconduct and fail to report the felonies alleged the loophole to evade
justice is fulfilled, as no criminal investigations are instituted because they have been
blocked. Every once in a while an attorney may be disbarred or a judge suspended when
they are involved in criminal misconduct but no criminal prosecution of them is made and
the victim is left helpless with no due process for the crimes against them.
58. If the victims turn back to criminal authorities after the regulatory agencies determine no
cause to investigate the complaint, law enforcement then states that the agencies did not find
wrong doing and that they do not want to review the matter as it will be taken to a prosecutor
member of the Florida Bar in the end who will review and work with the State Bar and thus
the effort will be futile.
59. That Eliot states that victims should never seek State Bar sanctions or disbarment of the
attorneys who have committed crimes against them and only work with criminal authorities
who are often not associated with the Florida Bar, as there is nothing sexier in a prison
environment than a lawyer with a license who everyone wants as a cellie at night to do his
pleadings and so disbarment for criminal acts of lawyers is not good, as if a lawyer is guilty
of a criminal act against a client, it would serve well the victim to know that the lawyer is not
only criminally charged, prosecuted and sentenced but that he is then being worked to death
while serving his sentence in the pen by everyone who needs a lawyer in jail.
60. This “Get Out of Jail Free” card that lawyers and judges have written themselves by creating
the state bar associations and disciplinary departments to have regulatory power over their
members in ethical and criminal complaints filed by citizens and whistleblowers and move
the matters to their organization for improper adjudication is unconstitutional.
61. This perversion of the system allows bar members who commit felony acts to be first
reviewed by the bar association and determinations made that can evade criminal authorities,
such as intentionally failing to report the criminal acts of their members in victim complaints
(Misprision of a Felony or Aiding and Abetting) to criminal authorities and this directly
impacts the victims’ rights to fair and impartial due process of parties that committed
criminal acts against them.
62. The complaints get moved from criminal authorities to the very organization where the
complained members are beholden to for their livelihoods and who may be part of the
organized criminal element within the bar association and regulatory body and this is like
going to the Gestapo and complaining camp guards are beating you and anticipating justice
will be served and the guards will now treat you with respect.
63. ANY OTHER AMERICAN without legal title who has to face criminal authorities for
crimes alleged against them by a victim have no place or organization they are members of
that they can go to and try and wiggle out of criminal misconduct by the organization they
belong to failing to pursue criminal misconduct against them by failing to report the crimes
and instead charge them with a slap on the wrist with useless disciplinary sanction,
suspension from profession such as disbarment and evade criminal prosecution.
64. The state bars are NOT a law enforcement agency. This ability to evade criminal authorities
and punishments creates unequal protections in the application of law and places certain
parties above the law and getting preferential treatment, while denying their victims fair and
impartial due process.
65. Florida Bar members should be conflicted out from investigating any another attorney who is
a member of the Florida Bar, which is a patent denial of due process through conflict that
obstructs justice and creates an overwhelming Appearance of Impropriety to the general
public that lawyers and judges are untouchable or immune to the criminal misconduct they
do and the reason lawyers and judges have the lowest approval rating of any professional
organization in America next to Congress (again made up primarily by attorneys at law.)
66. The self-policing aspect of the Florida Bar becomes even more inherently biased, conflicted
and unjust when the complaint is made by another Florida Bar member against another
Florida Bar member that is connected and the investigator is yet another connected Florida
Bar regulatory member. In this instance, the lawyer complaining can be threatened with
disbarment the ole Hollywood mob line modified to, “you’ll never practice or rule in this
state again,” forcing them to give up their complaint or go against the organization that holds
their livelihood and be destroyed.
67. The same inherent conflict of interest that exists with the Florida Bar also exists with the
Judicial Qualifications Commission. Florida Bar members again regulate Judges, who are
other Florida Bar members when a Florida Bar member whistleblower or a victim of judicial
injustice files a complaint against a Florida State Judge with the Judicial Qualifications
Commission.
68. For these reasons Florida Bar members and the Florida Bar are inherently conflicted from
handling any aspect of Eliot’s Whistleblower matters or other civil actions due to these
conflicts from Eliot’s pursuit of the organization that conflict him with every member,
whether they are directly involved or not, as Eliot cannot know which members are involved
in the conspiracy against him due to the secretive nature of a conspiracies members who
conceal their criminal intent or know who the good lawyers trying to help him who are then
being threatened to drop his matters or else.
69. Due to the inherent conflict in the Florida Bar self-policing its members, it has manifested
into an criminal protection agency composed of reprobate attorneys who threaten and extort
members and victims who play by the rules seeking justice and protection and where it is in
no way a consumer protection agency in the way it operates.
70. That due to Eliot’s exposing reprobate members of the Florida Bar, he is also perusing
attorneys at law and judges in three states and their bar associations (PA, NY & VA) and
Eliot’s complaints allege collusion by a host of judges and he is now being legally abused by
misuse of the Florida Probate courts and aided and abetted by the courts acting as accomplice
and facilitator to ongoing crimes against him in Florida and this Court.
71. All of these new crimes taking place in this Court and the Florida Probate court are again
done by reprobate attorneys at law and all intended to deprive Eliot of his properties by legal
schemes and disabling his rights, including his right to counsel (as everyone of over 100
lawyers contacted to help him have declined, most expressing fear of retribution by their bar
associations or stating it was too complicated to sue attorneys.)
72. After the Candice Schwager, Esq. warning call, no attorneys after learning of that even want
to talk about representation, as if telling them about the car bombing up front does not scare
them away. After the call, Schwagger had to decline further representation to Eliot’s minor
children as she too is fearful of retribution and now suffering from the legal process abuse
directed at her for efforts to expose the corruption and truly help and provide justice to
victims.
73. Eliot, his wife Candice and their minor children are all afraid for their lives and in need of
immediate protections. All court proceedings in all Florida court cases should be
immediately stayed by this Court while they are transferred to this Court to prevent further
mis-adjudication, Fraud on the court, Fraud in the court and Fraud by the court and to prevent
further criminal activities from occurring against Eliot.
74. Eliot also seeks this Court to federally intervene in all prosecutorial and criminal
investigations due to the influence on these agencies by members of the Florida Bar and
Florida Supreme Court who Eliot is suing and pursuing in criminal and civil complaints filed
with state and federal agencies and to ensure and provide conflict free investigations and
prosecutions.
75. Eliot is pursuing all of the following parties that are members of the Florida Bar, Florida
Supreme Court and other reprobate bar members acting in private practices (and this is only a
partial list in Florida and Eliot has three other similar states he sued with a similar cast of
criminals in each.
Properties theft, including but not limited to the following Defendants sued in the RICO
filed. These bar members were public officials involved at the time of filing the RICO in the
cover up and subsequent crimes: ''
Source and Lot's More
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkiMjlfV2lDNmNJdHM/edit
Oppenheimer - No Need for Signed Trusts, Just Give us your MONEY. Judge Martin Colin Florida Probate,
''196. Judge Colin allows Trusts for minors to be operated by a Trustee, Oppenheimer, without
ANY SIGNATURE PAGES28 and improperly executed and asks Eliot in hearing what
statute prohibits a bank trust company from operating Trusts without signature pages or
opening an account (in a different name than on the trust) and using such funds without a
signed Trust instrument. When Eliot responded to Colin stating fraud as the statute, Colin
states it is not enough and overruled an accounting objection to the Trust accounting claiming
Oppenheimer operated without legal documents, and accessed an account with a different
name than that on the trust that has no signature pages.
197. Again this raises red flags as to Colin’s competency and his acts to try and further cover up
for the officers and fiduciaries he appointed, Oppenheimer, who once again are caught in
what appears an alleged massive fraud and again Colin fails to notify the authorities of the
possible criminal acts this bank fraud depicts and yet entertains guardianship hearings filed
by Steven A. Lessne, Esq., (“LESSNE”) the attorney for Oppenheimer, who is a counter defendant
in Eliot’s counter complaint against Oppenheimer which has been stayed by Colin
and yet LESSNE continues to represent other parties despite his conflict.
198. That it should be noted by the Court that LESSNE began his representation of Oppenheimer
at the law firm GrayRobinson, P.A. and then after Eliot counter sued LESSNE and Gray
Robinson, LESSNE then transferred with the Oppenheimer case, to ROSE’s former law firm
Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A. (“GUNSTER”)
199. That GUNSTER is the former law firm of Christopher Wheeler, Esq., the central defendant
in Eliot’s RICO claims of theft of the Intellectual Properties, who was formerly with
Proskauer Rose until resigning and going to work at GEO Corporation, the private prison
company that incarcerates people for profit as their stock value is dependent on the number
of prisoners incarcerated.
200. Again Colin protects the officer of his Court LESSNE that he appointed and shields him
from criminal investigation of him and his client while allowing hearings of contempt and
guardianship issues filed by LESSNE as retaliation to proceed forward.
201. Judge Colin allegedly transferred Trusteeship of the three minor children’s trusts in 2010 and
without reviewing the 3 trusts which are not attached to the Petition filed29, which have no
signatures pages for Daniel, which have conflicting trustees and a Successor named Larry
Bishens, Esq. and are improperly executed, which he would have seen these glaring
problems had he reviewed the Trusts prior to allegedly transferring Trusteeship to
Oppenheimer based on what appear more fraudulent and forged documents.
OPPENHEIMER TRUST THEY POSITED WITH COURT AS DOCUMENT THEY ARE OPERATING ON FOR xx BERNSTEIN MISSING SIGNATURE PAGES!
http://www.iviewit.tv/Simon%20and%20Shirley%20Estate/Exhibit%20C%20Oppenheimer%20Criminal%20Complaint%20PBSO%20-%20Trust%20Daniel.pdf
29 Alleged Fraudulent and Forged Petition to Change Trustee of Children Trusts
http://www.iviewit.tv/Simon%20and%20Shirley%20Estate/20100619AllegedForgedEliotCandicePetitiontoAppointSuccessorTrusteeJoshuaJacobandDaniel.pdf
Source and Lot's More
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkiMjlfV2lDNmNJdHM/edit
ANY SIGNATURE PAGES28 and improperly executed and asks Eliot in hearing what
statute prohibits a bank trust company from operating Trusts without signature pages or
opening an account (in a different name than on the trust) and using such funds without a
signed Trust instrument. When Eliot responded to Colin stating fraud as the statute, Colin
states it is not enough and overruled an accounting objection to the Trust accounting claiming
Oppenheimer operated without legal documents, and accessed an account with a different
name than that on the trust that has no signature pages.
197. Again this raises red flags as to Colin’s competency and his acts to try and further cover up
for the officers and fiduciaries he appointed, Oppenheimer, who once again are caught in
what appears an alleged massive fraud and again Colin fails to notify the authorities of the
possible criminal acts this bank fraud depicts and yet entertains guardianship hearings filed
by Steven A. Lessne, Esq., (“LESSNE”) the attorney for Oppenheimer, who is a counter defendant
in Eliot’s counter complaint against Oppenheimer which has been stayed by Colin
and yet LESSNE continues to represent other parties despite his conflict.
198. That it should be noted by the Court that LESSNE began his representation of Oppenheimer
at the law firm GrayRobinson, P.A. and then after Eliot counter sued LESSNE and Gray
Robinson, LESSNE then transferred with the Oppenheimer case, to ROSE’s former law firm
Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A. (“GUNSTER”)
199. That GUNSTER is the former law firm of Christopher Wheeler, Esq., the central defendant
in Eliot’s RICO claims of theft of the Intellectual Properties, who was formerly with
Proskauer Rose until resigning and going to work at GEO Corporation, the private prison
company that incarcerates people for profit as their stock value is dependent on the number
of prisoners incarcerated.
200. Again Colin protects the officer of his Court LESSNE that he appointed and shields him
from criminal investigation of him and his client while allowing hearings of contempt and
guardianship issues filed by LESSNE as retaliation to proceed forward.
201. Judge Colin allegedly transferred Trusteeship of the three minor children’s trusts in 2010 and
without reviewing the 3 trusts which are not attached to the Petition filed29, which have no
signatures pages for Daniel, which have conflicting trustees and a Successor named Larry
Bishens, Esq. and are improperly executed, which he would have seen these glaring
problems had he reviewed the Trusts prior to allegedly transferring Trusteeship to
Oppenheimer based on what appear more fraudulent and forged documents.
OPPENHEIMER TRUST THEY POSITED WITH COURT AS DOCUMENT THEY ARE OPERATING ON FOR xx BERNSTEIN MISSING SIGNATURE PAGES!
http://www.iviewit.tv/Simon%20and%20Shirley%20Estate/Exhibit%20C%20Oppenheimer%20Criminal%20Complaint%20PBSO%20-%20Trust%20Daniel.pdf
29 Alleged Fraudulent and Forged Petition to Change Trustee of Children Trusts
http://www.iviewit.tv/Simon%20and%20Shirley%20Estate/20100619AllegedForgedEliotCandicePetitiontoAppointSuccessorTrusteeJoshuaJacobandDaniel.pdf
Source and Lot's More
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkiMjlfV2lDNmNJdHM/edit
Florida Corruption; Patent Theft; RICO; Judge Martin Colin, Ted Bernstein, Attorney Alan Rose, Florida Probate Court, Illinois Insurance Fraud, Deceased signing probate documents, alleged murder and lots' more..
FEDERAL PROTECTION FROM LIFE-THREATENING DANGER TO ELIOT AND
WHISTLEBLOWER, CONTINUATION OF RICO ACTIVITIES AFTER PRIOR
FAMILY MINIVAN CAR BOMBING, PRIOR THREATS, SCHEME TO DENY PROPER
HIS FAMILY VIA NEW THREATS OF PHYSICAL DANGER ACTING AS
MONETIZATION OF INVENTIONS, DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
AND PROCEDURE THAT IS OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE.
1. That Eliot has previously filed a RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit before Honorable Judge
Shira A. Scheindlin, 07cv11196 Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department
Disciplinary Committee, et al. and these matters and the criminal elements both proven and
alleged herein appear to be continuations of those crimes by similar and related parties
mostly reprobate attorneys at law. That Eliot filed an Amended Complaint1
this Court can review those records from that case for more information regarding how the
Iviewit matters tie in to many significant events in US History, including the Bush v Gore
election fraud and Supreme Court nomination in a 5-4 vote for President, the collapse of
Enron and more.
2. That Scheindlin in her err filed dismissal of the RICO2
case as defined at the time.
3. Eliot has recently come under new and continued life threatening danger and severe duress
and seeks this Court’s urgent protection from his Whistleblowing efforts on attorneys at law acting outside the color of law in Florida, in a variety of titles, as judges, prosecutors, private
attorneys, state bar disciplinary agent and more. This danger is evidenced by all the
following ongoing issues in the life of Eliot and his family.
4. Massive recent further fraud and other crimes against Eliot and his family, primarily
committed by attorneys at law, with court escalation of retaliation and denial of due process
and procedure against Eliot that obstructs justice, intentionally and with scienter, to interfere
with expectancies/inheritance for Eliot and his minor children and this retaliation due to his
exposing and having reported to prosecutors and criminal authorities attorneys at law
involved directly in crimes committed in, on and by the Florida Probate court and its Florida
Bar members. Eliot and his family are subjected to domestic terrorism under 18 U.S.C. §
2331 and crimes against Humanity.
5. It appears there is a domestic terrorist organization operating with the legal system, where a
mob styled infiltration has occurred at the highest level in the legal system, using the courts
as their business addresses to facilitate their crimes and operate a human trafficking scheme
through guardianships that rob the victims of their legal rights and theft and money
laundering through the probate courts to steal families properties upon the death of their
loved ones. The courts abuse of process creates a mob styled racketeering enterprise
committed under a tainted color of law in the State of Florida that is given cover by the
Florida Bar, which protects its reprobate members who are part of the scheme and artifice to
defraud citizens.
6. A victim is targeted in the Probate/Guardianship court, their assets then stolen after they are
dead in probate or while still living through guardianships of unlawful chicanery designed to
bleed their victims assets as they are slowly put to their death by illegal court “edicts”,
stripped of legal right through illegal legal custody gained and then defenseless stripped of
their assets and isolated from their family members who get in the way.
7. The officers of the Florida Probate court in Eliot’s parents probate and trusts matters were
caught and have admitted to their law firm committing felony criminal acts, including but not
limited to, proven Post Mortem Fraudulent Alteration and Notarization of Court documents
and Dispositive documents posited with the court as a Fraud on the Court, Post Mortem
Admitted Forgeries of documents for decedents Simon and Shirley and other living parties
including Eliot, numerous past and ongoing Frauds on the court and multiple Frauds
committed against Beneficiaries of the estates and trusts. Further they are undergoing
investigations for other crimes not yet proven but formally alleged, including but not limited
to, Insurance Fraud, Fraud on a Creditor, Fraud on a Federal Court (this Court), Mail and
Wire Fraud, Theft of Estate and Trust Assets, Conversion, Extortion, alleged Murder of
Simon Bernstein by Plaintiff Theodore Bernstein and more.
8. Eliot’s exposure of and objections to the court corruption and his filings with criminal
authorities for acts committed by these attorneys at law, operating as officers and fiduciaries
of the probate courts of Judge Martin Colin, Esq. (“Colin”) and Judge David E. French, Esq.
(“French”) , has been covered up and further aided and abetted by the judges of the Florida
Probate court, which are facilitating these highly sophisticated illegal legal crimes under the
guise of probate proceedings and providing cover for the reprobate attorneys who were
caught.
9. These harms are caused by the very courts that should be upholding Eliot’s rights and
protecting him, especially after he cleaned house for the judges by exposing the bad faith acts
of Florida attorneys at law practicing before their courts, the officers appointed by the courts,
who were found acting in concert to Fraud the court and commit a variety of crimes against
the Beneficiaries, these crimes primarily targeting Eliot.
10. Why Eliot? Eliot was joined together in 2008 with American Hero Whistleblower, New
York Supreme Court Appellate Division Departmental Disciplinary Committee attorney at
law, Christine C. Anderson, Esq., by Federal Judge Shira A. Scheindlin who legally related
Eliot’s RICO case involving a massive corruption inside government and almost all
attributable to those with legal degrees, to Anderson’s riveting Whistleblower lawsuit that
exposed a criminal cartel operating at the highest levels of the country’s legal system and
protected by the self-regulating failed attorney at law disciplinary departments they
controlled.
11. That Scheindlin related several other Whistleblower citizens fighting the corruption in the
courts for many years together with Anderson and so began a lengthy and ongoing effort to
expose the corruption that plagues our nation by a small group of very dedicated citizens who
fearlessly took on the corruption machine inside the courts, at great personal and familial
costs.
12. That after finding out how the innards of this corruption scheme worked whereby criminals
disguised as attorneys at law are violating law with impunity, it was apparent that they have
seized the keys to the kingdom at the highest outposts of law and turned a country built on
law into lawlessness society.
13. This has created an unprecedented situation in our country, a coup d'état of the legal system
and everything it controls and now requiring unprecedented actions by both citizens and a
brave few lawyers and judges who are willing to stand up in their roles as honorable and duty
bound to justice attorneys at law and bust up this racket that threatens our nation by turning
in those reprobate members who are acting outside the color of law, despite the consequences
against them by those in control of their profession at this time, unafraid of the retaliation
they most certainly will face.
14. Eliot has recently met even more brave Whistleblower attorneys at law, upholding their oaths
to report the misconduct of their brethren, although these are false brethren, as they are really
criminals using law to commit crime and cover them up, using the courts as retaliatory
weapons against the victims and the retaliation of these lawyers who have done nothing
wrong but fulfill their duty to report other members misconduct is swift and vicious.
15. Joining Anderson’s heroic whistleblowing are now Barbara Stone, Esq., Candice Schwager,
Esq., Joanne Denison, Esq., Kenneth Ditkowski, Esq., Kevin R. Hall, Esq. and Dean Loren,
Esq. and other attorney Whistleblowers who are all exposing the illegally formed bar
associations and the crimes in the court they have witnessed firsthand. Now they are in
danger of losing their livelihoods and being viciously retaliated against for their exposure of
the bad actors by what at first glance appears lawyers, judges, prosecutors and the bar
associations and with deeper inspection one finds they are lawbreakers misusing law to target
their victims.
16. There is also another citizen, William Windsor, who has been jailed for his efforts to
expose the public office corruption in the nation by assembling video of nationwide victims
and again Mr. Windsor’s only crime is that of exposing the underbelly of the legal system
through the eyes of victims. http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index.php
17. The reprobate attorneys are acting to commit crimes in various combinations of racketeering
type fraudulent illegal legal schemes that utilize the courts as host to the crimes and using the
their legal degrees to commit these crimes and then having other criminals disguised as
lawyers planted in the regulatory agencies to cover them up for them, with virtually no fear
of retribution, as the cover up is at the highest levels of the failed self-policing attorney at law
failed Disciplinary Departments, State Bars, Judicial Conduct Commissions and criminal
prosecutorial agencies.
18. The self-policing bar associations and the judicial qualifications commissions instead of
protecting the Whistleblowers exposing their reprobate members and investigating the
complaints filed by the Whistleblowers and citizen victims reporting the misconduct of
judges to them are instead retaliated against.
19. Retaliation against the Whistleblower members of the Florida Bar who are reporting against
other members of the bar committing the crimes include extortionary threats of disbarment
used in efforts to force these brave and heroic whistleblowers from pursuing their acts to
expose the bad actors or else.
20. Further the state bar associations and judicial conduct commissions are denying due process
and procedure of the attorney at law Whistleblowers by disbarring them and preventing and
dismantling their efforts to protect their clients, themselves, their families and the public at
large from the dangers of the reprobate attorneys at law, judges and prosecutors they are
exposing who have corrupted and polluted the legal system, casting a grave appearance of
impropriety over the whole system of jurisprudence and leaving no one capable of putting it
down.
21. The danger to Eliot directly is further evidenced by Eliot and his wife Candice’s receipt of a
phone call at 4am. on April 11, 2015 by his children’s counsel, Candice Schwager, Esq. of
Texas, informing him that their lives were in imminent danger for their whistleblowing
efforts against judicial and attorney at law corruption and to instantly seek federal and state
protections. This phone call and the following actions with state and federal authorities
already involved in Eliot’s life is documented below by attorney at law Barbara Stone, Esq.
who also received a similar call from Candice Schwagger, Esq.:
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 7:07 AM
To: Michael Horowitz [Inspector General @ US DOJ OIG] ~ Partner @ Cadwalader, Wickersham
& Taft LLP (michael.horowitz@cwt.com ); 'The Honorable Glenn Alan Fine, Inspector General ~
Cc: 'Barbara Stone (bstone575@gmail.com )'; 'JoAnne M. Denison Esq. @ Denison & Associates,
From: Eliot Ivan Bernstein [mailto:iviewit@iviewit.tv ]
Department of Justice'
PC (jdenison@surfree.com )'; Candice Schwager @ Schwager Law Firm
(candiceschwager@icloud.com ); 'Andrew Dietz @ Rock-It Cargo USA, Inc.
(andyd@rockitcargo.com )'; 'CANDICE BERNSTEIN (tourcandy@gmail.com )'; 'Caroline
Prochotska Rogers Esq. (caroline@cprogers.com )'; 'Eliot I. Bernstein (iviewit@iviewit.tv )'; 'Marc
R. Garber Esq. (marcrgarber@gmail.com )'; 'Marc R. Garber Esq. @ Flaster Greenberg P.C.
(marc.garber@flastergreenberg.com) '; 'Michele M. Mulrooney ~ Partner @ Venable LLP
(mmulrooney@Venable.com )'
Subject: Eliot Bernstein. FW: We have been warned by counsel that we are in danger and need
of Federal protection
Dear Inspector General Horowitz, please add this email to my ongoing case file with DOJ OIG. As
this involves further potential dangers to my family, where it has been alleged my father was
murdered and a Coroner’s report reveals several elevated heavy metals, I take this warning very
seriously, especially where I have uncovered and proven fraud and forgeries of deceased parties
to gain Dominion and Control of my deceased father’s estate, the crimes committed by
Attorneys at Law. I have been trying to contact the FBI for several months to report several very
serious crimes that require federal investigations and have supposedly contacted the FBI who
refused to give me names of the people that were supposed to be doing the intake and have not
heard back from them at all. I have tried to contact your offices and similarly I was unable to
confirm anyone’s name that I was speaking to and if in fact you had gotten my messages. Please
feel free to contact me at my numbers below. Eliot
Eliot I. Bernstein
Inventor
From: Eliot Bernstein [mailto:iviewit5@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 6:57 AM
To: 'Detective Andrew Panzer @ Palm Beach County Sheriff (PanzerA@pbso.org)'
Subject: Eliot Bernstein. FW: We have been warned by counsel that we are in danger and need
of Federal protection
Dear Detective Panzer, please add this to the ongoing investigation of my family estate and trust
matters. Barbara Stone is a Florida Attorney who is exposing Judicial Corruption. I got a call at
4am from attorney Candice Schwager who informed me and Candice my wife that our lives and
those of our children were in imminent danger for our Whistleblowing efforts. This warning
came from a licensed attorney. Paul Wright is at the FBI according to Barbara. I was told to
contact state and federal authorities for protection. Eliot
From: barbara stone [mailto:bstone575@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 7:36 PM
To: Paul Wright
Cc: Eliot Bernstein; Candice Schwager, Esq.; JoAnne M Denison, Esq.
Subject: We have been warned by counsel that we are in danger and need of Federal protection
My attorney, Candice Schwager who is also the attorney for Eliot Bernstein contacted
both of us on or about 4:00 am EST on Saturday and advised us to contact Federal
authorities for protection.
She warned me and Eliot Bernstein that we and our families are in danger and in need of
immediate Federal protection due to our efforts to expose judicial corruption.
22. That this wakeup call warning of imminent danger and to get the children protected by a
licensed Attorney at Law has left Eliot and his wife Candice panicked and frantic for the last
two plus weeks trying to get help and keep an eye on the children at the same time and left
them hardly able to keep up with the sudden increased legal hearings and pleadings dumped
on them as the pressure is mounting on the bad actors from the criminal acts being uncovered
in the courts.
23. These sharp practices of heaping hearing after hearing on Eliot seems calculated to heighten
the pressure on them intentionally in the six legal cases involving the Estates and Trusts of
Eliot’s deceased parents, Simon and Shirley as pressure mounts and their crimes are further
uncovered and reported on.
24. Many of the legal actions require strict deadlines, there are a mass of scheduled hearings,
hearings of Eliot’s changed overnight and moved up a month by Judge Colin on his own
initiative with demands that Eliot be present at that time or else lose his rights regarding
complicated accounting proceedings, where thousands of pages of documents were dumped
on him without giving him the opportunity to review them before the hearing and all this
coming as Eliot and others are finding out about a plethora of crimes committed by the
attorneys at law, fiduciaries and other parties involved in the Estates and Trust cases of
Simon and Shirley Bernstein.
25. That the court will again take note that it was alleged by Ted Bernstein and Pamela Simon on
the day Simon died that he was murdered, TED and PAM are his estranged son and daughter
who were cut out of the Estates and Trusts with their lineal descendants and if the murder
allegation is true Eliot could be next.
26. That the Court will take note that a bomb was placed in Eliot’s car (see Graphic images of
car bombing @ www.iviewit.tv) that blew up three cars next to it as well and where every
day of Eliot and Candice’s life that all of these matters are not investigated and handled
properly with fair and impartial due process given them, they are in danger every time they
start their vehicle to take the children to school in the morning.
27. This car bombing alleged to have taken place over Eliot’s claims that reprobate attorneys at
law stole his and others Intellectual Properties worth an estimated billions to trillions
(currently over 90% of internet traffic uses the technologies as they are backbone imaging
and video technologies), and the attorneys at law were using the Court system and other
Government agencies, including the US Patent Office, to enable the highly sophisticated
legal crimes deployed by major law firms to steal the technologies.
28. When caught in the act it is alleged that these lawyers infiltrated some of the highest outposts
of law in efforts to cover up the crimes by interfering with Eliot’s due process rights and by
obstructing Justice inside government agencies and when caught at the cover up then tried to
murder him and have since been pursuing a pattern and practice of crimes to hurt and damage
Eliot and his family.
29. The death of Simon Bernstein if he was murdered may also have been due to his ownership
interests in the Intellectual Properties, his potential settlement interests in Eliot’s RICO and
his intimate knowledge of how the royalties were being converted illegally by the law firms
that stole the technologies (primarily Proskauer Rose LLP) through the Madoff and Sir Allen
Stanford Ponzi Schemes (aka criminal attorney at law and law firm money laundering
schemes for monies stolen from clients.)
30. As the court will note in the Probate and Trust cases involving Eliot’s three minor children
and Oppenheimer, there are accounts at the heart of that matter that came from Stanford
Bank and Stanford Trust that then transferred with the agents from Stanford to Oppenheimer
Trust and the accounts and agents transferred to JP Morgan, where it is alleged that millions
of dollars of Simon’s monies in the estates and trusts disappeared weeks before his untimely
and strange death.
31. Eliot has had repeated death threats over a thirteen year period reported to state and federal
authorities for his Whistleblowing efforts against the highest ranking members of three state
bar associations, judges, prosecutors, attorneys at law and high ranking government officials
throughout the nation who were involved in the thefts of the Intellectual Properties.
Wherefore, Eliot requests that there be an order of federal protection from life
threatening danger to Eliot and his family.
DESIGNATION OF STATUS AS WHISTLEBLOWER AND AFFORD ALL STATE AND
FEDERAL WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS AND PROVIDE FEDERAL WITNESS
PROTECTION
32. That while Eliot is not an attorney at law, nor a member of any bar association, his efforts to
expose the corruption of the members of three state bar associations have led to Orders ( see
URL @
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2006%2017%20Cahill%20Motion%20to%20mov
e%20complaints%20krane%20rubenstein.pdf )
from the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Departmental
Disciplinary Committee for investigation of three of its members, including former deceased
President of the New York State Bar at the time, Steven C. Krane, Esq. of Proskauer Rose
(who died suddenly after the investigations were ordered), Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. of
Proskauer Rose and sole patent evaluator for MPEGLA, LLC (who Eliot claims is the largest
infringer of his Intellectual Properties) and Thomas Cahill, Esq., the former Chief Counsel
for the First Judicial Departmental Disciplinary Committee (who Whistleblower Anderson
sued and immediately after losing her trial against him Judge Scheindlin came into the Court
after the jury had left and entered into the record that she had just learned that Cahill and
others had perjured their testimony in the trial and thus poisoned the jury decision and where
Cahill resigned early amidst the Anderson case and the legally related Iviewit RICO). The
Iviewit RICO4
attorney at law corruption in various divisions of the courts, prosecutors’ offices and more.
is legally related to Anderson and other actions that allege widespread attorney at law corruption in
various divisions of the courts, prosecutors’ offices and more.
That the fraud on the Court in the Anderson case and related cases should lead, when the
time is ripe, for a rehearing for Anderson and the related cases once the court corruption is
cleaned up and it was truly extensive and widespread as Anderson’s testimony revealed.
33. The New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Departmental
Disciplinary Committee was Ordered to be investigated by the New York Appellate Division
of the Supreme Court, Second Judicial Departmental Disciplinary Committee. The reason
those ordered investigations were never completed was because new allegations of conflict
were levied against the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Second Judicial
Departmental Disciplinary Committee.
34. Eliot therefore should be considered a Whistleblower as he is instrumental in bringing about
law enforcement to investigate the corruption in the legal system and because his RICO case
in New York is legally related to New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First
Judicial Departmental Disciplinary Committee Attorney at Law Christine C. Anderson, Esq.
whistleblowing lawsuit against State Actors and Disciplinary Departments. So too, the
retaliation against Eliot involved in denying due process to Eliot’s RICO and his bar and
disciplinary complaints is substantially the same as the retaliation suffered by attorney at law
members of the state bar for their Whistleblower efforts.
35. Due to Eliot’s efforts as a Whistleblower he has come under repeated life threatening
retaliations by attorneys at law over the last decade who desire to cover up their crimes
through continued misuse of the courts and justice system to deny him due process, deprive
him of inheritance and to intentionally obstruct his efforts to get fair and impartial treatment
under law and essentially obstructing any/every effort Eliot makes to seek relief, state or federally to protect his rights and protect his family, all in efforts to try and silence Eliot and
his family.
36. That immediately after the recent warnings by Candice Schwager, Esq.5
family and Attorney Barbara Stone, Esq. were in imminent danger of their lives, exhibited
already herein, the bar associations in the respective states recommended disbarment of two
of the attorneys involved with Eliot and helping him, Joanne Denison, Esq. (IL)6
Stone, Esq. (FL)7 in what appears retaliation by the bar associations against them for blowing
the whistle on massive corruption schemes being operated under the color of law by certain
judges and attorneys in their states who they blew the whistle on.
37. These Whistleblowing attorneys are duty bound to report the misconduct of other members
of their profession by their respective state bar Rules of Professional Conduct in the first
place. By following The Rules of Professional Conduct that they take oath under G-d to
uphold, they are compelled to report any misconduct of other attorneys and judges they are
aware of.
38. The good actors are then rewarded with retaliation by the very institution charged with
investigating the corruption of the reprobate attorneys at law and judges they are exposing
and their law licenses are dangled as leverage to silence them and thus their livelihoods that
that Eliot and his family and attorney Barbara Stone.
are held captive by the Bar Associations who can disbar them are used as threats, which is
like being blacklisted from the profession, a typical mob styled racketeering extortion
scheme reminiscent of mob controlled Unions and their extortion of their members.
39. Like the retaliation from Whistleblowing on the corrupt courts by honest attorneys at law
doing what they are duty bound to do, Eliot is also subject to continuous retaliation by these
reprobate attorneys at law because he is pursuing the law firms and thousands of corporations
worldwide that are using Eliot’s technologies through illegal patent pooling schemes the
lawyers are using to benefit themselves not Eliot from the stolen technologies of Eliot’s and
who have illegally blocked Eliot from market through anticompetitive monopolistic patent
pooling schemes and disabling his legal rights to pursue to such illegal combinations like
those conducted by MPEGLA, LLC., which is controlled by Eliot’s former Intellectual
Property Counsel, Proskauer Rose LLP and which licenses thousands of corporations.
40. Many of these companies such as YouTube and Facebook are wholly dependent on Eliot’s
SUSPENDED Intellectual Properties and these companies are directly tied to the alleged
perpetrators of the Intellectual Property crimes in many instances directly to Proskauer Rose,
a large law firm that Eliot is pursuing as the initial conspirator in the thefts and where these
corporations also have incentive to see Eliot and his family and other shareholders and patent
interest holders dead (including his father) versus successful in Court where they could lose
everything if Eliot succeeds and he will in time, when the due process blocks are busted up.
Iviewit / Eliot Bernstein Amended Complaint
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080509%20FINAL%20AMENDED%20COMPLAINT%20AND%20RICO%20SIGNED%20COPY%20MED.pdf
March 08, 2008 Shira Scheindlin Dismissal of Iviewit RICO complaint
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080808%20Scheindlin%20Dismissal%20of%20Complaint%20no%20comments.pdf
March 08, 2008 Shira Scheindlin Dismissal of Related Cases to Christine C. Anderson, Esq.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080808%20Scheindlin%20Dismissal%20of%20related%20complaints.pdf
i. Case # 502012CP004391XXXXSB – Simon Bernstein Estate
ii. Case # 502011CP000653XXXXSB – Shirley Bernstein Estate
iii. Case # 502014CP002815XXXXSB – Oppenheimer v. Bernstein Minor Children
iv. Case # 502014CP003698XXXXSB – Shirley Trust Construction
v. Case # 502015CP001162XXXXSB – Eliot Bernstein v. Trustee Simon Trust Case OLD CASE
#502014CA014637XXXXMB
WHISTLEBLOWER, CONTINUATION OF RICO ACTIVITIES AFTER PRIOR
FAMILY MINIVAN CAR BOMBING, PRIOR THREATS, SCHEME TO DENY PROPER
HIS FAMILY VIA NEW THREATS OF PHYSICAL DANGER ACTING AS
MONETIZATION OF INVENTIONS, DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
AND PROCEDURE THAT IS OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE.
1. That Eliot has previously filed a RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit before Honorable Judge
Shira A. Scheindlin, 07cv11196 Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department
Disciplinary Committee, et al. and these matters and the criminal elements both proven and
alleged herein appear to be continuations of those crimes by similar and related parties
mostly reprobate attorneys at law. That Eliot filed an Amended Complaint1
this Court can review those records from that case for more information regarding how the
Iviewit matters tie in to many significant events in US History, including the Bush v Gore
election fraud and Supreme Court nomination in a 5-4 vote for President, the collapse of
Enron and more.
2. That Scheindlin in her err filed dismissal of the RICO2
case as defined at the time.
3. Eliot has recently come under new and continued life threatening danger and severe duress
and seeks this Court’s urgent protection from his Whistleblowing efforts on attorneys at law acting outside the color of law in Florida, in a variety of titles, as judges, prosecutors, private
attorneys, state bar disciplinary agent and more. This danger is evidenced by all the
following ongoing issues in the life of Eliot and his family.
4. Massive recent further fraud and other crimes against Eliot and his family, primarily
committed by attorneys at law, with court escalation of retaliation and denial of due process
and procedure against Eliot that obstructs justice, intentionally and with scienter, to interfere
with expectancies/inheritance for Eliot and his minor children and this retaliation due to his
exposing and having reported to prosecutors and criminal authorities attorneys at law
involved directly in crimes committed in, on and by the Florida Probate court and its Florida
Bar members. Eliot and his family are subjected to domestic terrorism under 18 U.S.C. §
2331 and crimes against Humanity.
5. It appears there is a domestic terrorist organization operating with the legal system, where a
mob styled infiltration has occurred at the highest level in the legal system, using the courts
as their business addresses to facilitate their crimes and operate a human trafficking scheme
through guardianships that rob the victims of their legal rights and theft and money
laundering through the probate courts to steal families properties upon the death of their
loved ones. The courts abuse of process creates a mob styled racketeering enterprise
committed under a tainted color of law in the State of Florida that is given cover by the
Florida Bar, which protects its reprobate members who are part of the scheme and artifice to
defraud citizens.
6. A victim is targeted in the Probate/Guardianship court, their assets then stolen after they are
dead in probate or while still living through guardianships of unlawful chicanery designed to
bleed their victims assets as they are slowly put to their death by illegal court “edicts”,
stripped of legal right through illegal legal custody gained and then defenseless stripped of
their assets and isolated from their family members who get in the way.
7. The officers of the Florida Probate court in Eliot’s parents probate and trusts matters were
caught and have admitted to their law firm committing felony criminal acts, including but not
limited to, proven Post Mortem Fraudulent Alteration and Notarization of Court documents
and Dispositive documents posited with the court as a Fraud on the Court, Post Mortem
Admitted Forgeries of documents for decedents Simon and Shirley and other living parties
including Eliot, numerous past and ongoing Frauds on the court and multiple Frauds
committed against Beneficiaries of the estates and trusts. Further they are undergoing
investigations for other crimes not yet proven but formally alleged, including but not limited
to, Insurance Fraud, Fraud on a Creditor, Fraud on a Federal Court (this Court), Mail and
Wire Fraud, Theft of Estate and Trust Assets, Conversion, Extortion, alleged Murder of
Simon Bernstein by Plaintiff Theodore Bernstein and more.
8. Eliot’s exposure of and objections to the court corruption and his filings with criminal
authorities for acts committed by these attorneys at law, operating as officers and fiduciaries
of the probate courts of Judge Martin Colin, Esq. (“Colin”) and Judge David E. French, Esq.
(“French”) , has been covered up and further aided and abetted by the judges of the Florida
Probate court, which are facilitating these highly sophisticated illegal legal crimes under the
guise of probate proceedings and providing cover for the reprobate attorneys who were
caught.
9. These harms are caused by the very courts that should be upholding Eliot’s rights and
protecting him, especially after he cleaned house for the judges by exposing the bad faith acts
of Florida attorneys at law practicing before their courts, the officers appointed by the courts,
who were found acting in concert to Fraud the court and commit a variety of crimes against
the Beneficiaries, these crimes primarily targeting Eliot.
10. Why Eliot? Eliot was joined together in 2008 with American Hero Whistleblower, New
York Supreme Court Appellate Division Departmental Disciplinary Committee attorney at
law, Christine C. Anderson, Esq., by Federal Judge Shira A. Scheindlin who legally related
Eliot’s RICO case involving a massive corruption inside government and almost all
attributable to those with legal degrees, to Anderson’s riveting Whistleblower lawsuit that
exposed a criminal cartel operating at the highest levels of the country’s legal system and
protected by the self-regulating failed attorney at law disciplinary departments they
controlled.
11. That Scheindlin related several other Whistleblower citizens fighting the corruption in the
courts for many years together with Anderson and so began a lengthy and ongoing effort to
expose the corruption that plagues our nation by a small group of very dedicated citizens who
fearlessly took on the corruption machine inside the courts, at great personal and familial
costs.
12. That after finding out how the innards of this corruption scheme worked whereby criminals
disguised as attorneys at law are violating law with impunity, it was apparent that they have
seized the keys to the kingdom at the highest outposts of law and turned a country built on
law into lawlessness society.
13. This has created an unprecedented situation in our country, a coup d'état of the legal system
and everything it controls and now requiring unprecedented actions by both citizens and a
brave few lawyers and judges who are willing to stand up in their roles as honorable and duty
bound to justice attorneys at law and bust up this racket that threatens our nation by turning
in those reprobate members who are acting outside the color of law, despite the consequences
against them by those in control of their profession at this time, unafraid of the retaliation
they most certainly will face.
14. Eliot has recently met even more brave Whistleblower attorneys at law, upholding their oaths
to report the misconduct of their brethren, although these are false brethren, as they are really
criminals using law to commit crime and cover them up, using the courts as retaliatory
weapons against the victims and the retaliation of these lawyers who have done nothing
wrong but fulfill their duty to report other members misconduct is swift and vicious.
15. Joining Anderson’s heroic whistleblowing are now Barbara Stone, Esq., Candice Schwager,
Esq., Joanne Denison, Esq., Kenneth Ditkowski, Esq., Kevin R. Hall, Esq. and Dean Loren,
Esq. and other attorney Whistleblowers who are all exposing the illegally formed bar
associations and the crimes in the court they have witnessed firsthand. Now they are in
danger of losing their livelihoods and being viciously retaliated against for their exposure of
the bad actors by what at first glance appears lawyers, judges, prosecutors and the bar
associations and with deeper inspection one finds they are lawbreakers misusing law to target
their victims.
16. There is also another citizen, William Windsor, who has been jailed for his efforts to
expose the public office corruption in the nation by assembling video of nationwide victims
and again Mr. Windsor’s only crime is that of exposing the underbelly of the legal system
through the eyes of victims. http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index.php
17. The reprobate attorneys are acting to commit crimes in various combinations of racketeering
type fraudulent illegal legal schemes that utilize the courts as host to the crimes and using the
their legal degrees to commit these crimes and then having other criminals disguised as
lawyers planted in the regulatory agencies to cover them up for them, with virtually no fear
of retribution, as the cover up is at the highest levels of the failed self-policing attorney at law
failed Disciplinary Departments, State Bars, Judicial Conduct Commissions and criminal
prosecutorial agencies.
18. The self-policing bar associations and the judicial qualifications commissions instead of
protecting the Whistleblowers exposing their reprobate members and investigating the
complaints filed by the Whistleblowers and citizen victims reporting the misconduct of
judges to them are instead retaliated against.
19. Retaliation against the Whistleblower members of the Florida Bar who are reporting against
other members of the bar committing the crimes include extortionary threats of disbarment
used in efforts to force these brave and heroic whistleblowers from pursuing their acts to
expose the bad actors or else.
20. Further the state bar associations and judicial conduct commissions are denying due process
and procedure of the attorney at law Whistleblowers by disbarring them and preventing and
dismantling their efforts to protect their clients, themselves, their families and the public at
large from the dangers of the reprobate attorneys at law, judges and prosecutors they are
exposing who have corrupted and polluted the legal system, casting a grave appearance of
impropriety over the whole system of jurisprudence and leaving no one capable of putting it
down.
21. The danger to Eliot directly is further evidenced by Eliot and his wife Candice’s receipt of a
phone call at 4am. on April 11, 2015 by his children’s counsel, Candice Schwager, Esq. of
Texas, informing him that their lives were in imminent danger for their whistleblowing
efforts against judicial and attorney at law corruption and to instantly seek federal and state
protections. This phone call and the following actions with state and federal authorities
already involved in Eliot’s life is documented below by attorney at law Barbara Stone, Esq.
who also received a similar call from Candice Schwagger, Esq.:
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 7:07 AM
To: Michael Horowitz [Inspector General @ US DOJ OIG] ~ Partner @ Cadwalader, Wickersham
& Taft LLP (michael.horowitz@cwt.com ); 'The Honorable Glenn Alan Fine, Inspector General ~
Cc: 'Barbara Stone (bstone575@gmail.com )'; 'JoAnne M. Denison Esq. @ Denison & Associates,
From: Eliot Ivan Bernstein [mailto:iviewit@iviewit.tv ]
Department of Justice'
PC (jdenison@surfree.com )'; Candice Schwager @ Schwager Law Firm
(candiceschwager@icloud.com ); 'Andrew Dietz @ Rock-It Cargo USA, Inc.
(andyd@rockitcargo.com )'; 'CANDICE BERNSTEIN (tourcandy@gmail.com )'; 'Caroline
Prochotska Rogers Esq. (caroline@cprogers.com )'; 'Eliot I. Bernstein (iviewit@iviewit.tv )'; 'Marc
R. Garber Esq. (marcrgarber@gmail.com )'; 'Marc R. Garber Esq. @ Flaster Greenberg P.C.
(marc.garber@flastergreenberg.com) '; 'Michele M. Mulrooney ~ Partner @ Venable LLP
(mmulrooney@Venable.com )'
Subject: Eliot Bernstein. FW: We have been warned by counsel that we are in danger and need
of Federal protection
Dear Inspector General Horowitz, please add this email to my ongoing case file with DOJ OIG. As
this involves further potential dangers to my family, where it has been alleged my father was
murdered and a Coroner’s report reveals several elevated heavy metals, I take this warning very
seriously, especially where I have uncovered and proven fraud and forgeries of deceased parties
to gain Dominion and Control of my deceased father’s estate, the crimes committed by
Attorneys at Law. I have been trying to contact the FBI for several months to report several very
serious crimes that require federal investigations and have supposedly contacted the FBI who
refused to give me names of the people that were supposed to be doing the intake and have not
heard back from them at all. I have tried to contact your offices and similarly I was unable to
confirm anyone’s name that I was speaking to and if in fact you had gotten my messages. Please
feel free to contact me at my numbers below. Eliot
Eliot I. Bernstein
Inventor
From: Eliot Bernstein [mailto:iviewit5@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 6:57 AM
To: 'Detective Andrew Panzer @ Palm Beach County Sheriff (PanzerA@pbso.org)'
Subject: Eliot Bernstein. FW: We have been warned by counsel that we are in danger and need
of Federal protection
Dear Detective Panzer, please add this to the ongoing investigation of my family estate and trust
matters. Barbara Stone is a Florida Attorney who is exposing Judicial Corruption. I got a call at
4am from attorney Candice Schwager who informed me and Candice my wife that our lives and
those of our children were in imminent danger for our Whistleblowing efforts. This warning
came from a licensed attorney. Paul Wright is at the FBI according to Barbara. I was told to
contact state and federal authorities for protection. Eliot
From: barbara stone [mailto:bstone575@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 7:36 PM
To: Paul Wright
Cc: Eliot Bernstein; Candice Schwager, Esq.; JoAnne M Denison, Esq.
Subject: We have been warned by counsel that we are in danger and need of Federal protection
My attorney, Candice Schwager who is also the attorney for Eliot Bernstein contacted
both of us on or about 4:00 am EST on Saturday and advised us to contact Federal
authorities for protection.
She warned me and Eliot Bernstein that we and our families are in danger and in need of
immediate Federal protection due to our efforts to expose judicial corruption.
22. That this wakeup call warning of imminent danger and to get the children protected by a
licensed Attorney at Law has left Eliot and his wife Candice panicked and frantic for the last
two plus weeks trying to get help and keep an eye on the children at the same time and left
them hardly able to keep up with the sudden increased legal hearings and pleadings dumped
on them as the pressure is mounting on the bad actors from the criminal acts being uncovered
in the courts.
23. These sharp practices of heaping hearing after hearing on Eliot seems calculated to heighten
the pressure on them intentionally in the six legal cases involving the Estates and Trusts of
Eliot’s deceased parents, Simon and Shirley as pressure mounts and their crimes are further
uncovered and reported on.
24. Many of the legal actions require strict deadlines, there are a mass of scheduled hearings,
hearings of Eliot’s changed overnight and moved up a month by Judge Colin on his own
initiative with demands that Eliot be present at that time or else lose his rights regarding
complicated accounting proceedings, where thousands of pages of documents were dumped
on him without giving him the opportunity to review them before the hearing and all this
coming as Eliot and others are finding out about a plethora of crimes committed by the
attorneys at law, fiduciaries and other parties involved in the Estates and Trust cases of
Simon and Shirley Bernstein.
25. That the court will again take note that it was alleged by Ted Bernstein and Pamela Simon on
the day Simon died that he was murdered, TED and PAM are his estranged son and daughter
who were cut out of the Estates and Trusts with their lineal descendants and if the murder
allegation is true Eliot could be next.
26. That the Court will take note that a bomb was placed in Eliot’s car (see Graphic images of
car bombing @ www.iviewit.tv) that blew up three cars next to it as well and where every
day of Eliot and Candice’s life that all of these matters are not investigated and handled
properly with fair and impartial due process given them, they are in danger every time they
start their vehicle to take the children to school in the morning.
27. This car bombing alleged to have taken place over Eliot’s claims that reprobate attorneys at
law stole his and others Intellectual Properties worth an estimated billions to trillions
(currently over 90% of internet traffic uses the technologies as they are backbone imaging
and video technologies), and the attorneys at law were using the Court system and other
Government agencies, including the US Patent Office, to enable the highly sophisticated
legal crimes deployed by major law firms to steal the technologies.
28. When caught in the act it is alleged that these lawyers infiltrated some of the highest outposts
of law in efforts to cover up the crimes by interfering with Eliot’s due process rights and by
obstructing Justice inside government agencies and when caught at the cover up then tried to
murder him and have since been pursuing a pattern and practice of crimes to hurt and damage
Eliot and his family.
29. The death of Simon Bernstein if he was murdered may also have been due to his ownership
interests in the Intellectual Properties, his potential settlement interests in Eliot’s RICO and
his intimate knowledge of how the royalties were being converted illegally by the law firms
that stole the technologies (primarily Proskauer Rose LLP) through the Madoff and Sir Allen
Stanford Ponzi Schemes (aka criminal attorney at law and law firm money laundering
schemes for monies stolen from clients.)
30. As the court will note in the Probate and Trust cases involving Eliot’s three minor children
and Oppenheimer, there are accounts at the heart of that matter that came from Stanford
Bank and Stanford Trust that then transferred with the agents from Stanford to Oppenheimer
Trust and the accounts and agents transferred to JP Morgan, where it is alleged that millions
of dollars of Simon’s monies in the estates and trusts disappeared weeks before his untimely
and strange death.
31. Eliot has had repeated death threats over a thirteen year period reported to state and federal
authorities for his Whistleblowing efforts against the highest ranking members of three state
bar associations, judges, prosecutors, attorneys at law and high ranking government officials
throughout the nation who were involved in the thefts of the Intellectual Properties.
Wherefore, Eliot requests that there be an order of federal protection from life
threatening danger to Eliot and his family.
DESIGNATION OF STATUS AS WHISTLEBLOWER AND AFFORD ALL STATE AND
FEDERAL WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS AND PROVIDE FEDERAL WITNESS
PROTECTION
32. That while Eliot is not an attorney at law, nor a member of any bar association, his efforts to
expose the corruption of the members of three state bar associations have led to Orders ( see
URL @
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2006%2017%20Cahill%20Motion%20to%20mov
e%20complaints%20krane%20rubenstein.pdf )
from the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Departmental
Disciplinary Committee for investigation of three of its members, including former deceased
President of the New York State Bar at the time, Steven C. Krane, Esq. of Proskauer Rose
(who died suddenly after the investigations were ordered), Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. of
Proskauer Rose and sole patent evaluator for MPEGLA, LLC (who Eliot claims is the largest
infringer of his Intellectual Properties) and Thomas Cahill, Esq., the former Chief Counsel
for the First Judicial Departmental Disciplinary Committee (who Whistleblower Anderson
sued and immediately after losing her trial against him Judge Scheindlin came into the Court
after the jury had left and entered into the record that she had just learned that Cahill and
others had perjured their testimony in the trial and thus poisoned the jury decision and where
Cahill resigned early amidst the Anderson case and the legally related Iviewit RICO). The
Iviewit RICO4
attorney at law corruption in various divisions of the courts, prosecutors’ offices and more.
is legally related to Anderson and other actions that allege widespread attorney at law corruption in
various divisions of the courts, prosecutors’ offices and more.
That the fraud on the Court in the Anderson case and related cases should lead, when the
time is ripe, for a rehearing for Anderson and the related cases once the court corruption is
cleaned up and it was truly extensive and widespread as Anderson’s testimony revealed.
33. The New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Departmental
Disciplinary Committee was Ordered to be investigated by the New York Appellate Division
of the Supreme Court, Second Judicial Departmental Disciplinary Committee. The reason
those ordered investigations were never completed was because new allegations of conflict
were levied against the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Second Judicial
Departmental Disciplinary Committee.
34. Eliot therefore should be considered a Whistleblower as he is instrumental in bringing about
law enforcement to investigate the corruption in the legal system and because his RICO case
in New York is legally related to New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First
Judicial Departmental Disciplinary Committee Attorney at Law Christine C. Anderson, Esq.
whistleblowing lawsuit against State Actors and Disciplinary Departments. So too, the
retaliation against Eliot involved in denying due process to Eliot’s RICO and his bar and
disciplinary complaints is substantially the same as the retaliation suffered by attorney at law
members of the state bar for their Whistleblower efforts.
35. Due to Eliot’s efforts as a Whistleblower he has come under repeated life threatening
retaliations by attorneys at law over the last decade who desire to cover up their crimes
through continued misuse of the courts and justice system to deny him due process, deprive
him of inheritance and to intentionally obstruct his efforts to get fair and impartial treatment
under law and essentially obstructing any/every effort Eliot makes to seek relief, state or federally to protect his rights and protect his family, all in efforts to try and silence Eliot and
his family.
36. That immediately after the recent warnings by Candice Schwager, Esq.5
family and Attorney Barbara Stone, Esq. were in imminent danger of their lives, exhibited
already herein, the bar associations in the respective states recommended disbarment of two
of the attorneys involved with Eliot and helping him, Joanne Denison, Esq. (IL)6
Stone, Esq. (FL)7 in what appears retaliation by the bar associations against them for blowing
the whistle on massive corruption schemes being operated under the color of law by certain
judges and attorneys in their states who they blew the whistle on.
37. These Whistleblowing attorneys are duty bound to report the misconduct of other members
of their profession by their respective state bar Rules of Professional Conduct in the first
place. By following The Rules of Professional Conduct that they take oath under G-d to
uphold, they are compelled to report any misconduct of other attorneys and judges they are
aware of.
38. The good actors are then rewarded with retaliation by the very institution charged with
investigating the corruption of the reprobate attorneys at law and judges they are exposing
and their law licenses are dangled as leverage to silence them and thus their livelihoods that
that Eliot and his family and attorney Barbara Stone.
are held captive by the Bar Associations who can disbar them are used as threats, which is
like being blacklisted from the profession, a typical mob styled racketeering extortion
scheme reminiscent of mob controlled Unions and their extortion of their members.
39. Like the retaliation from Whistleblowing on the corrupt courts by honest attorneys at law
doing what they are duty bound to do, Eliot is also subject to continuous retaliation by these
reprobate attorneys at law because he is pursuing the law firms and thousands of corporations
worldwide that are using Eliot’s technologies through illegal patent pooling schemes the
lawyers are using to benefit themselves not Eliot from the stolen technologies of Eliot’s and
who have illegally blocked Eliot from market through anticompetitive monopolistic patent
pooling schemes and disabling his legal rights to pursue to such illegal combinations like
those conducted by MPEGLA, LLC., which is controlled by Eliot’s former Intellectual
Property Counsel, Proskauer Rose LLP and which licenses thousands of corporations.
40. Many of these companies such as YouTube and Facebook are wholly dependent on Eliot’s
SUSPENDED Intellectual Properties and these companies are directly tied to the alleged
perpetrators of the Intellectual Property crimes in many instances directly to Proskauer Rose,
a large law firm that Eliot is pursuing as the initial conspirator in the thefts and where these
corporations also have incentive to see Eliot and his family and other shareholders and patent
interest holders dead (including his father) versus successful in Court where they could lose
everything if Eliot succeeds and he will in time, when the due process blocks are busted up.
Iviewit / Eliot Bernstein Amended Complaint
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080509%20FINAL%20AMENDED%20COMPLAINT%20AND%20RICO%20SIGNED%20COPY%20MED.pdf
March 08, 2008 Shira Scheindlin Dismissal of Iviewit RICO complaint
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080808%20Scheindlin%20Dismissal%20of%20Complaint%20no%20comments.pdf
March 08, 2008 Shira Scheindlin Dismissal of Related Cases to Christine C. Anderson, Esq.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080808%20Scheindlin%20Dismissal%20of%20related%20complaints.pdf
i. Case # 502012CP004391XXXXSB – Simon Bernstein Estate
ii. Case # 502011CP000653XXXXSB – Shirley Bernstein Estate
iii. Case # 502014CP002815XXXXSB – Oppenheimer v. Bernstein Minor Children
iv. Case # 502014CP003698XXXXSB – Shirley Trust Construction
v. Case # 502015CP001162XXXXSB – Eliot Bernstein v. Trustee Simon Trust Case OLD CASE
#502014CA014637XXXXMB
Source, Full Document (MOTION) and to Download
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkiMjlfV2lDNmNJdHM/edit
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Plaintiff, Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox NOTIFIES Intel Corp., (INTC:NASDAQ GS) (INTC.OQ) (INTC:US) of Massive Shareholder Liability by sending INTC, Intel Corp a Notice of Claim, Notice of Liability Regarding Federal RICO / Racketeering Lawsuit District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, filed February 26th, 2013 by Plaintiff Crystal Cox. Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach, District Judge James C. Mahan, Las Vegas Nevada.
Plaintiff Blogger Crystal Cox Notice of Claim, Notice of Liability; Defendant INTC, Intel Corp., Douglas Melamed personally and professionally, Steven R. Rodger personally and professionally. RICO / Racketeering Lawsuit, District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF.
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
Pro Se Plaintiff
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
March 6th, 2013
Steven R. Rodgers
Vice President of Legal, Corporate Affairs and
Deputy General Counsel of Litigation, Licensing & Patents, Intel Corporation
Douglas Melamed
Intel Corp. General Counsel
Intel, INTC Shareholders, Auditors, Insurance Providers
Regarding: NOTICE of Liability;
Notice of Claim Regarding Intel Corporation and Possible Trillion Dollar Fraud on Intel, INTC Shareholders and Others. Notice to all Intel Executives, Shareholders, Board Members, Insurance Providers, Auditors, and all financially connected to Intel Corp., INTC in any way.
Notice Regarding RICO / Racketeering Complaint Filed in District Of Nevada, Liability to INTC, Intel Shareholders and Intel Executives.
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF names Douglas Melamed, Steven R. Rodgers and Intel Corp. in conspiracy to STOP the flow of information in online media regarding INTC, Intel’s Involvement in the iViewit Technology Theft.
Douglas Melamed, Steven R. Rodgers and Whom It May Concern:
This notice is written upon the Knowledge and Belief of Investigative Blogger Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox. I, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, write this letter to notify you of legal action pending against Intel, INTC in the District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF Lawsuit, whereby Intel Corp., Douglas Melamed, and Steven R. Rodgers are named Defendants.
Notice was sent to Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation, who is named Personally and Professionally, On December 27th 2012 and again in On January 27th 2013. As well as updated court documents. Notices have also been sent to INTC, Intel Corp. General Counsel Douglas Melamed
Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation have, thus far, ignored this serious legal matter, and it is assumed have failed to notify auditors, shareholders, Intel Ceo’s, and all who should be notified of this massive liability to Intel Corp. and INTC Shareholders.
Upon information and belief, the frauds included but are not limited to the failure of Intel Corp., INTC, to disclose both this lawsuit and the Intellectual Property infringement of the iViewit Technology, which is a Trillion dollar liability to Intel, INTC Shareholders and the Intel Corporation.
Intel Corp., INTC executives have known of this massive liability over violations of NDA’s and infringement of the iViewit Video Technology for over a Decade.
Ex-Senior Vice President, General Counsel of Intel Corp., INTC, Bruce Sewell, now General Counsel of APPLE, who is also named in this Federal RICO Lawsuit. Corresponded with Eliot Bernstein regarding this massive undisclosed liability. I, Crystal Cox have attached those correspondences to this Notice of Liability, as well as added links at the bottom of this letter.
APPLE Executive Steven Dowling has also communicated with Eliot Bernstein of iViewit Technology regarding this massive undisclosed liability.
Eliot Bernstein, founder of iViewit Technology Company, and one of the inventors of the iViewit Video Technology, is named as a Defendant in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, which was filed in alleged conspiracy to suppress Internet Blogs, Domain Names and Online Media reporting on the iViewit Technology theft, which involves Intel Corp., INTC, as noted in the iViewit Technology SEC Complaint, RICO Complaint, FBI Complaints, USPTO Complaint and other Federal Investigations into this matter.
In regard to Eliot Bernstein and the iViewit Technology Company, Intel Corp., INTC has massive, undisclosed liabilities and this notice is to warn all those financially tied to INTC, Intel Corporation of this massive liability. Failing to disclose this liability is in direct violation of various SEC laws and rules including but not limited to FASB No. 5 requirements for disclosing liabilities and more.
The Eliot Bernstein and the iViewit Technology Company, also involves an attempted murder of his family and a car bombing that blew up three vehicles in addition to Bernstein Vehicle.
The iViewit Technology theft is a very serious matter, and a massive, undisclosed liability to Intel, INTC shareholders, auditors, and executives. The iViewit Technology theft involves high stakes corporate theft and fraud of a 13 Trillion Dollar Intellectual Property.
Notably, federal Judge Shira Scheindlin referred to the iViewit Case as a case involving Murder that has also been marked as legally “related” by Scheindlin to an ongoing Federal Whistleblower case, the Christine Anderson case. ( Christine C. Anderson,Case No.: 07cv9599 Plaintiff Appellant, (SAS) (AJP), 2d Cir. No. 09-5059-cv v. The State of New York,Defendants-Appellee)
Steven Rodgers Vice President has allegedly conspired with WIPO, ( World Intellectual Property Organization) Director Francis Gurry, and also WIPO Legal Edward Kwakwa and also Eric Wilbers of WIPO, in order to wipe out blogs, online media that report on the iViewit Technology Story and cover up this massive liability by wiping out blogs, changing domain names servers of Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox.
I, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, have a web stat that shows WIPO looking at my Notice to WIPO of massive fraud, and then emailing Steven Rodgers of INTC, Intel Corporation.
Eric Wilbers of WIPO has spoke with Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox regarding this matter. WIPO has been notified of this massive fraud months ago, that will affect Intel, INTC Shareholders. WIPO has done nothing, that I am aware of, to correct this matter nor to notify executives, insurance providers, shareholders of this massive liability.
Steven Rodgers Intel Corporation knows of the iViewit Technology infringement by Intel, and has failed disclose this liability to Shareholders, Executives, Auditors..
Intel Corp. INTC Shareholders have a massive liability in this matter. This letter is a NOTICE to Intel Corp Executives, Shareholders, Auditors, Liability Carriers, Insurance Provides and more, to disclose this massive liability, that by LAW Intel Corporation, INTC, Must Disclose.
I, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, have attached the Federal RICO Complaint District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF to this eMail notice, as well as documents of Intel’s Connection to this liability.
Here is an Online Link to the RICO Complaint Filed February 26th, 2013 by Plaintiff, Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/147018909/District-of-Nevada-213-cv-00297-JCM-NJK-Civil-RICO-Complaint-COX-vs-Randazza-RacketeerCorrupt-Organization-Jurisdiction-Diversity-Case
Also note that Portland Oregon Law Firm Tonkon Torp LLP and Mike Morgan of Tonkon Torp are also named in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF.
Tonkon Torp Law Firm, Portland represented Intel and represented Enron in their bankruptcy, this is very much connected to the Iviewit Technology case and also brings massive financial liability to the shareholders of INTC, Intel Corp.
There is definite action that Steven Rodgers of INTC, Intel Corporation should have take to disclose this legal action. There is definite action that Bruce Sewell former General Counsel at Intel Corporation should have also taken to disclose this legal action. Bruce Sewell, now General Counsel of APPLE is also a named Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, as is APPLE Executive Steve Dowling.
This Notice of Claim and Liability serves as a warning to INTC, Intel Shareholders, Auditors, Insurance Providers, CEO’s, and all companies and people connected to INTC, Intel Financially for any reason of the massive, pending liability to Intel Corporation, INTC.
INTC, Intel has violated NDA’s with Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Technology. INTC, Intel is named in Federal RICO Complaints, SEC Complaints and more, in regard to massive liability over the infringement of the iViewit Video Technology, which is said to be worth 13 Trillion Dollars.
Knowing the liability that Intel, INTC has over the iViewit Video Technology, and violations of agreements with Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Technology, Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation recently conspired with WIPO and WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson, to take Domain Names from Eliot Bernstein, Founder of iViewit and one of the iViewit Inventors, and Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, who had been reporting on the iViewit Technology theft for 3 years.
Peter L. Michaelson has conspired with the Plaintiff in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, Marc J. Randazza, who now is also a named Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, in order to launch a public defamation, disgrace, and discrediting campaign against Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox, reporting on the iViewit Technology Theft for over 3 years.
Marc J. Randazza, Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, conspired by officially stating in WIPO Complaints, WIPO Publications, WIPO Decisions, and WIPO Legal Announcements to the World, that Eliot Bernstein, Founder of iViewit and one of the iViewit Inventors, and Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox are guilty of the crime of extortion, of which neither Eliot Bernstein, Founder of iViewit and one of the iViewit Inventors, nor Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox have been charged with, under investigation for, nor prosecuted of.
This action by Peter L. Michaelson and Marc J. Randazza in WIPO Decisions and in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, was intentional to discredit and silence the reporting of the world’s biggest technology crime. Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox has filed claims against all those conspiring with Plaintiff Marc J. Randazza in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, and the WIPO Decision.
I, Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal Cox, have attached correspondence between Intel, INTC and Eliot Bernstein to this notice. Here are links to further information regarding the massive liability to INTC, Intel Corp. Shareholders, Insurance Carriers and Intel Executives.
Links to Documents proving this massive Liability to INTC, Intel Shareholders, Auditors, Insurance Providers, CEO’s, and all companies and people connected to INTC, Intel Financially for any reason.
iViewit Technology SEC Complaint Naming INTC, Intel Corp.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf
iViewit Technology NDA Agreements with INTC, Intel Corp.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/nda%20violators.pdf
iViewit Technology Demand Letter to INTC, Intel Corp.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/130695905/iviewittv_CompanyDocs_United-States-District-Court-Southern-District-NY_20090306-Intel-Demand-Letter-_-Liability-Exposure--Signed-3549l
More Regarding INTC, Intel Corp and iViewit Technology
.
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?tag=intc
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=498
http://www.rayfordwilkins.com/2012/10/intel-corp-intc-refuse-to-disclose.html
http://intelcorruption.blogspot.com/2010/10/intel-general-counsel-bruce-sewell.html
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090306%20Intel%20Demand%20Letter%20&%20Liability%20Exposure%20%20Signed%203549l.pdf
http://federalricolawsuit.blogspot.com/2010/01/judiciary-committee-reviews-iviewit.html
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/RICO%20CRIME%20CHARTS.pdf
I, Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal Cox, am an Investigative Blogger, I have read thousands of pages of documents over 3 years, listened to Senate Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings, read depositions, read billing documents, listening to depositions, read court filings, read NDA agreements, and massive amounts of proof of the liability that Intel has. This is an Important issue and by LAW must be disclosed.
I, Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal Cox, intend to file this Notice with the SEC, 7 days after sending this official notice to INTC, Intel Corporation.
I have read SEC Complaints, RICO Complaints, USPTO Complaints, NDA Agreements, Contracts, and massive amounts of documented proof of the rightful Inventors and owner of the iViewit Technology that 99% of ALL video uses today, and I feel it is my duty to Warn INTC Investors, shareholders, auditors, insurance providers, ceos and more regarding this massive liability.
Upon my knowledge and belief, Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation has directly conspired to silence me, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, as I have been reporting on the iViewit Technology theft for over 3 years. Due to Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation conspiring to remove my online media regarding the iViewit Technology theft, I have filed legal action against Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation personally and professionally, and against the INTC Company for 10 Million Each.
This is a serious and valid Notice of Claim, Notice of Liability and is in response to Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation, Douglas Melamed, and Intel Corp. being named in a Federal RICO, Racketeering Lawsuit, FILED by Plaintiff Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox, District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF.
Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF have directly attacked me, defaming me, suppressed my online news media blogs, endangered my life, threatened me, stolen my intellectual property, and ruined my reputation in order to SUPPRESS the flow of information regarding their involvement and liability in the iViewit Technology Theft.
Pro Se Plaintiff
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF
Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox
Crystal Cox News
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
PDF of INTC, Intel Corp., Notice of Claim, Notice of Liability
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/148002688/INTC-Intel-Notice-of-Claim-Notice-of-Liablity
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF RICO Filing
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/147018909/District-of-Nevada-213-cv-00297-JCM-NJK-Civil-RICO-Complaint-COX-vs-Randazza-RacketeerCorrupt-Organization-Jurisdiction-Diversity-Case
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF Docket
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/147851256/213-cv-00297-JCM-VCF---Nevada-RICO
If you are concerned about this serious liability to INTC, Intel Corp. Stocks, Shares, Assets or have questions regarding this legal action, here are Intel Corp., INTC Key Executive, and Contact Information.
Originally Posted At
http://deniedpatent.blogspot.com/2013/03/plaintiff-investigative-blogger-crystal.html
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
Pro Se Plaintiff
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
March 6th, 2013
Steven R. Rodgers
Vice President of Legal, Corporate Affairs and
Deputy General Counsel of Litigation, Licensing & Patents, Intel Corporation
Douglas Melamed
Intel Corp. General Counsel
Intel, INTC Shareholders, Auditors, Insurance Providers
Regarding: NOTICE of Liability;
Notice of Claim Regarding Intel Corporation and Possible Trillion Dollar Fraud on Intel, INTC Shareholders and Others. Notice to all Intel Executives, Shareholders, Board Members, Insurance Providers, Auditors, and all financially connected to Intel Corp., INTC in any way.
Notice Regarding RICO / Racketeering Complaint Filed in District Of Nevada, Liability to INTC, Intel Shareholders and Intel Executives.
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF names Douglas Melamed, Steven R. Rodgers and Intel Corp. in conspiracy to STOP the flow of information in online media regarding INTC, Intel’s Involvement in the iViewit Technology Theft.
Douglas Melamed, Steven R. Rodgers and Whom It May Concern:
This notice is written upon the Knowledge and Belief of Investigative Blogger Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox. I, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, write this letter to notify you of legal action pending against Intel, INTC in the District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF Lawsuit, whereby Intel Corp., Douglas Melamed, and Steven R. Rodgers are named Defendants.
Notice was sent to Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation, who is named Personally and Professionally, On December 27th 2012 and again in On January 27th 2013. As well as updated court documents. Notices have also been sent to INTC, Intel Corp. General Counsel Douglas Melamed
Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation have, thus far, ignored this serious legal matter, and it is assumed have failed to notify auditors, shareholders, Intel Ceo’s, and all who should be notified of this massive liability to Intel Corp. and INTC Shareholders.
Upon information and belief, the frauds included but are not limited to the failure of Intel Corp., INTC, to disclose both this lawsuit and the Intellectual Property infringement of the iViewit Technology, which is a Trillion dollar liability to Intel, INTC Shareholders and the Intel Corporation.
Intel Corp., INTC executives have known of this massive liability over violations of NDA’s and infringement of the iViewit Video Technology for over a Decade.
Ex-Senior Vice President, General Counsel of Intel Corp., INTC, Bruce Sewell, now General Counsel of APPLE, who is also named in this Federal RICO Lawsuit. Corresponded with Eliot Bernstein regarding this massive undisclosed liability. I, Crystal Cox have attached those correspondences to this Notice of Liability, as well as added links at the bottom of this letter.
APPLE Executive Steven Dowling has also communicated with Eliot Bernstein of iViewit Technology regarding this massive undisclosed liability.
Eliot Bernstein, founder of iViewit Technology Company, and one of the inventors of the iViewit Video Technology, is named as a Defendant in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, which was filed in alleged conspiracy to suppress Internet Blogs, Domain Names and Online Media reporting on the iViewit Technology theft, which involves Intel Corp., INTC, as noted in the iViewit Technology SEC Complaint, RICO Complaint, FBI Complaints, USPTO Complaint and other Federal Investigations into this matter.
In regard to Eliot Bernstein and the iViewit Technology Company, Intel Corp., INTC has massive, undisclosed liabilities and this notice is to warn all those financially tied to INTC, Intel Corporation of this massive liability. Failing to disclose this liability is in direct violation of various SEC laws and rules including but not limited to FASB No. 5 requirements for disclosing liabilities and more.
The Eliot Bernstein and the iViewit Technology Company, also involves an attempted murder of his family and a car bombing that blew up three vehicles in addition to Bernstein Vehicle.
The iViewit Technology theft is a very serious matter, and a massive, undisclosed liability to Intel, INTC shareholders, auditors, and executives. The iViewit Technology theft involves high stakes corporate theft and fraud of a 13 Trillion Dollar Intellectual Property.
Notably, federal Judge Shira Scheindlin referred to the iViewit Case as a case involving Murder that has also been marked as legally “related” by Scheindlin to an ongoing Federal Whistleblower case, the Christine Anderson case. ( Christine C. Anderson,Case No.: 07cv9599 Plaintiff Appellant, (SAS) (AJP), 2d Cir. No. 09-5059-cv v. The State of New York,Defendants-Appellee)
Steven Rodgers Vice President has allegedly conspired with WIPO, ( World Intellectual Property Organization) Director Francis Gurry, and also WIPO Legal Edward Kwakwa and also Eric Wilbers of WIPO, in order to wipe out blogs, online media that report on the iViewit Technology Story and cover up this massive liability by wiping out blogs, changing domain names servers of Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox.
I, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, have a web stat that shows WIPO looking at my Notice to WIPO of massive fraud, and then emailing Steven Rodgers of INTC, Intel Corporation.
Eric Wilbers of WIPO has spoke with Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox regarding this matter. WIPO has been notified of this massive fraud months ago, that will affect Intel, INTC Shareholders. WIPO has done nothing, that I am aware of, to correct this matter nor to notify executives, insurance providers, shareholders of this massive liability.
Steven Rodgers Intel Corporation knows of the iViewit Technology infringement by Intel, and has failed disclose this liability to Shareholders, Executives, Auditors..
Intel Corp. INTC Shareholders have a massive liability in this matter. This letter is a NOTICE to Intel Corp Executives, Shareholders, Auditors, Liability Carriers, Insurance Provides and more, to disclose this massive liability, that by LAW Intel Corporation, INTC, Must Disclose.
I, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, have attached the Federal RICO Complaint District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF to this eMail notice, as well as documents of Intel’s Connection to this liability.
Here is an Online Link to the RICO Complaint Filed February 26th, 2013 by Plaintiff, Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/147018909/District-of-Nevada-213-cv-00297-JCM-NJK-Civil-RICO-Complaint-COX-vs-Randazza-RacketeerCorrupt-Organization-Jurisdiction-Diversity-Case
Also note that Portland Oregon Law Firm Tonkon Torp LLP and Mike Morgan of Tonkon Torp are also named in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF.
Tonkon Torp Law Firm, Portland represented Intel and represented Enron in their bankruptcy, this is very much connected to the Iviewit Technology case and also brings massive financial liability to the shareholders of INTC, Intel Corp.
There is definite action that Steven Rodgers of INTC, Intel Corporation should have take to disclose this legal action. There is definite action that Bruce Sewell former General Counsel at Intel Corporation should have also taken to disclose this legal action. Bruce Sewell, now General Counsel of APPLE is also a named Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, as is APPLE Executive Steve Dowling.
This Notice of Claim and Liability serves as a warning to INTC, Intel Shareholders, Auditors, Insurance Providers, CEO’s, and all companies and people connected to INTC, Intel Financially for any reason of the massive, pending liability to Intel Corporation, INTC.
INTC, Intel has violated NDA’s with Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Technology. INTC, Intel is named in Federal RICO Complaints, SEC Complaints and more, in regard to massive liability over the infringement of the iViewit Video Technology, which is said to be worth 13 Trillion Dollars.
Knowing the liability that Intel, INTC has over the iViewit Video Technology, and violations of agreements with Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Technology, Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation recently conspired with WIPO and WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson, to take Domain Names from Eliot Bernstein, Founder of iViewit and one of the iViewit Inventors, and Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, who had been reporting on the iViewit Technology theft for 3 years.
Peter L. Michaelson has conspired with the Plaintiff in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, Marc J. Randazza, who now is also a named Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, in order to launch a public defamation, disgrace, and discrediting campaign against Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox, reporting on the iViewit Technology Theft for over 3 years.
Marc J. Randazza, Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, conspired by officially stating in WIPO Complaints, WIPO Publications, WIPO Decisions, and WIPO Legal Announcements to the World, that Eliot Bernstein, Founder of iViewit and one of the iViewit Inventors, and Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox are guilty of the crime of extortion, of which neither Eliot Bernstein, Founder of iViewit and one of the iViewit Inventors, nor Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox have been charged with, under investigation for, nor prosecuted of.
This action by Peter L. Michaelson and Marc J. Randazza in WIPO Decisions and in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, was intentional to discredit and silence the reporting of the world’s biggest technology crime. Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox has filed claims against all those conspiring with Plaintiff Marc J. Randazza in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, and the WIPO Decision.
I, Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal Cox, have attached correspondence between Intel, INTC and Eliot Bernstein to this notice. Here are links to further information regarding the massive liability to INTC, Intel Corp. Shareholders, Insurance Carriers and Intel Executives.
Links to Documents proving this massive Liability to INTC, Intel Shareholders, Auditors, Insurance Providers, CEO’s, and all companies and people connected to INTC, Intel Financially for any reason.
iViewit Technology SEC Complaint Naming INTC, Intel Corp.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf
iViewit Technology NDA Agreements with INTC, Intel Corp.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/nda%20violators.pdf
iViewit Technology Demand Letter to INTC, Intel Corp.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/130695905/iviewittv_CompanyDocs_United-States-District-Court-Southern-District-NY_20090306-Intel-Demand-Letter-_-Liability-Exposure--Signed-3549l
More Regarding INTC, Intel Corp and iViewit Technology
.
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?tag=intc
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=498
http://www.rayfordwilkins.com/2012/10/intel-corp-intc-refuse-to-disclose.html
http://intelcorruption.blogspot.com/2010/10/intel-general-counsel-bruce-sewell.html
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090306%20Intel%20Demand%20Letter%20&%20Liability%20Exposure%20%20Signed%203549l.pdf
http://federalricolawsuit.blogspot.com/2010/01/judiciary-committee-reviews-iviewit.html
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/RICO%20CRIME%20CHARTS.pdf
I, Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal Cox, am an Investigative Blogger, I have read thousands of pages of documents over 3 years, listened to Senate Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings, read depositions, read billing documents, listening to depositions, read court filings, read NDA agreements, and massive amounts of proof of the liability that Intel has. This is an Important issue and by LAW must be disclosed.
I, Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal Cox, intend to file this Notice with the SEC, 7 days after sending this official notice to INTC, Intel Corporation.
I have read SEC Complaints, RICO Complaints, USPTO Complaints, NDA Agreements, Contracts, and massive amounts of documented proof of the rightful Inventors and owner of the iViewit Technology that 99% of ALL video uses today, and I feel it is my duty to Warn INTC Investors, shareholders, auditors, insurance providers, ceos and more regarding this massive liability.
Upon my knowledge and belief, Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation has directly conspired to silence me, Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox, as I have been reporting on the iViewit Technology theft for over 3 years. Due to Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation conspiring to remove my online media regarding the iViewit Technology theft, I have filed legal action against Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation personally and professionally, and against the INTC Company for 10 Million Each.
This is a serious and valid Notice of Claim, Notice of Liability and is in response to Steven Rodgers Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Intel Corporation, Douglas Melamed, and Intel Corp. being named in a Federal RICO, Racketeering Lawsuit, FILED by Plaintiff Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox, District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF.
Defendant in District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF have directly attacked me, defaming me, suppressed my online news media blogs, endangered my life, threatened me, stolen my intellectual property, and ruined my reputation in order to SUPPRESS the flow of information regarding their involvement and liability in the iViewit Technology Theft.
Pro Se Plaintiff
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF
Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox
Crystal Cox News
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
PDF of INTC, Intel Corp., Notice of Claim, Notice of Liability
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/148002688/INTC-Intel-Notice-of-Claim-Notice-of-Liablity
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF RICO Filing
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/147018909/District-of-Nevada-213-cv-00297-JCM-NJK-Civil-RICO-Complaint-COX-vs-Randazza-RacketeerCorrupt-Organization-Jurisdiction-Diversity-Case
District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF Docket
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/147851256/213-cv-00297-JCM-VCF---Nevada-RICO
If you are concerned about this serious liability to INTC, Intel Corp. Stocks, Shares, Assets or have questions regarding this legal action, here are Intel Corp., INTC Key Executive, and Contact Information.
Originally Posted At
http://deniedpatent.blogspot.com/2013/03/plaintiff-investigative-blogger-crystal.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)