AFI Custom Search

To ensure you are reading the latest post, click the logo above.
SEARCH by topic, keyword or phrase. Type in Custom Search box
Use this Custom Search toole.g. "IBM Eclipse Foundation" or "racketeering"

Friday, May 24, 2013


Sample FOIA Letter to the S.E.C.

SEC counsel cleared the way for the Facebook “pump and dump” scheme in 2008?

SEC counsel appears to have failed to disclose his conflicts of interest with Facebook Chairman James W. Breyer; hindsight says this oversight triggered the IPO feeding frenzy

Contributing Writers | OPINION | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION  | Updated Apr. 17, 2013 10:32 a.m. ET | Udated PDF (post Scribd censorship)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: Facebook S.E.C. Exemption from the 500-shareholder rule, approved by Thomas J. Kim, filed by Fenwick & West LLP, Ref. No. 9999999997-08-043090, Oct. 14, 2008

New: Apr. 17, 2013—On October 14, 2008, SEC Counsel Thomas J. Kim approved Facebook’s 500-shareholder exemption. The exemption request was submitted only one day earlier, on October 13, 2008 by Jeffrey R. Vetter, Fenwick & West LLP. (Click the Scribd logo under the document to expand the view)

This exemption is unprecedented. The Securities Act of 1933/34 was created to prevent private market making in unregulated stocks by unscrupulous underwriters. Such activities caused the Great Depression. However, this exemption cleared the way for Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley to make a $3+ billion private market in Facebook stock. They sold billions of dollars of private Facebook insiders’ stock to Russian oligarchs Yuri Milner, Alisher Amanov, DST, and Digital Sky Technologies. The dubious nature of these transactions was confirmed by Zuckerberg’s former speech writer, Katherine Loose, who wrote “no one asked if the Russians’ money was clean.” See Boy Kings.

This influx of foreign cash pumped Facebook’s pre-IPO valuation to $100 billion. One of the primary beneficiaries of this dramatic boost in valuation was James W. Breyer, chairman of Facebook and managing partner of Accel Partners LLP. Breyer is the second largest shareholder in Facebook. See SEC Insider Trading report on James W. Breyer.

Click image to enlarge.

Fig. 1 - SEC and Fenwick were in a hurry to give Facebook the 500-shareholder exemption before the 2008 election. SEC Counsel Thomas J. Kim failed to disclose his conflict with James W. Breyer and Accel Partners LLP when he was counsel in Washington for Latham & Watkins LLP, Breyer's National Venture Capital Association (NVCA) lobbyist. Click here for Full View of this and accompanying slides.

SEC Counsel Thomas J. Kim approved the Facebook exemption in one day (Remember: we're describing the conduct of a former editor of the Harvard Law Review)

The SEC counsel who approved the exemption was Thomas J. Kim. The SEC is governed by Standards of Ethical Conduct which required him to disclose his conflicts of interest. Mr. Kim was Washington D.C. counsel for the law firm of Latham & Watkins LLP. Latham & Watkins was the chief lobbyist for the National Venture Capital Association (NCVA) whose chairmanships were held then by Facebook's director James W. Breyer. Therefore, Mr. Kim had a material conflict of interest which should have excluded him from any involvement with the SEC 12(g) exemption. Instead, he approved the exemption.

Is influence peddling wrong? Yes.

We also note that Fenwick & West LLP filed for the exemption for Facebook. Since Facebook was then in the process of stealing Leader Technologies’ invention at that time, and since Fenwick & West was Leader’s counsel at that time, the conflicts of interest are astounding.

"Influence peddling is the illegal practice of using one's influence in government or connections with persons in authority to obtain favors or preferential treatment for another, usually in return for payment."

Here are just a few of the regulations governing the conduct of employees of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. These statements are contained in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 17: Commodity and Securities Exchanges, Part 200, Subpart C—Canons of Ethics, § 200.53 Preamble:

"(a) Members of the Securities and Exchange Commission are entrusted by various enactments of the Congress with powers and duties of great social and economic significance to the American people . . . Their success in this endeavor is a bulwark against possible abuses and injustice which, if left unchecked, might jeopardize the strength of our economic institutions."

(b) It is imperative that the members of this Commission continue to conduct themselves in their official and personal relationships in a manner which commands the respect and confidence of their fellow citizens." (emphasis added).

Or maybe this statement vis a vis Mr. Kim remarkable one-day turnaround of Facebook's variance request.  Code of Federal Regulations, Title 17: Commodity and Securities Exchanges, Part 200, Subpart C—Canons of Ethics, § 200.59 Relationship with persons subject to regulation:

"In the performance of his rule-making and administrative functions, a member has a duty to solicit the views of interested persons."

SEC: "We do Facebook exemptions-while-you-wait"—no public hearing on this unprecedented exemption

How could Mr. Kim have solicited the views of interested persons in accordance with Rule 200.59 in his unprecedented one-day SEC-exemption-while-you-wait? This reminds us of the equally remarkable same-day denial of Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam's Amicus Curiae Brief at the Federal Circuit in Leader v. Facebook. There, the Clerk of Court Jan Horbaly's staffer Valerie White told a caller that there was no way the judges had time to even receive the brief, much less rule on it. This was before Ms. White's phone extension was disabled and she totally dropped off the radar. Apparently she had not been know the secret handshake. The common thread in all these disturbing actions is that these people were all associated with the Facebook cabal's law firms and Harvard before they were employed by the public.

Or, how about  Code of Federal Regulations, Title 17: Commodity and Securities Exchanges, Part 200, Subpart C—Canons of Ethics, § 200.61 Impression of influence:

"A member should not, by his conduct, permit the impression to prevail that any person can improperly influence him, that any person unduly enjoys his favor or that he is affected in any way by the rank, position, prestige, or affluence of any person."

Do ya think that Mr. Lee had ex parte conversations with his Latham & Watkins LLP buddies at Facebook to grease  the secret exemption turnaround?

The SEC rules prohibit prejudicial ex parte communications with a party. Ex parte is a fancy word for side conversations that the other party does not know are occurring (literally: without a party present). Code of Federal Regulations, Title 17: Commodity and Securities Exchanges, Part 200, Subpart C—Canons of Ethics, § 200.62 Ex parte communications:

"A member shall at all times comply with the Commission's Code of Behavior governing ex parte communications between persons outside the Commission and decisional employees."

SEC Opinion failed on the substance required by § 200.63

The Code requires the Commission's reasons for their actions to "contain a clear showing that no serious argument of counsel has been disregarded or overlooked." However, such statements are MISSING in the Facebook opinion. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 17: Commodity and Securities Exchanges, Part 200, Subpart C—Canons of Ethics, § 200.63 Commission opinions:

"The opinions of the Commission should state the reasons for the action taken and contain a clear showing that no serious argument of counsel has been disregarded or overlooked. In such manner, a member shows a full understanding of the matter before him, avoids the suspicion of arbitrary conclusion, promotes confidence in his intellectual integrity and may contribute some useful precedent to the growth of the law. A member should be guided in his decisions by a deep regard for the integrity of the system of law which he administers. He should recall that he is not a repository of arbitrary power, but is acting on behalf of the public under the sanction of the law."

To the contrary, Mr. Lee's opinion contains only CYA phrases like "based on the representations made to the Division in your letter" and "different facts or conditions might require the Division to reach a different conclusion" and "does not represent a legal conclusion." Such statements say nothing about any arguments of (opposing) counsel.

One remarkable aspect of the influence peddling that appears to be occurring in this Leader v. Facebook judicial and financial corruption scandal are the “Harvard connections.”

Harvard "Friends" in all the right places - Leader v. Facebook
Fig. 2—At what point do Harvard and Ivy League loyalties transform from college friendships to international influence peddling? Thomas J. Kim, Harvard alum, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, and counsel at Latham & Watkins LLP in 2003, failed to disclose his conflicts of interest. Instead, he approved the Facebook 500-shareholder exemption anyway--in one day no less! Does the U.S. Government ever move that quickly? Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley used this exemption to pump the Facebook pre-IPO stock with billions in dubious investments from Russia.

Undermining American Democracy

Harvard University Logo
Pope John Paul II
Fig. 3 - Is he not saying to the Harvard / Facebook cabal: "Just do the right thing by your fellow man Your immortal souls hang in the balance."

Between Oct. 2003 and Jun. 2004, while (1) Lawrence Summers was President of Harvard, (2) Mark Zuckerberg was a 19-year old sophomore, (3) SEC's Thomas J. Kim worked for James W. Breyer's lobbyist Latham & Watkins LLP, and (4) Fenwick & West LLP represented (stole FB's core technology from?) Leader Technologies, The Harvard Crimson carried FIFTY-ONE (51) articles about Zuckerberg and Facebook, and THREE (3) about Pope John Paul II.

It would appear that these individuals have been planning this undermining of U.S. and international financial and legal systems for the better part of two decades. They appear to have strategically placed "their people" to approve an exemption here, fix judges there, use prosecutor cronies to harass, bribe liberally, gum up the legal system with frivolity, exploit stock with cooperative underwriters, motivate politician$, etc.—all clothed in Crimson. Ironically, Harvard's motto is "Veritas" which is Latin for "Truth." And yet, to pull off their schemes, they decided to steal from a Harvard parent, Michael McKibben of Leader Technologies. Why didn't they just invite McKibben into their Club? They probably figured that given his friendship with Pope John Paul II that he marched to the tune of a different drummer. Perhaps our country would be in better shape if more did.

In any event, the SEC’s complicity in the Facebook "pump and dump" scheme is now evident. (And they have the audacity to prosecute others?) This exemption may go down as one of the biggest rip offs of all time. The reaction of our elected officials and regulatory bureaucrats to this new revelation will be quite revealing.

Spread the word.

Georgia!Update: Apr. 15, 2013—Interview with Leader's Michael McKibben

Updated: Apr. 15, 2013

Why is the White House meddling in Leader v. Facebook—a patent case?

The Three Kings of U.S. Corruption (below) are closely associated with the President

Did the President meddle in Leader v. Facebook to protect his pre-election 25+ million "Likes" on Facebook?

(April 9, 2013)—Just when you think the Leader v. Facebook judicial corruption scandal could not get more twisted, new evidence reveals that President Obama has exerted "presidential communications privilege" to prevent a FOIA disclosure (Freedom of Information Act) at the U.S. Patent Office. Anyone regularly reading Facebook's duplicitous legal writings recognizes their fingerprints on this Patent Office response. It cites "Exemption 5" which allows agencies to withhold certain kinds of information, mostly regarding internal deliberations.

"The Protected Party is the President of the United States" —Loving v. Dept. of Defense

Out of all the legal precedents that the Patent Office could have cited, they chose Loving v. Department of Defense, 550 F. 3d 32 (DC Circuit 2008) whose subject is the "presidential communications privilege." It states "Here the party protected by the privilege, is . . . the President of the United States." It relies on the privilege because the communications "directly involve" the President.

Patent Office failed to provide a Vaughn index

What the Patent Office chose to ignore in the Loving case was the "Vaughn index" which is required "to fulfill the agency's obligation to show with 'reasonable specificity'" why the requested information is being withheld. Put simply, they are required to disclose the nature of the information being withheld (topic, sender, receiver, date, reason for concealing, etc.). The Patent Office did not provide a Vaughn index as the precondition to rely on Exemption 5 in the Loving case, and should therefore lose the privilege.

The Patent Office is hiding behind presidential privilege while violating the terms of the very law it relies on for the privilege. Does this tactic sound familiar? It's lawfare—mangle every argument with truth and error to fool the unsuspecting, and thus gum up the legal system.

We ask again: Why is President Obama involved in Leader v. Facebook? Could it be to protect his political interests in his 35 million Facebook "Likes" when he is supposed to be protecting Leader Technologies constitutional rights? Remember, the President's involvement would likely have occurred before the 2012 election. Pundits say he probably edged out Mitt Romey using his Facebook "Like" data to micro-target voter blocks.

The requester has forwarded the renewed request to the House Oversight Committee on Government Reform and to the Acting Commerce Secretary. The letter to Congressman Jim Jordan is embedded below.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: Renewed FOIA Appeal to the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office Response to Leader v. Facebook data requests, Apr. 2, 2013


Greed, envy and conspiracy against real American innovators

Contributing Writers | OPINION | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION  | Updated Mar. 10, 2014 01:38 p.m. ET | Udated PDF (post Scribd censorship)
The Three Kings of U.S. Corruption
Lawrence Summers Crown of Corruption James W. Breyer, Accel Partners LLP, Crown of Corruption Gordon K. Davidson, Fenwick & West LLP, Crown of Corruption
Lawrence ''Larry'' Summers James W. Breyer, Managing Director, Accel Partners LLP Gordon K. Davidson, Managing Partner, Fenwick & West LLP
Lawrence "Larry"
James W. Breyer
Accel Partners LLP
Gordon K. Davidson
Fenwick & West LLP
Economist Venture Capitalist Attorney
Conflicts of Interest;
Market Manipulation;
Trade Secrets Theft;
Market Manipulation
Bribery & Collusion
Intell. Property Theft;
Abuse of Client Confidence
Stock Manipulation
Update: Apr. 1, 2013: Patent Office Cites Presidential Privilege to block a Leader v. Facebook FOIA Request
Click the image below to enlarge. Why is President Obama intervening in the Leader v. Facebook 3rd patent reexamination order at the U.S. Patent Office Fig. 1—The Patent Office has just cited Executive Privilege to block release of Freedom of Information Act data in Leader v. Facebook. President Obama has also been discovered to have direct connections to Facebook's attorney Gibson Dunn LLP. Are the Facebook attorneys his version of President Nixon's White House "plumbers?"

Click here to read the RENEWED APPEAL as well as the USPTO response.
"Experience has shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
Thomas Jefferson
“Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot long exist.”
Edmund Burke
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."
The Gospel of St. Matthew 7:12
"You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
The Book of Exodus 20:16-17

(March 28, 2013)—A comprehensive overview of the Leader v. Facebook judicial and financial misconduct appeared yesterday. While most of the analysis is not new to AFI, it does tell the real story of Facebook's illicit beginnings. Compare this to the fantastical Zuckerberg super-hacker pabulum that the mainstream press has repeated uncritically since 2003. The essay identifies journalist David Kirkpatrick, author of The Facebook Effect, as a contributor to the Facebook fiction. Astoundingly, the mainstream media started citing Kirkpatrick for their primary research. More humorous, Facebook attorneys even QUOTED Kirkpatrick in various legal briefs to try and deceive federal judges.

Also remarkable is the alleged deep involvement of former Treasury Secretary and Obama Bailout Director Lawrence "Larry" Summers in all things Facebook. The trails of corruption just seem to fan out from Summers in all directions. Perhaps most damning is his failure to disclose (concealment of) his conflicts of interest during the 2008 bailout Summers failed to disclose conflicts of interest surrounding Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley in 2008—only a $32,000,000,000 oversight

Specifically, Summers failed to disclose his 20-year mentor relationship with Russian Yuri Milner. In the early 1990's, Milner collaborated with Summers and Summers' then research assistant, Sheryl Sandberg (now Facebook COO). In 1993, Milner even authored a World Bank paper for Summers that recommended what is now universally recognized as the reckless (and failed) Russian voucher system. That system has created the current oligarchies which have so corrupted the current Russian economy (PDF). It also created Alisher Asmanov, another Goldman Sachs partner. Since the Facebook IPO, Asmanov is now called the "Richest man in Russia." Summers' decisions have been very good to his protégés Asmanov, Milner and Sanberg.

Milner + Goldman Sachs = Summers Conflict of Interest

Purchase of Facebook Stock by a bailed-out-Goldman's Moscow Partners + Sandberg = Summers Conflict of Interest

At the time of the bailout, Milner was partnered with Goldman Sachs which received at least $16 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds. Milner reappeared six months later with bags full of money totaling; $3+billion in "overseas" funds to purchase Facebook insider stock. (See the Boy Kings briefing about those dubious transactions.)

Fenwick & West LLP paved the way for Russian funds from Summers' protégés

Fig. 2—Click image to enlarge the Lawrence "Larry" Summers Conflicts Map.

Fenwick & West LLP paved the way for these sales by getting Facebook a one-day SEC exemption turnaround allowing Facebook to ignore the chiseled-in-granite-500-shareholder rule (a private company with more than $10 million in assets cannot have over 500 shareholder without being considered a public company by default). That exemption enabled Milner to become the second largest investor in Facebook after Accel Partners/James W. Breyer. Many now believe this money to purchase Facebook stock came from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley TARP funds laundered through Dubai and Cyprus. Click here to view the Larry Summers Conflicts Map.

Yahoo! Voice's Christofer French (PDF) boiled down modern day corruption into seven points. He drew his assessment from the downfall of the Roman Empire:

  1. Arrogant leadership
  2. Loss of a Middle Class
  3. Lust for power
  4. Greed
  5. Excessive Taxation
  6. A General Societal and Legal Winking
Christofer French. Sliding Down the Slippery Slope of Legal Corruption! Corruption Makes Us Numb and Also Unconscious. When We Are Consciously Corrupt, That's the Worst. Yahoo! Voices, Dec. 10, 2010.

Do these symptoms of system-wide corruption sound familiar? Will this corruption destroy America? Only if we are complacent and do nothing to stop it.

Several different sites have already re-posted the essay embedded below. (Note: Scribd, GoogleDrive and DocStoc allow you to download a PDF to your local computer. For example, with GoogleDrive, from the document, select File, then Download. Then a window on your computer pops up where you designate the folder to store it in. If you don't select a folder, the PDF will be stored in your browser's default download folder.)

Ask your elected representatives to investigate

Readers are encouraged to write their senators and congresspersons. Ask them to open inquiries and investigate these disturbing revelations. Attach this essay as your background. Meet with them to discuss your concerns. Get active. If not you, who? If not now, when?

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: The Real Facebook - A Portrait in Corruption, Mar. 28, 2013

Fig. 3—The Real Facebook | A Portrait of Corruption.

Click Comment below to join the conversation ... or email your comment to and we'll post it.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: 2008 Banking Crisis Timeline - The Fleecing of America

Fig. 4—2008 Banking Crisis Timeline - The Fleecing of America

* * *


  1. its time for congress to investigate

    is this you craven

  2. We all need to stop letting these thieves into our houses. We do have a bigger "Fish to Fry"..Lets get going! What is happening to our Constitution and our rights is HIDEOUS!!

  3. Comment by: Georgia!

    Check out our latest discoveries about how the Leader v. Facebook case is connected to the other Obama scandals. We've even uncovered lies told by Cooley's partner McBee Strategic (lobbyist Jeff Markey) to mask their intimate association around all things Facebook. Does anyone know if Jeff Markey is related to Congressman Ed Markey who Obama has just endorsed for the Senate?:

  4. I just wanted to add to what Georgia pointed out about Judge Lenoard P. Stark’s Judiciary Committee nomination hearing on THURSDAY, APRIL 22, 2010
    Judge Stark was sworn in: (excerpt from hearing) “Do you affirm the testimony you are about to give before the Committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?
    Mr. Lohier. I do. Judge Stark. I do. Senator Kaufman. Thank you. Let the record show the nominees have taken the oath.
    Judge Stark. “Yes, Senator. As a magistrate judge now and if fortunate enough to be confirmed as a District Court judge, my approach is to carefully apply the precedent of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals to the facts of the case as they appear before me.”
    Judge Stark was later asked by Senator Kaufman “Senator Kaufman. Thank you. Judge Stark, you worked as a judicial law clerk, private practice and a prosecutor. What did you learn from that that you think will help you be on the District Court?”
    Quoting Judge Stark: “I have had the opportunity to try cases, civil and criminal, in both state and Federal court and I think through all that experience I have learned just both how difficult but how important it is to put together a case, to put together a record to vigorously represent your client's interest and to pursue justice.”
    A couple of questions come to mind after reading.
    1. Judge Stark’s conduct in Leader v. Facebook means he flat out lied to the Senate when he said that he will “carefully apply the precedent of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals to the facts of the case as they appear before me.” Judge Stark ignored his own sworn promise to Congress just three months later when he ignore clear Supreme Court and Appeals cases for testing the on sale bar so-called “evidence,” which wasn’t evidence at all. It was Cooley Godward fabrication.
    2. Knowing “both how difficult but how important it is to put together a case”, was Judge stark trying to derail Leaders case when he ignored his own court order telling Leader that they were only to answer Interrogatory No. 9 in the present tense! Then ruled that they should have answered differently and then not “apply the precedent of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals to the facts of the case “.

    In my mind he is too smart not to have known he was breaking the law for Cooley. That was very obviously the price of his appointment from Cooley’s man in the White House, Don Stern.
    This administration has both memory and truth problems.
    Folks, you can’t just make this stuff up. Read the records for yourself. Judge Stark said everything here and it is not taken out of context! Simple questions with simple answers he thought the Senators and public wanted to hear.

  5. You put me on to the Government Printing Office. The Confirmation Hearings help expose the lies our "leaders" tell to obtain their regulatory jobs:

    For instance, here's what SEC CHAIRWOMAN MARY SHAPIRO said on January 15, 2009 during her Senate confirmation hearing. Just like Magistrate Leonard Stark, she did the opposite of what she told Congress:

    "And finally, with respect to impartiality, my belief is there can be no sacred cows. We have to go with full force and fervor against anyone who violates investors’ trust, large or small, regardless of their standing in the investment community."

    Let's see, she approved the Facebook "Pump & Dump" scheme, probably the biggest stock manipulation scheme in the history of America that allowed insiders like James W. Breyer and Accel Partners (her Chief Counsel Thomas J. Lee's buddy from Latham & Watkins) to dump over $16 billion of insider stock on Day 3 of the Facebook IPO.

    Another liar. Wait, let me check, is she an attorney? Yes! Sorry, I was being redundant. "Attorney ethics" is probably the biggest scam going.

    Here's a complete cite for other researchers:

    S. Hrg. 111-31, Nominations of: Mary Schapiro et al. Hearing before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, 111th Congress, First Session, Jan. 15, 2009, Y 4.B 22/3, p. 15. para. 5 .

  6. Our government officials are required by law to disclose the financial holdings of their families also. Here are the names of SEC CHAIRWOMAN MARY SHAPIRO'S family that she disclosed in her Senate Confirmation Hearing on page 11:

    Daughter 1: MOLLY CADWELL
    Daughter 2: ANNA CADWELL
    Husband: CHAS CADWELL

    We need to run down their investments to see if any of these individuals have held Facebook stock. The law on this BTW, is 5 CFR § 4401.102 (SEC Ethical Conduct), Prohibited and restricted financial interests and transactions.

    "... directly or indirectly, by or on behalf of
    a member or employee, the member’s or employee’s spouse, the member’s or employee’s unemancipated minor child, or any person for whom the member or employee serves as legal guardian

    Bottom line, if either Shapiro or her husband or children held Facebook stock directly or indirectly, they are in breach. This doesn't even address the rules that tells all government employees to "avoid even the appearance of impropriety."

    88x17: Appearance of Impropriety, Office of Government Ethics

  7. Here's what Bloomberg says about the family:

    "she [MARY SCHAPIRO] attended George Washington University law school, where she met her husband, Charles Cadwell, now an attorney at the Urban Institute, a Washington think tank. They have two teenage daughters, Anna and Molly.

  8. "Charles Cadwell, Urban Institute" made the following donations according to the Federal Election Commission:

    04/29/2008 Obama for America $500
    07/01/2008 Obama Victory Fund $1,800
    07/31/2008 Obama for America $500
    07/31/2008 Obama for America $1,800
    09/30/2008 Obama Victory Fund $1,800
    09/30/2008 Obama for America $1,800

    Schapiro was nominated for SEC Chairperson on January 14, 2009, just four months after Cadwell's last donation to Obama. Pay to play? So much for "avoid the appearance of impropriety".

  9. Comment by: Judicial Corruption

    JUDGE KIMBERLY A. MOORE'S selective ethics:

    While hearing the Leader v. Facebook case where she had undisclosed stock in Facebook, Judge Kimberly A. Moore disqualified herself in another case becase her husband, MATTHEW J. MOORE, LATHAM & WATKINS LLP, had submitted an amicus curiae brief in another case. That bothered her more than holding stock in a litigant!

    MARINE POLYMER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. HEMCON, INC. (Fed. Cir. 2012 (March 12, 2012),36

    Where have we heard of Latham & Watkins LLP before? Ah yes, SEC Chief Counsel Thomas J. Kim (approved the Facebook 500-shareholder "pump & dump" exemption) worked there when Latham represented Facebook's James W. Breyer when he was chairman of the National Venture Capital Association.

    Isn't this another interesting "koinky dink," Matt Moore joined Latham & Watkins on February 22, 2010... five months before the Leader v. Facebook trial.


    HUFFINGTON POST just posted this article about FOIA tricks being played by Obama political appointees:

    "Obama Political Appointees Using Secret Email Accounts" by Jack Gillum, 06/04/13 10:44 ET EDT.

    BE SURE TO ASK FOR THESE SECRET EMAILS IN YOUR FOIA REQUESTS. (Taking bets they won't comply! However, when they don't, they're just digging their holes deeper.) We all need to keep comparing notes about what is and isn't being provided.|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D322697

  11. We know Judge Kimberly A. Moore held stock in Facebook that she did not disclose. What about her family? Here's what she disclosed to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary chaired by Senator Hatch (Pages 57, 128)
    Husband..........MATTHEW J. MOORE
    Eldest Son.......WILLIAM ("BILLY") MOORE
    Youngest Son.....ROBERT ("BOBBY") MOORE
    Middle Son.......MATTHEW MOORE
    Mother...........LINDA PACE
    Father-in-law....FRANK PRICE, Fayettville, NY
    Mother-in-law:...JANE PRICE, Fayettville, NY
    Brother-in-law...MARK MOORE
    28 USC 455 "...(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances: ... He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship of them, or the spouse of such a person ... is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding."

  12. Here's some info on Judge Wallach from Leader v. Facebook
    Wife............. DR. KATHERINE TOBIN, PhD, Stanford
    Former Client.... DAVID OLIVE
    Friend........... FRANK STEARNS
    Friend........... JUDY STEARNS
    28 USC 455 "...(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances: ... He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship of them, or the spouse of such a person ... is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding."

  13. Comment by: Judicial Corruption:

    Talk about feathering nests in DC, Tobin, Obama, Harry Reid and Judge Wallach are tight as a drum. Reid is the Senator who put Wallach forward for nomination. Reid probably gave the Wallach/Tobin lessons on how to fund family members with government money, since his four attorney sons are all funded by legislation pushed forward by Reid.

    It is telling that Tobin's bios fail to mention that she is married to a Federal Circuit judge.

  14. Thank you all! You're digging up good evidence and facts. Keep going. We'll get to the bottom of this cesspool eventually. It appears to be "deep and wide."

    From Federal Election Commission Records
    (wife of Leader v. Facebook Federal Circuit Judge Evan J. Wallach)

    Katherine C. Tobin, Ph.D.
    25 Mercer Ave
    Hartsdale, NY 10530-2603

    02/06/2008 Obama for America $1,000
    03/18/2008 Obama for America $1,000
    04/22/2008 Obama for America $200
    08/28/2008 Obama for America $2,270
    08/28/2008 Obama for America $2,270
    08/28/2008 Obama for America $2,300
    08/28/2008 Obama for America $2,300
    09/30/2008 Obama for America $-30 ("Contribution Refund")*
    10/18/2010 Friends of Harry Reid $250

    That's a lot of donating to OBAMA just a few weeks before the Nov. 4, 2008 Presidential election. More Pay to Play? Obama appointed Tobin as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Performance and Improvement at the Department of Education on July 28, 2009.

    *Note: According to the FEC rules, this is not an adequate description of the purpose of this refund which occured just four days before the Presidential election.

    Tobin's record:

  15. Comment by: SuperSleuth

    Public records on KATHERINE C. TOBIN, spouse of Federal Circuit Judge Evan J. Wallach. Judges are required to disclose conflicts of interest in cases before them to the "third degree" of relationship, so the conduct of these individuals vis a vis Facebook and Facebook holdings are relevant.

    Age: 62
    Birthdate: 10/27/1950

    Katherine C Tobin
    Katherine Colleen Tobin

    Phone Number: (914) 681-0193

    Related to:

    Steven M Tobin
    Steven J Tobin
    Avi Aviv
    Greer Olivia Tobin
    Joanne Tobin
    Danielle Tobinengel
    Danielle H. Tobin
    Brian Mark Engel

    Known address:

    25 Mercer
    Hartsdale, NY 10530

    22 Fairmont
    Hastings On Hudson, NY 10706

    9001 Robinson Ridge
    Las Vegas, NV 89117

    254 PO Box
    Waccabuc, NY 10597

    21 Dunham
    Hartsdale, NY 10530

    10397 Mary
    Cupertino, CA 95014

    914 Dunham
    Hartsdale, NY 10530

    2079 Oberlin
    Palo Alto, CA 94306

    19 Clinton
    Saratoga Spgs, NY 12866

  16. Comment by: Super Sleuth

    How many of these "third degree" family members hold stock in Facebook that Judge Kimberly A. Moore did not disclose in Leader v. Facebook?
    Names: Matthew J. Moore, Age?
    Matt John Moore
    Related to:

    Wife............Kimberly Ann Pace,
    (Judge Kimberly A. Moore), Age?

    Mother..........Jane E. Price Age 77 (Janee, J E)
    Father..........Francis D. Price, b. 7/30/1925, deceased
    Francis D. Price, Jr., 64
    Fuller Mark More, 53
    William H Moore, Age 51
    Michael David Moore, 50
    Andrew Price, 65
    Linda A Pace, 42
    Robert C Pace, 42
    William T Price
    Shannon L Price
    Joseph V Price
    Casey M Price
    James P Price
    Elizabeth A Price
    Viginia L Price
    Jason Keith Moore

    Phone Numbers:

    (703) 533-2975
    (703) 533-2974
    Known Addresses:

    6676 Avignon
    Falls Church, VA 22043

    3003 Van Ness
    Washington, DC 20008

    2700 Connecticut
    Washington, DC 20008

    219 Sugartown
    Wayne, PA 19087

    106 Henschke
    Fayetteville, NY 13066

    949 Lighthouse
    Corolla, NC 27927

    6676 Avignon
    Falls Church, VA 22043

    7293 Highbridge
    Fayetteville, NY 13066

    KIMBERLY ANN PACE Public Records

    (703) 533-2974
    558 Memorial
    Cambridge, MA 02139

    6676 Avignon
    Falls Church, VA 22043

    945 Stormont
    Halethorpe, MD 21227

    3003 Van Ness
    Washington, DC 20008

    2800 Quebec
    Washington, DC 20008

  17. When looking at all this new information, I think a reasonable person would ask 2 questions.
    1. Are the Facebook lawyers of, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Inept, (Having or showing no skill; clumsy)
    2. Are the Facebook lawyers of, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dishonest, (behaving or prone to behave in an untrustworthy or fraudulent way, and or intended to mislead or cheat)

    To point out the obvious in light of the continuing revelation of the cover-up of evidence, in 2007 during the ConnectU case. That’s right the same case Facebook tried to have sealed, the district judged ruled and signed an “Order for Discovery of Computer Memory Devices” on September 13, 2007. The company in possession of the hard drives at the time was Parmet and Associates.
    Now fast forward to the 2012 sworn deposition testimony at the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP offices, of the Facebook experts who examined the hard drives.
    Michael F McGowan, states in a sworn deposition,
    “That among the 28 devices were some that, according to the documentation, had been preserved by Parmet & Associates in the past and were presently being held by McManis Faulkner.”
    On page 64, line 18-25 and continuing to Page 65, lines 1-5,.
    He is asked,
    “Q. When did this examination occur of these 28 devices belonging to Mr. Zuckerberg?
    A. In around September of 2010.
    Q. How long did that work take in California?
    A. It was more than several days, I don't recall the full length, the exact length of how long it took.
    Q. And who paid you to do the work?
    A. We were paid -- we conducted this work for Gibson, Dunn on behalf of Facebook, I believe it's Facebook that's paying our bills.”

    Remember folks Leader was told these hard drives were lost!! Leader’s discovery had just closed on May 14 2010. Miraculously they appear in the Ceglia v Facebook trial and are known to Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Facebook attorneys????? They made the arrangements to have them examined!!!!!!!

    Did Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP attorneys for Facebook have a legal obligation to produce these hard drives when requested by Leader even after the close of discovery? Were they just misplaced?

    Are Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP attorneys for Facebook guilty of Tampering with Evidence because they concealed the hard drives from Leader and the District Court during Discovery? They were evidently aware of their location!

    Is New York based US Attorney Preet Bharara going to step in with this new evidence and file charges against Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Facebook attorneys for Obstruction of Justice for the cover-up of evidence? One of his former employers was Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.
    Now try to answer the 2 questions asked in the beginning. As with most things it is a few people who seem to drag down the majority. I think a Congressional hearing is in order to investigate the misconduct, (a legal term meaning a wrongful, improper, or unlawful conduct motivated by premeditated or intentional purpose or by obstinate indifference to the consequences of one's acts.), by members of the Federal Circuit Bar Association, associated with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP !!!!


  18. I am going to throw in this little tidbit.
    Should Thomas G Hungar have notified Leaders attorneys that he filed an Amicus Brief for the Federal Circuit Bar Association in defense of Judge R Rader and the Federal Circuit Judges, since it was less than 2 years when he represented Facebook in front of these same judges? Might a reasonable person say there was a conflict of interest? Did Judge R Rader know that Attorney Hungar filed the brief for the Federal Circuit Bar Association in all the judges’ behalf? Most everywhere you read about conflicts they say that judges, attorneys and mediators need to be diligent to prevent conflicts. There is even software to help them in this matter.

    If the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has the following requirements for anyone charged with being a mediator for the court, are the rules then relaxed for attorneys to argue cases before them????????

    Some of the guidelines for a mediator on the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals website state;If the mediator is affiliated with a law firm and that law firm represents or has represented a party to an appeal within the last 5 years, the mediator will recuse him or herself if appointed to mediate any case involving that party. Before final selection of a mediator, the circuit mediation officers inquire about conflicts of interest. The mediator must not presently represent either party or any amicus for any purpose, must disclose any past relationships that he or she had with counsel, counsels' firms, and the parties, and must disclose any potential "issues" conflicts. Mediators are required to decline from participating in any cases in which there is a conflict of interest, in which they perceive a conflict, or in which a reasonable person would perceive a conflict.

    These questions need to be answered


  19. Comment by: Lisa


    As of Tuesday morning, Amazon sales of George Orwell's Dystopian novel 1984 had jumped 6,021 percent in just 24 hours, to No. 213 on Amazon's bestseller list. As NPR's Alan Greenblatt recently pointed out, many people have found uncomfortable resonances between Orwell's "Big Brother" state and the news that broke last week of U.S. government surveillance programs.

    I am reminded that this is exactly what Mike McKibben, Al Stern and Professor Hy Berman warned of:

    The world is following a pack of devils, it would appear.

  20. facebook there where a lot of people who new facebook was stolen sean parker facebook extortionst james breyer david kirkpatick lisa simpson new york litigation partner at orrick judge lourie and judge moore new that mark zuckerberg sign the contract to paul ceglia and new that facebook was stolen

    the glitch ther was no real glitch at NASDAQ the FBI was warning about an epidemic of fraud

    DAVID Kirkpatrick : Henry Blodget issued fraudlent research under Merrill Lynch name as well as research

    Tech elite stir wave of resentment facebook billionaire Sean Parker held a reported $10 million game of thrones themed wedding with fake ruinsand fake waterfalls all the money he got from the jake up ipo

    The Google bus techies that pricelocals outof the housing market and twist rules and regulations in total lack of civic COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

    Even though everyone knows the game nothing happens until someone outside their little island confronts them with the facts its not the outsiders superior skill or knowlege that matters just their outsderness and in a way that hopefull

    1. For those who may be curious. dave123 is a very smart guy who has a form of dyslexia where the words on a page appear correct to him, but are often mixed. As is often the case with such folks, his thinking skills are off the charts, he just has challenges with expression. With dave123 read for concepts and you'll get the gist of his thoughts. He has connected a lot of dots and is finally relieved others are finally waking up to the facts he saw long ago.

  21. This is very informative and graceful blog, which is apreciable. The Indian Institute of Journalism and New Medi Courses (IIJNM) is one of South Asia’s leading post-graduate schools of journalism and media. Located in Bangalore in the heart of India’s high-tech industry. The Indian Institute of Journalism and New Medi Admissions is very simpler. This institute offers an excellent curriculum that combines both theory and practice to prepare its graduates for positions in the media industry. Thanks for sharing this useful information.


NOTICE TO COMMENTERS: When the MSM diatribe on "fake news" began, our regular commenters were blocked from posting comments here. Therefore, email your comments to a new secure email addess and we will post them.