President Obama Cheats Leader to protect 50+ million “likes”
Eric Holder instruct Judge Leonard Stark to violate Leader's rights?
Chief Justice Roberts failed to disclose his Facebook conflicts
All five Leader v. Facebook federal judges hold Fidelity investments. Facebook Director James W. Breyer and his Accel Partners LLP is the common denominator. Facebook insiders, most notably Breyer, dumped over $6 billion on Day 3 of the IPO under the smoke screen of the supposed NASDAQ glitch, before the price crashed. Breyer has collaborated for a decade with Robert Ketterson, a Fidelity Managing Partner who oversees Fidelity tech investing. They even own companies together. They worked hand in hand setting policy for U.S. venture investing almost a decade ago at the National Venture Capital Association. Remarkably, since then Breyer has turned to dissing U.S. venture investing in favor of Chinese investing. His elusive father, James P. Breyer, runs IDG Capital Partners out of Beijing. More conducive to IP theft and corrupt financing?
Is American innovation and the rule of law being hacked to pieces by these people—from their new Chinese bird's nest, aided by U.S. judges?
CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON THIS STORY.
Editorial: The scandals just keep coming. One wonders if the law schools at Harvard, Yale, Columbia and GW cancelled Ethics, U.S. Constitution and Human Decency 101 during the years that these people attended. Or, maybe their mamas just didn't raise them right. Who knows? Anyway...
In 1992, Chief Justice Roberts mentored Facebook's attorney, Thomas G. Hungar. Roberts also collaborated with another Gibson Dunn LLP attorney, Theodore B. Olson. None of these conflicting relationships were disclosed in Leader v. Facebook. Hungar's participation compromised both the Federal Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court in ethics violations. These circumstances are akin to a judge hearing a case argued by a close relative and not disclosing that relationship to the other side. Lack of disclosure is scandalous. Olson is an Obama appointee to The Administrative Conference of the United States. The "Obstruction of Justice" illustration has been update below to show these new connections to The White House. Was Roberts' Obamacare vote the quid pro quo? The mind wanders.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON THIS STORY.
Jun. 10, 2013
Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts was massively conflicted in Leader v. Facebook
New judicial financial disclosures reveal that the Chief Justice failed to disclose mountains of Facebook conflicts in Leader v. Facebook—companies with dubious ties to the Kremlin, U.S. bailout, and direct ties to Michael Rhodes, Facebook's attorney (Cooley Godward LLP).
CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON THIS STORY.
New evidence implicates The White House in obstruction of justice
(Jun. 9, 2013)—AFI readers / investigators have just uncovered more ties between The White House and the growing Leader v. Facebook judicial corruption scandal. Click here to read the Comment. Previously suppressed and censored court documents have just surfaced that prove the Federal Circuit itself was represented by Facebook's attorney, Thomas G. Hungar, Gibson Dunn LLP BEFORE the Leader appeal to the Federal Circuit.
The Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges dictated disclosure of conflicts and disqualifications by the judges. Instead, the judges just faked impartiality as their man Hungar argued for Facebook. Click here: Document 1, Document 2 (see "Obstruction of Justice" illustration for context—click to enlarge).
The documents also prove that Gibson Dunn, the Federal Circuit's law firm, suppressed the evidence of 28 Zuckerberg hard drives in Leader v. Facebook. Facebook's other attorneys, Cooley Godward LLP, told Leader's attorneys that the hard drives were lost. These circumstances are scandals within scandals. The Federal Circuit's duplicity in allowing Hungar to appear before them in Leader v. Facebook is scandalous enough.
Worse, that appearance also identified Cooley Godward LLP, whose Man in The White House, Donald K. Stern, advises President Obama on Justice Department matters. Stern would have advised on the Leonard P. Stark and Evan J. Wallach appointments to federal courts, which is also scandalous. Stern is former chief legal counsel to Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis, who ran unsuccessfully for President against George H.W. Bush in 1988. He then became a U.S. Attorney, which makes him a contemporary of another U.S. Attorney associated with this scandal, namely Preet Bharara, formerly with Gibson Dunn. Bharara is currently prosecuting Paul Ceglia in U.S. v. Ceglia over dubious criminal claims involving Zuckerberg and Ceglia from 2003 (the year of the theft of Leader Technologies' source code).
The evidence is now pointing to a compromised-in-toto Federal Circuit court whose motives for protecting Facebook were many, and included (1) boosting the judges' stock portfolios in the Facebook IPO; (2) protecting President Obama's 47 million "likes" on Facebook in the run-up to the election and beyond; (3) preserving the Facebook cabal's global virtual currency plan via Facebook Credits; (4) protecting the tens of billions of winnings in their Facebook IPO "pump and dump" stock scheme; (5) protecting the ability to spy on Facebook users unobstructed; (6) legitimizing Facebook's hundreds of bogus patent applications filed for them by Fenwick & West LLP (Leader's former attorney); (7) concealing pay-to-play judge nominations, and (8) concealing cooperation with foreign powers, among others.
To be investigated further are the uncanny facts that: (1) while the Zuckerberg's 28 hard drives were being concealed from Leader Technologies (and Stark was blocking further Leader discovery after he allowed Facebook to add the on-sale bar claim), on Jun. 4, 2010 Mark Zuckerberg revealed his weird "Illuminati" symbol to New York Times editor Kara Swisher, and (2) within a few months, after the Leader v. Facebook whitewash by newly-appointed Judge Leonard P. Stark, President Obama held an all hands on deck meeting of his Silicon Valley techies. Zuckerberg was, like, his wing man, dude. (Feb. 17, 2011). Evidently, the sovereignty of the Constitution and America's data was being placed into the President's personal control in that toast.
Corruption Watch List
- Leonard P. Stark, Kimberly A. Moore and Evan P. Wallach lied to Congress about how they would handle conflicts of interest
- Judge Kimberly A. Moore has spouse associations with Facebook principals
- Federal Circuit court records have been cleansed to obscure massive conflicts among all the judges and the court itself
- Judge Evan J. Wallach held Facebook stock too; this means ALL THREE JUDGES HELD FACEBOOK STOCK.
- Wallach's wife, Dr. Katherine Tobin, is tight with the Obama administration and Harry Reid. She too has plenty of motivation to protect Obama's 47 million "likes"
- Facebook's attorney Thomas G. Hungar, Gibson Dunn LLP, also represented the Federal Circuit and was not disqualified
- Judge Moore's former client, Weil Gotshal LLP, also represented the Federal Circuit Bar against Leader, and she did not recuse
- The Leader v. Facebook panel was an ambush; all three judges held Facebook stock and were conflicted out the wazoo
New, 6/6/13: All three Leader v. Facebook Federal Circuit judges held stock in Facebook during the proceedings
(May 24, 2013) — Investigators have uncovered deep ties between the Obama administration and Facebook’s attorneys Cooley Godward Kronish LLP (“Cooley”). These ties should invalidate the Leader v. Facebook courts for bias, collusion and maybe RICO (if you tell someone else to do your dirty work, you are just as guilty).
Consider the cover-up of four deaths at the Benghazi embassy the State Department; the targeting of the Tea Party by the IRS; the secret wiretapping of The Associated Press approved by Justice Department magistrate judge. And now, consider the corruption of the SEC and Justice Department to protect 47 million “likes” on Facebook.
Flippancy telegraphs a governmental cancer
These scandals expose an arrogant administration that stops at nothing to get its way. On Wednesday, when former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman was asked by the House Oversight Committee why he made 118 visits to the White House, he cited an Easter Egg hunt. This flippancy telegraphs a governmental cancer.
“Drip, drip, drip.”
In such a cancerous ethical environment, bribing judges to hide Facebook’s theft of the technology that runs Facebook is just another day at the office. They expect Leader Technologies and its investors, whom they’ve cheated, to get over it, like a bad cold. What will be needed to get to the bottom of this corruption? To quote John Boehner this morning: “Drip, drip, drip.”
In Leader v. Facebook, Facebook was found guilty on 11 of 11 counts of stealing Leader’s technology, and yet Facebook has sidestepped accountability, so far, with Cooley-fabricated evidence. This custom-made evidence has been excused by federal judges ever since.
Now we know why. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department will direct judges to ignore the law to protect Obama and his friends.
Another federal magistrate judge behaving badly
Another federal magistrate judge, Leonard P. Stark, presided over the Leader v. Facebook trial between July 19 and July 28, 2010. He had only been assigned to the case one month before trial. He replaced veteran judge Joseph Farnan, a Reagan appointee. We have just learned that Cooley attorney Donald Stern was advising the Obama Justice Department at the time. Since Cooley’s attorneys were representing Facebook in Leader v. Facebook, any involvement by a Stern regarding Stark is a conflict of interest and possibly corrupt.
In the month before trial, Stark was busy helping Facebook. Stark allowed Facebook to add a new on-sale bar claim. It came after the close of all discovery, and on the same day that he took over the trial. On-sale bar is polar opposite to their earlier false marking—which arrogantly claimed that Leader had no invention, but was telling the world they did. In the switcheroo, Facebook was conceding that they were infringing Leader’s patent, but this last minute flip-flop now alleged that Leader tried to sell the invention too soon.
This is political whitewash by an Obama administration Justice Department that is above the law, uses corrupt law firms like Cooley Godward LLP and employs bag men like Michael Rhodes to do their bidding. Rhodes became counsel over Tesla Motor's $465 million Obama stimulus DURING the Leader v. Facebook case.
Judge Leonard P. Stark was rewarded with a judgeship eight (8) days after the trial.
All three Federal Circuit judges, Kimberly A. Moore, Alan D. Lourie and Evan J. Wallach were rewarded with a Facebook IPO value boost to their stock portfolios (We have no idea how many in their immediate families invested also. They refused to disclose those "third degree" investments when asked.).
Federal Circuit decisions were timed perfectly to Facebook's pre-IPO media needs. Said that was just "coincidence."
Federal Circuit clerk staffer for Clerk Jan Horbaly, Valerie White, said the judges did not have time to see motions (that was before her phone number was changed the next day and she stopped returning calls).
On-sale bar is like the tax code. Nobody understands it. Even the name "on-sale bar" sounds like a judicial honky-tonk, so it's a playground for unscrupulous lawyers. When Judge Leonard Stark failed to use the Pfaff v. Wells Elecs., Inc. U.S. Supreme Court gold standard for testing the on-sale claims (along with other well-accepted precedents), experience litigators assumed that the Federal Circuit would fix this mistake of a newbie judge.
Sadly, the borders of this Cooley Godward playground include the Federal Circuit, U.S. Supreme Court and other "high-powered" lawyers like Gibson Dunn LLP, Facebook's appellate lawyers.
Stark blocked Leader from building defenses to the new claim. Leader could have easily presented its source code to prove the allegation was false, but Stark blocked it. Facebook did not put up a single piece of hard evidence. Instead, Stark allowed two pieces of Cooley-doctored evidence at trial. Fragments of evidence are normally not allowed to be presented in court. This so-called evidence became the centerpiece of the judicial misconduct from that point forward.
Facebook offered no expert witnesses, no source code evidence, no testimony from the third parties who supposedly received these offers, no legal proofs at all. They only had Cooley Godward’s snippets of video taken out of context, and a 60% blanked out questionnaire. Legally speaking, the Facebook decision was a whitewash by Stark; a total outlier.
The timing is just all too unseemly.
|Timeline of Scandal in Leader v. Facebook|
|JUDICIAL IMPROPRIETY in Leader v. Facebook
Obama linked to both Facebook Cooley Godward attorney Michael Rhodes and Magistrate Judge Leonard P.Stark
CODE OF CONDUCT: "avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety"
|Nov. 18, 2008||Leader Technologies sued Facebook for patent infringement of their U.S. Patent No. 7,139,761.
Facebook represented by White & Case LLP (Heidi Keefe, Mark Weinstein)
Judge Joseph Farnan stated publicly that he was looking forward to taking the Leader v. Facebook case to trial. See Leader Techs, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc., 770 F. Supp. 2d 686 (D. Del. 2011).
17 days later
|Dec. 05, 2008||Cooley’s Donald K. Stern named advisor to Obama Justice Department (incl. recommendations to fill federal judge seats)|
|Apr. 23, 2009||McBee Strategic and Cooley announced a partnership "designed to help clean energy technology companies access public-sector capital." They arranged funding for BrightSource ($1.6 billion), Solyndra ($535) and Tesla Motors ($465 million).|
|May 2009||Facebook accepts first $200 million investment from Moscow, Russia-based Yuri Milner, DST Systems, aka Digital Sky Technologies. This is the beginning of the "pump and dump" strategy culminating in the $100 billion IPO valuation after which the Facebook insiders dumped over $16 billion on Day 3 of the IPO.|
|Q2/Q3, 2009||Facebook's Discovery Fraud:
Facebook attorneys Heidi Keefe, Mark Weinstein and Jeffrey Norberg lied to Leader Technologies' attorneys. They said that Zuckerberg "lost" all of his documents and files from 2003-2004. In 2012, Facebook experts admitted in Ceglia v. Facebook that 28 Zuckerberg hard drives and Harvard emails were in the possession of Facebook's attorneys the whole time. Those files would prove that Zuckerberg and his PayPal Mafia handlers (Lawrence "Larry" Summers, James W. Breyer, Accel Partners, Ping Li, Jim Swartz, Reid Hoffman, Peter Thiel, Matt Cohler) stole Leader's actual source code with the assistance of Fenwick & West LLP (Gordon K. Davidson), Leader's former counsel.
NOTE: Keefe and Weinstein's former employee at White & Case LLP, Samuel C. O'Rourke, silently reappeared as Facebook's inside intellectual property counsel during this discovery period. Pundits suspect that O'Rourke's task was to "scrub" the Zuckerberg evidence that would be fatal to The Grand Scheme. No Facebook press release was ever issued on O'Rourke's arrival. He just appeared. Several months later on Aug. 31, 2009, he fired White & Case LLP and hired Cooley Godward LLP where Keefe and Weinstein had moved . . . with their Facebook client in tow.
Figure: Depiction of Mark Zuckerberg's 28 computer hard drives and Harvard emails exist; they were never ''lost'' as they told Leader Technologies in 2009. On July 18-19, 2012, their existence was confirmed by Facebook forensic experts Michael F. McGowan and Bryan J. Rose of Stroz Friedberg in Ceglia v. Zuckerberg.
Deposition of Michael F. McGowan, Facebook Forensic Expert, Paul D. Ceglia v. Mark E. Zuckerberg, 1:10-cv-00569-RJA (W.D.N.Y. 2010), Jul. 19, 2012.
Deposition of Bryan J. Rose, Facebook Forensic Expert, Paul D. Ceglia v. Mark E. Zuckerberg, 1:10-cv-00569-RJA (W.D.N.Y. 2010), Jul. 18, 2012.
|Aug. 31, 2009||Cooley acquires Heidi Keefe and Mark Weinstein; they bring Facebook as a client to Cooley. Cooley assigns Michael Rhodes as lead trial counsel.|
|Nov. 20, 2009||McBee Strategic filed a LOBBYING disclosure form with the U.S. Senate and failed to disclose their strategic alliance with Cooley Godward LLP to help companies like BrightSource and Tesla Motors obtain "green" stimulus funds.
|Jan. 20, 2010||Leader dismantled Facebook’s case in the Markman Hearing. Judge Farnan’s Opinion took Facebook to the woodshed. (Markman is a pivotal hearing after which one of the parties often knows they are going to lose the legal argument.)|
|Probable panic at The White House & Facebook.
THE GRAND SCHEME WAS THREATENED BY FACEBOOK'S INCOMPETENT SHOWING AT THE MARKMAN HEARING.
Obama’s tens of millions of Facebook “likes” were threatened, as was his campaign cash cow, as was his 2012 campaign mouthpiece, as was Fenwick & West’s hundreds of Zuckerberg patent filings, as was James W. Breyer’s grand plan to “pump and dump” Facebook stock, as was Larry Summers’ plan for a new global currency using Facebook Credits, etc.
Bottom line, too many interrelated schemes were threatened to let a little thing like American property law and due process rights stand in their way.
Cooley’s Donald K. Stern went to work to save THE GRAND SCHEME.
|Jan. 26, 2010||Judge Farnan surprise announcement to retire to private practice, effective Jul. 31, 2010 (after Leader v. Facebook trial).|
Feb. 22, 2010
Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges:
"avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety"
Matthew J. Moore joined Latham & Watkins LLP on Feb. 22, 2010. Matthew Moore is the husband of Federal Circuit Judge Kimberly A. Moore (here's his bio). Judge Moore is one of the three-judge panel in Leader v. Facebook.
Latham & Watkins LLP's clients include James W. Breyer, Accel Partners LLP, Facebook's second largest shareholder.
Latham & Watkins LLP alumni include SEC Chief Counsel Thomas J. Kim. In 2008 (about one month before the so-called financial crisis), Kim granted Facebook an exemption to the 500-shareholder rule. This exemption opened the floodgates for Facebook's broker Goldman Sachs to raise $$$ billions in dubious investments from Moscow, Russia. This enabled Breyer's "pump & dump" strategy that netted Facebook insiders over $7 billion on Day 3 of the Facebook IPO alone.
During this time, Judge Moore and her husband Matthew held undisclosed Facebook stock, and were thus enriched by the Facebook IPO. Judge Moore did not disclose her Facebook holdings or disqualify herself from Leader v. Facebook. Hindsight says her silence was deafening.
In her Senate confirmation hearing, Kimberly Moore disclosed that she was an expert witness for Weil Gotshal LLP. Therefore, propriety would dictate that she disqualify herself from hearing any cases (1) handled by her husband's former or present employers, Howrey LLP or Latham & Watkins LLP, or (2) cases involving her former client, Weil Gotshal LLP. See Kimberly A. Moore Senate Confirmation Hearing, Jun. 28, 2006, p. 71.
Two cases were before Judge Moore in early 2012, Leader v. Facebook and Marine Polymer v. HemCon. The Federal Circuit court records in both cases are conspicuously incomplete, but enough is available to paint a clear picture of misconduct by both Judge Moore and Clerk of Court Jan Horbaly.
In Marine Polymer, Judge Kimberly A. Moore's husband Matthew J. Moore filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief for Geico Corporation on Feb. 10, 2012. One can only piece this date together by working backwards from the Decision, then finding a single clerk entry that mentions Geico, but not Matthew Moore. Normally all but sealed documents are available for public review. However, in Marine Polymer almost none of the case documents are available. The official statement is "not available for download." In fact, an entry in another part of the docket says the entire record is sealed, which is highly unusual, especially for a case involving high profile companies (Broadcom, Cisco, Dell, Facebook, Google, Hewlett-Packard, SAP and eBay) entering Friend of the Court briefs. Normally companies want their opinions highly publicized. What is being hidden? We think it is the misconduct of the court in Leader v. Facebook.
DOCTORED FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT RECORDS, AGAIN: The Rules require every attorney who makes an appearance in a case to formally register an appearance with the court. The court docket always lists the names of the attorneys at the beginning of the docket. However, Matthew J. Moore's entry in Marine Polymer has been REMOVED from the docket. However, we know he made an entry because he is identified in the decision. The evident attempt here is to obscure his association with Judge Kimberly A. Moore and Latham & Watkins LLP, and conceal misconduct, in our opinion. If one were to do a job assessment of Clerk of Court Jan Horbaly, based solely on his clerking in Leader v. Facebook and Marine Polymer, one would have to conclude that he is utterly incompetent... but, we don't think he's incompetent.
Marine Polymer reveals something equally as startling. Edward R. Reines, Weil Gotshal LLP filed amicus curiae briefs for Broadcom, Cisco, Dell, Facebook, Google, Hewlett-Packard, SAP and eBay.
Judge Moore disqualified herself in Marine Polymer merely because of her relationship to her husband, Matthew. (We surmise. The Clerk even sealed her disqualification filing.)
However, Judge Moore did not disqualify herself in Leader v. Facebook, even in the face of egregious conflicts, including:
New! Jun. 6, 2013 - All three judges held Facebook stock during Leader v. Facebook:
The Federal Circuit three-judge panel in Leader v. Facebook included Judge Evan J. Wallach. Wallach has absolutely no patent experience, so why is he presiding over a patent case? Judge Wallach was nominated by Barack Obama. More protection for Obama's 47 million Facebook "likes?" This becomes evident now that proof has emerged that Wallach held Facebook stock, just like Judge Kimberly A. Moore and Judge Alan D. Lourie, during the proceedings.The Wallach Senate confirmation information is on pages pp. III, IV, VII, 1, 6, 7, 9-91. Judge Wallach's wife Dr. Katherine Tobin has been well taken care of by Obama and his allies, but most especially by Senator Harry Reid. What's good for Facebook is good for Harry, and is therefore good for Wallach and his wife.
Wallach gave this testimony and was appointed to the Federal Circuit during the Leader v. Facebook proceedings. Was his cooperation in The Grand Scheme his price of appointment by Obama, just like Leonard P. Stark?
It gets worse folks...
Evan J. Wallach has an extensive professional relationship with Terence P. Stewart.
Stewart argued four cases before Judge Wallach at the Court of International Trade between 2004-2007. The cases were:
The illustration above occurred on August 3, 2010. Now see the same actors two years later in Leader v. Facebook. Note that "Amber H. Rovner" of Weil Gotshal LLP has very recently changed her name to "Amber L. Hagy." She also goes by "Amber Hatfield."
(Note to AFI investigators: Amber H. Rovner is very evidently attempting to distance herself from her longtime association with Weil Gotshal LLP—Judge Kimberly A. Moore's former client. What she has done will prevent her name from appearing in normal searches using her "H. ROVER" middle and last name. Therefore, when you search, be sure to search "Amber H. Rovner" OR "Amber Hatfield" OR "Amber L. Hagy". We have seen this trick before where attorneys in this case change their names to avoid being detected in searches. Fenwick & West LLP's attorney "Christopher P. King" changed his name on Facebook filings to "Christopher-Charles King." This way, his name would not appear anywhere associated to Leader Technologies' U.S. Patent No. 7,139,761, which Christopher P. King does (associated with two Marc Andreessen patents in 2005). This association proves "inequitable conduct"—FRAUD—by Fenwick & West LLP at the U.S. Patent Office—a fact that the Patent Office is ignoring.)
New: Jun. 17, 2013
More sins of the Federal Circuit
Update Jun. 18, 2013—As expected, AFI researchers have discovered a direct connection between Amber H. Rovner, Weil Gotshal LLP, and Judge Kimberly A. Moore.
In her Senate Confirmation, Moore disclosed that Weil Gotshal LLP was her client and identified a case, In Seagate Tech LLC v. Cornice, Inc. (D.Del. 04-418(SLR)). It turns out that at least two of the Weil Gotshal patent litigation partners on that case, namely Jason D. Kipnis & Adrian Percer, work with Amber H. Rovner, a.k.a. Amber L. Hagy a.k.a. Amber Hatfield, currently. This conflict meant that Judge Moore had a solemn duty to speak up about the conflict. The rule in colloquial terms is, if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck . . . recuse. Judge Moore clearly cheated lady justice and Leader Technologies' shareholders who counted on her to judge rightly. She pumped her Fidelity stock portfolio instead.
On Sep. 11, 2012, Terence P. Stewart, now President of the FCBA, was again represented by Edward R. Reines, Weil Gotshal LLP (Judge Kimberly A. Moore's former client) in a motion adverse to Leader in Leader v. Facebook to absolve the judges of their conflicts of interest.
New! Jun. 7, 2013
PURVEYORS OF SCANDAL:
The court docket has been cleansed of documents and entries proving that these bad actors actually represented and/or had conflicting relationships with: (1) the FCBA, (2) the judges and (3) Facebook and Microsoft, BEFORE the Leader v. Facebook appeal was filed.
What does this mean? It means the entire Federal Circuit court compromised itself in Leader v. Facebook. They did not disqualify themselves according to the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges and Judicial Employees.
New evidence suggests that the U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts was also conflicted via massive amounts of Facebook-related stock holdings just release for public review.
A year later, Thomas Hungar represented Facebook in Leader v. Facebook in arguments before the Federal Circuit in 2011/2012. The judges just smiled and pretended to act impartially.
Remarkably, the Aug. 3, 2010 amicus curiae motion containing this Thomas G. Hungar Certificate of Service (above) is not available on the Federal Circuit docket. Yet another damning piece of information has been removed from a Federal Circuit docket. Censorship of court records is illegal. They are supposed to be published unless they are sealed for a proper purpose.
Protecting judges from the consequences of their misconduct is not a proper purpose. Instead, it was discovered on the PatentlyO website. Also remarkably, no attorneys associated with this motion are entered in the docket, which is required by the Rules of Federal Procedure. This docket too, like the Leader v. Facebook and Marine Polymers dockets, fails to show proper entries for Matthew J. Moore, Thomas G. Hungar, Terence P. Stewart, Edward R. Reines, Amber H. Rovner, Reeve T. Bull, Gibson Dunn LLP, or Weil Gotshal LLP. However, after discovering their motion at PatentlyO, we were able to piece the story back together; thus proving the duplicity of the court.
Put simply, the ethics rules demanded that the court address the conflicts of interest issues in this case—before proceeding. They were not only silent, but when motions were filed asking them to disclose their conflicts of interest, they failed to even respond or docket those motions. In short, they put themselves above the law.
No collusion hangs together perfectly. For example, Clerk of Court Jan Horbaly's staffer, Valerie White, told a caller that the judges could not have even seen the amicus curiae briefs in Leader v. Facebook before they were denied within hours of being received. They were presumably dispensed with by Clerk Horbaly acting unilaterally. Ms. White's phone extension at the Federal Circuit office was disconnected the next day.
The illustration above is proof that the three-judge panel failed to recuse themselves, or alternatively, failed to insist that Facebook appoint an attorney other than Thomas G. Hungar and Gibson Dunn LLP. Even then, that would not have been enough. The FCBA motion and entry of Weil Gotshal and Edward Reines dictated that Judges Moore, Wallach, Lourie, Rader, all the en banc judges, as well as Clerk of Court Jan Horbaly recuse. Instead, they were silent on the constitution, but went out of their way to accommodate Facebook's pre-IPO needs with decisions perfectly timed to Facebook's IPO schedule. Of course, they would since all three judges wanted the boost in their stock portfolios that Facebook's handlers promised as the quid pro quo.
Code of Conduct Sins:
The violations of Leader Technologies' constitutional rights are obscene.
[Editor: The list of doctored Federal Circuit dockets is growing: Leader v. Facebook, Marine Polymer v. Hemcon, Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. US Patent and Trademark Office. Tellingly, all the actors associated with Leader v. Facebook are cleansed from those earlier records. It has taken our researchers over three days of digging to unearth the truth, thanks to a few breaks, like the PatentlyO document containing Thomas G. Hungar's signature representing the Federal Circuit Bar Association in 2010. That certification proves the illegality of the court's conduct.]
|Apr. 6, 2010||Judge Farnan set the discovery closing date for May 14.|
Apr. 22, 2010
|Magistrate Judge Leonard P. Stark stated at his U.S. Senate confirmation Hearing, under oath:
"My obligation is to follow the binding precedents of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals."
|May 14, 2010||Discovery closed|
|May 14, 2010||
Magistrate Judge Leonard P. Stark was ERIC HOLDER'S MAN assigned to protect Obama's 47 million "likes" on Facebook: Facebook filed new on-sale bar claim (102(b)). Leader objected. Stark overruled and allowed Facebook to pursue the new claim while denying Leader the right to prepare defenses. No hard evidence supported Facebook. Scandalously, Stark affirmed only a Cooley-fabricated video snippet taken out of context and a single 60% blanked-out questionnaire. Not a single piece of engineering evidence was presented. Facebook did not even present an expert witness! Nothing. Nada. Zilch. (Editorial: Herein is perhaps the most telling proof of collusion. The verdict for Facebook was predetermined, so the lack of proof didn't matter.)
Stark abused Leader's Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. Leader had a constitutional right to prepare new defenses to Facebook's new claim (which flip-flopped from a pre-trial "false marking" claim that Leader had no patent to, OK, Leader has a valid patent and tried to sell it too soon—on-sale bar).
Stark also abused judicial discretion. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) dictate that late-stage claims can only be made "with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires." Justice did not require abusing Leader's due process rights to help Facebook. In short, Stark blocked Leader from preparing a defense with additional evidence, expert witnesses, source code, third party testimony, etc. Pfaff and Group One specified a detailed analysis of alleged offers. None of that happened.
Stark promised Congress to decide ". . . carefully and impartially." He deceived Congress in his Grand Bargain with Obama and Cooley Godward in exchange for his appointment.
3 weeks before trial . . .
Jun. 24, 2010
The Grand Bargain
|Judge Farnan withdraws suddenly as presiding trial judge. Judge Leonard P. Stark assigned. Cooley’s Donald K. Stern certainly is involved in this decision since (a) he is Obama’s Justice Department advisor, and (b) the judge seat is in Vice President Joe Biden’s State of Delaware where he has been blocking Republican nominees for years.|
|Judge Stark allowed Facebook to amend their claims and add on-sale bar; Judge Stark blocked Leader from conducting additional discovery.
The Grand Bargain to gain his judgeship from Obama?
|Jul. 19-28, 2010||Leader v. Facebook trial. Split verdict. Facebook guilty on 11 of 11 counts, and Leader's expert witness decimated Facebook's prior art arguments. Despite the overwhelming proof of the opposite, Facebook prevailed on a single portion of the decision in which the jury admitted that they did not follow the jury instructions or precedent law for the proper testing of on-sale bar claims. Tellingly, Judge Stark heard this admission, yet forbade the attorneys from using this admission in their post trial pleadings. |
8 days later
|Aug. 5, 2010||Leonard P. Stark confirmed as U.S. federal judge. Refuses to overturn the jury on on-sale bar in post-trial motions. Fails to follow well-settled precedent law for assessing on-sale bar. Pfaff, Group One, Carr, The Dictionary Act. In short, the split decision stands.
In short, Facebook is using Leader's invention. And, Facebook failed to offer any evidence of on-sale bar, yet was supported by Judge Leonard P. Stark nonetheless.
|Table 1 – Timeline for "The Grand Scheme" including "The Grand Bargain" for a judgeship in Leader v. Facebook between President Obama, Cooley Godward LLP and then Magistrate Judge Leonard P. Stark.|
Do the circumstances above “avoid the appearance of impropriety in all actions” as dictated by the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges and Judicial Employees?
In exchange for delivering Facebook's on-sale bar verdict, Leonard P. Stark was rewarded a judgeship . . . in VP Joe Biden’s district
Evidently Stark was rewarded for protecting Obama’s “likes” on Facebook. Pundits thought the Federal Circuit would fix Stark’s mistake, but they waved their hands too. The appeals process was a total fraud which we have analyzed extensively.
|Obama posts a picture of himself on|
70% of his Facebook posts, averaging
1.3 posts per day, along with calls
to action for his 47 million followers
incl. "like," "share," "sign,"
"join," and "donate." No politician
in history has had such reach.
President and Michelle Obama have over 47 million “likes” on Facebook from which he makes money. In addition to his salary and perks as President, Organizing for Action raised $4.8 million in the first three months of 2013 with the help of his “share,” “like,” “join” and “sign” Facebook solicitations. In the last two months, he has posted more than once a day on his Barack Obama Facebook page. The majority of these posts contain his picture. What politician in history has had such an opportunity? Is this reach like a drug to which Obama and his handlers are addicted?
By comparison, Facebook “likes” as of mid-May 2013: Mitt Romney 11 million, George W. Bush 3.5 million, Fox News 3 million, Bill & Hillary Clinton 1.4 million, CBS News 880,000, Joe Biden 575,000, and John Boehner 373,000.
Cooley Godward LLP: Consiglieres (mob counsel) for the White House?
Besides Obama’s evident motive to protect his 47 million Facebook “likes,” the Federal Election Commission reports that 62 Cooley Godward attorneys donated almost $100,000 to the Obama campaign during the 2012 election. Two more donated to Organizing for Action. That makes a total of 64 Cooley employees who paid to play in Obama's sandbox.
Cooley Godward LLP
What kind of access did Cooley’s Rhodes have to the $645 million in Tesla Motors funds? Was this his slush fund for buying judicial employees and judges?
Two other donating attorneys, Cooley’s Ronald Lemieux and Roel Campos, are very well connected. Lemieux is directly associated with Cooley’s Heidi Keefe and Mark Weinstein, two more Leader v. Facebook attorneys, in Cooley-China. Investigators have learned that Facebook’s director and financier James W. Breyer and Accel Partners LLP are shifting portions of their post-Facebook-IPO tens of billions of dollars to China, alongside John P. Breyer, James W’s father, and IDG Capital Partners where James W is also a partner. AFI first broke the news of the identity of James W. Breyer’s father which does not appear in any of his public biographies. His father has been quietly building a financial empire in China for 20 years.
Cooley’s Roel Campos is more interesting. He only recently left Cooley. He is a former Securities & Exchange Commissioner who presided over the Facebook 12(g) exemption from the 500-shareholder rule. His SEC Chief Counsel was Thomas J. Kim, who failed to disclose that he worked for James W. Breyer’s lobbying firm Latham & Watkins LLP when Breyer ran the National Venture Capital Association 2003-2004. These were the same years Zuckerberg / Facebook / Fenwick & West’s theft of Leader’s technology occurred. We wrote about this earlier in our post The Real Facebook, A Portrait of Corruption.
One in six Russian entrepreneurs is in jail because they will not pay bribes to corrupt officials
May 25, 2013, BBC News—If Facebook's handlers have their way, America will soon be paying homage to oligarchs in Moscow, India, China and Brazil, using Facebook Credits and following their wishes. Your Benevolencies? (Editorial: Beware of Chinese, Russian, Indian and Brazilian money purchasing U.S. companies. This is part of THE GRAND SCHEME, and a great way to launder dirty money outside the reach of U.S. law.)
Malov employs 300 people. He was directed by the FSB (Russian secret police) to sell his dairy business to an unknown buyer, or face jail. He refused and was accused of fraud. He was found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison, just as the FSB officers had threatened. He now sits in jail.
This is what awaits America if Facebook's handlers succeed in corrupting our judges and institutions.
Curiously, Summers failed to disclose to the American public when he took that job that two of his protégés, Yuri Milner and Sheryl Sandberg, were Goldman clients and were running DST-Moscow and Facebook respectively. Such duplicity is illegal when not disclosed. In other words, if a party sits on both sides of a transaction (his friends decide who gets the money, and his friends receive and spend the money), then if he does not disclose that to both parties, he is double-dealing.
Bottom line is that Cooley's Roel Campos did the bidding of former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers who was working on ways to get (a) bailout funds, (b) stimulus funds and (c) "pump & dump" IPO funds to his protégés in Palo Alto (Sandberg) and Moscow (Milner)—a triple dip. This redefines the verb "fleece."
With Summers in the picture, any Obama assistance or involvement in Facebook is a conflict of interest by definition. But, as we have just seen with Obama's directive to Eric Holder not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, this administration apparently believes the U.S. Constitution is simply a pay-to-play prop to fool the masses. What happened to Obama's oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me God?"
Cooley’s Donald Stern advises the Obama Justice Department
Another donating attorney, Cooley’s Donald Stern, was a member of Obama’s Department of Justice transition team. Such a Cooley insider is only ever one step away from undue influence and corruption. At this point, can any reasonable person believe the line was not crossed?
Cooley’s McBee Strategic alliance dispensed Obama’s "green" stimulus billions to Solyndra and BrightSource that blew threw $2 billion between them
Two more donating attorneys, Cooley’s Tom Amis and Erich Veitenheimer, represent Cooley in the Cooley-McBee Strategic alliance formed to help companies obtain Obama’s “green energy” stimulus funds. This alliance occurred during the Leader v. Facebook case too. Cooley and McBee funneled Obama-stimulus funds to Solyndra ($535 million) and BrightSource ($1.6 billion). That money is all spent. Where did it go? Dubai? British Virgin Islands? Beijing? Bangalore? Cayman Islands? A more interesting question is how many Leader v. Facebook judges, judicial employees, their families and friends have their names on these accounts? What politicians are on the take too?
Cooley-McBee Strategic’s Mike Sheehy lobbied for BrightSource and worked for Nancy Pelosi
The tangled web gets worse. McBee Strategic disclosed that one of its lobbying agents for BrightSource is Mike Sheehy. Sheehy was Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s National Security Adviser for six years prior to joining McBee in March 2009.
Did Cooley's Donald Stern Justice Department adviser "have an understanding" regarding Stark's prospective judge seat re. the Leader v. Facebook outcome?
Bottom line, Michael Rhodes, Facebook’s lead attorney in Leader v. Facebook, was a heartbeat away from the Executive Branch and Department of Justice “transition” team during the Leader v. Facebook proceedings. Judge appointments, including Leonard P. Stark, were on the agenda. Was Stark given a choice to rule for Facebook no matter what, or kiss his appointment goodbye since Cooley had their man, Donald Stern, in the White House calling these shots?
On May 1, 2013, just a few weeks ago, about the time his name surfaced as a key player in this judicial corruption scandal, Stern unceremoniously left Cooley and joined Yurko, Salvesen & Remz, P.C. as "Of Counsel." This means that he was in such a hurry to leave Cooley that he did not have time to negotiate a partner agreement with Yurko, which is a very small Boston law firm. This is an extremely odd move for such a prominent attorney with a fat Rolodex.
Veteran Judge Joseph Farnan appears to have been forced into retirement one (1) month before trial so that Stark/Cooley could take over the proceedings. Those close to the case say Farnan had told the attorneys he was looking forward to the trial, then suddenly, he was sidelined after carrying the ball right up to the brink of trial.
Like lemmings, the Federal Circuit appeals court judges, their clerk, then the U.S. Supreme Court followed suit. Judicial financial reports reveal that two of the three judge Federal Circuit panel held stock in Facebook during the proceedings. These judges had a direct financial interest in decision favorable to Facebook. At this point Cooley and Facebook’s other handlers were sending a signal to a shocked legal world that they were in control of the federal appeals process . . . so everyone might as well shut up and simply admire their abuse of power.
FOIA Request: Patent Office invokes Executive Privilege
Are we going to find out that Obama instructed the Patent Office to ignore well-settled legal precedent? That would be the same logic he used to instruct Attorney General Eric Holder not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.
Facebook’s Cooley attorneys are tied at the hip to Obama. Obama uses Facebook to communicate daily with 47 million followers. Facebook makes millions from advertising on the Obama fan pages. Facebook’s Cooley attorneys have been beneficiaries of Obama’s “green energy” stimulus funds. It now seems that Cooley may have even helped dispense Obama’s “green” in collusion with McBee Strategic.
Is Cooley Godward LLP running the White House?
As this new Justice Department and Patent Office scandal emerges, will the combined scandals bring down this administration?
Q: How many Cooley Godward Kronish LLP attorneys does it take to become a kind of mob counsel (consigliere) to the Obama Administration?Will the mainstream media finally wake up to the charades and manipulation of the press by some very corrupt power mongers?
A. At least 64, apparently.
Drip, drip, drip.
Stay vigilant. Let’s keep pulling on the strings of this scandal until we unravel it. In this post, we have given you more names to add to your corruption watch list.
- The Great Patent Office Payoff. www.morningwhistle.com.
- McBee Strategic logo. McBee Strategic LLC.
 Wayne Allyn Root. "President Obama – the CEO who knows nothing." Fox News, May 21, 2013. Accessed May 25, 2013 <http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/05/21/president-obama-ceo-who-knows-nothing/> ("The reason I believe he is lying is because I've never heard of a CEO who knows nothing going on under his command.").
 Submission by Amicus Curiae Federal Circuit Bar Association in Support of Neither Party regarding Plaintiffs'-Appellees' Motion for Recusal of Chief Judge Randall R. Rader, Aug. 3, 2010, Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. US Patent and Trademark Office, 653 F. 3d 1329 (Fed. Cir.) <http://www.patentlyo.com/recusal.fcba.pdf>. Also online at <http://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/arunachalam/2010-08-03-Submission-by-Amicus-Curiae-Federal-Circuit-Bar-Association-in-Support-of-Neither-Party-regarding-Plaintiffs-Appellees-Motion-for-Recusal-of-Chief-Judge-Randall-R-Rader-Aug-3-2010.pdf> and <https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2SfG2nEsMfqR2FYQW1GTzVIcVE/edit?usp=sharing>.
 Steve Williams conversation with Federal Circuit Clerk of Court staff member Valeri White, DonnaKlineNow! Aug. 7, 2012 <http://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/donnakline/2012-08-07-Donna-Kline-Now-Judicial-Hyperactivity-at-the-Federal-Circuit-Judicial-Powers-Running-Amok-Next-Door-to-the-White-House-Aug-7-2012.pdf#page=9>; See also Cmt. 1 <http://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/donnakline/2012-08-07-Donna-Kline-Now-Judicial-Hyperactivity-at-the-Federal-Circuit-Judicial-Powers-Running-Amok-Next-Door-to-the-White-House-Aug-7-2012.pdf>.
 Deposition of Michael F McGowan, Facebook Forensic Expert, Paul D. Ceglia v. Mark E. Zuckerberg, Jul. 19, 2012, 1:10-cv-00569-RJA (W.D.N.Y. 2010) <"http://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/zuckerberg/2012-07-19-Deposition-of-Michael-F-McGowan-Facebook-forensic-expert-Ceglia-v-Zuckerberg-1-10-cv-00569-RJA-WDNY-2010-19-Jul-2012.pdf>; See also Deposition of Bryan J. Rose, Facebook Forensic Expert, Jul. 18, 2012, Paul D. Ceglia v. Mark E. Zuckerberg, 1:10-cv-00569-RJA (W.D.N.Y. 2010) <http://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/zuckerberg/2012-07-18-Deposition-of-Bryan-J-Rose-Facebook-forensic-expert-Ceglia-v-Zuckerberg-1-10-cv-00569-RJA-WDNY-2010-18-Jul-2012.pdf>.