Leader v. Facebook proves U.S. justice is corrupt

The Federal Circuit abolished; Supreme Court clerks investigated?

---

Contributing Writers | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION | Feb. 4, 2013

[Editorial]

The federal judges in Leader v. Facbook failed Justice 101. Three federal courts in this case (District, Federal Circuit and Supreme) supported the proven infringer Facebook without even a single shred of evidence or law to support their decision. They had to tear up the U.S. Constitution to do it. If American citizens do not act to stop this kind of lawlessness from our courts, our democracy is lost.

The Federal Circuit was caught telling multiple lies,
then trying to hide it in censored motions and bluster.

(Feb. 4, 2013)—Leader v. Facebook should become the poster child for reform of the U.S. justice system. It proves that justice is a cruel hoax meant to fool the great unwashed; we poor saps who still believe in the U.S. Constitution.

Our appellate system is supposed to correct the mistakes of lower courts. However, in Leader v. Facebook the U.S. Supreme Court allowed its clerks to bury the case.  OK, so they missed one, you say?

Consider this. The U.S. Supreme Court ignored a patent rights case involving a company, Facebook, that went public in the largest tech IPO in history while they relied upon the innovations of another company from whom they are proven to have stolen—Ohio-based Leader Technologies. If this case did not deserve the U.S. Supreme Court’s attention, then these people are truly blind to their constitutional function to correct lower courts and insure fair treatment under the law. Excuses fall on deaf ears when a court creates victims by its own callousness and lethargy.

Federal Circuit and their code of misconduct

The Federal Circuit gave Facebook's
evidence an "F" and still  handed them the verdict.

Now let’s turn to the Federal Circuit. Here we have a court where two judges in the three-judge panel hearing the case held stock in Facebook during the case. Not only did they fail to disclose this conflict of interest, but they also failed to apply some of the most fundamental patent law tests on the books. The presiding judge had even written one of the tests he himself ignored.

Zuckerberg concealed more than 28 million items of evidence from Leader Technologies

The story gets worse. After these judges had debunked all of Facebook’s evidence, instead of reversing the jury verdict on a ridiculously complicated “on-sale bar” law, they fabricated new arguments and evidence for Facebook! They did not give Leader a chance to challenge this new evidence. Then, they ignored new evidence in the Ceglia case that Mark Zuckerberg had concealed 28 hard drives of evidence from Leader Technologies during the trial. If each hard drive contained only 1 million documents and files in 2003, that means that Zuckerberg concealed perhaps 28,000,000 document and files that Leader was unable to examine for evidence of Zuckerberg's theft of their inventions.* In other words, the Federal Circuit judges, figuratively speaking, took off their black robes and became advocates for Facebook. These actions are a fundamental breach of the Fifth and 14th Amendment rights to due process.

(*The "average" personal computer today contains more than 200 times more capacity than a decade ago.)

This is no joke. Leader v. Facebook
boiled down to the courts playing
games with the definition of "is."

The Federal Circuit panel gave tacit blessing to numerous and easily provable mistakes of the trial judge. Scandalously, they ignored the fact that the trial judge ordered Leader to answer a particular interrogatory in the present tense, then supported the jury’s past tense interpretation of the verb "is" at trial. It was a classic bait and switch. It gets worse. The trial judge ignored his own instructions to the jury in two fundamental areas of law regarding on-sale bar evidence tests. Then, instead of justly ruling that the jury failed to rule based on law, he permitted the jury to make a decision based wholly on speculation. The jury even confirmed to the judge and the attorneys after the trial that they had speculated.

Leader v. Facebook is either evidence of utter incompetence, or corruption. Either way, we must demand major reforms.

Therefore, Leader v. Facebook is living proof that the American judicial system is broken and cannot apply justice fairly. If Leader Technologies cannot receive a just decision, none of us can.

The reason is this. In most cases there are some “bad facts” that create a question about someone’s innocence. However, in Leader v. Facebook, Facebook’s so-called evidence was all debunked as mere attorney fabrications. And yet, the Federal Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court supported the thief instead of the victim.

Replace the Federal Circuit before it corrupts the U.S. patent system entirely.

The Federal Circuit has lost its way. It is a marginal idea gone bad.

Checks and balances "keep each other
[agencies of gov't] in their proper place"

The Federal Circuit was formed under the theory that having patent-savvy judges would improve the appeals results in patent cases. However, this was faulty logic. Instead of this seeing this expertise improving the justice that patent-holders receive, it has made the result worse due to cronyism among the lawyer-practitioners. For example, Facebook's law firms have practically set up shop at The Federal Circuit Bar Association.  Bottom line, the Federal Circuit was formed by Congress (almost 50% attorneys themselves) following the lead of a vocal patent litigation attorney lobby. Although it may have seemed like a good idea in theory, in practice, the legislation that created the Federal Circuit included entirely too few checks and balances.

The corruption exposed in the Leader v. Facebook is living proof of that court's structural, moral and ethical deficiencies. Never before in the history of the Federal Circuit have we had such a "clean" example of everything that is wrong with that circuit. Their decision to support Facebook has absolutely NO support in law. None, zilch, nada.

The Federal Circuit is out of time to prove its worth. The final
nail in their coffin is the Leader v. Facebook corruption.

The older the Federal Circuit gets (it began in 1982), the more corrupted it becomes. Today’s Leader v. Facebook court has become so corrupt that they think they can hold stock in Facebook, in an appeal involving Facebook, and fail to disclose their interests or disqualify themselves from the case.

Indeed, a court with no accountability will become corrupt. It’s a natural law that has been ignored. The Federal Circuit is operating with virtual juridical autonomy since it handles ALL patent appeals and ALL Patent Office appeals. Their only theoretical accountability is to the U.S. Supreme Court that may hear a couple of their cases a year.

The Federal Circuit has accumulated too much power and effectively has no democratic checks and balances.

When one observes the utter arrogance of the Federal Circuit in Leader v. Facebook, one needs no more proof that: (a) the Federal Circuit must be replaced with a fair way to judge patent appeals, and (b) since the appeals system could not get its act together in Leader v. Facebook, it will never do so, and therefore must be overhauled.

Stand up for justice in Leader v. Facebook. If not you, who? If not now, when?

If American justice is overrun by thieves and interlopers,
what are American citizens going to do about it? What do
citizens do when those they pay to protect them, don't?

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the Leader appeal. Why? If not a case related to the biggest IPO in tech history, then what case qualifies? The likely reason is that the clerk system that vets cases for the justices is rife with cronyism and corruption.

We surmise that all the Federal Circuit Clerk of Court had to do is buy his fellow clerk buddies at the Supreme Court a beer and ask them to "lose" the Leader v. Facebook petition in their piles. We think this probably happened in Leader v. Facebook. Why? Because the Federal Circuit Clerk of Court this case appears to have made a habit of obstructing justice in this case by signing false statements and censoring motions. Even his own staffer Valerie White intimated foul play in the timing of motions and denials. If he was willing to put his name to lies and misrepresentations, and practice blatant censorship, then influencing his fellow clerks over drinks would be just another day at the office. Oh by the way, did we mention that Facebook's law firms and one of Facebook's largest shareholders, Microsoft, populate The Federal Circuit Bar Association where that same clerk is their prominent Ex Officio kingpin, whoops, officer?

If the American public does not cry foul in Leader v. Facebook, then are we the fools?

Boycott Facebook?

The "free" press drank Facebook's Kool-Aid years ago, ashamedly. If the Courts, Congress or the Executive don’t fix this Leader v. Facebook mess, then should the buying public boycott Facebook?

* * *