On Jan. 21, 2009, Mr. Obama swore with his hand on Abraham Lincoln's Bible to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Photo: SFGate/Getty
Sub-Scandal 1: Obama’s friends conceal required judicial disclosures in Leader v. Facebook
Sub-Scandal 2: Patent judges formerly employed by Facebook stakeholders TRY to kill off Leader’s 10-year old patent BY UNVARNISHED FIAT
Sub-Scandal 3: Patent Office is protecting its 15,000 "likes" on Facebook too, along with Obama's 47 million
Sub-Scandal 4: Director Kappos hides Facebook stock behind deceptive ethics wording
(Sep. 4, 2013)—An Indiana businesswoman, undeterred by Patent Office stonewalling and lying, pressed the Patent Office last week to cough up financial reports and background information on Patent Office employees involved in Leader v. Facebook. She filed an appeal to her first request (CLICK HERE), and also a second request (CLICK HERE).
Remarkably, like the IRS, the Patent Office blanked out most of its disclosure (also see previous post), including every reference to Microsoft and Facebook. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) officer herself, attorney Kathryn Siehndel, failed to disclose her prior employment with Facebook’s lawyer in Leader v. Facebook, White & Case LLP.
Nonsensically, the Patent Office is claiming that they have no documents on their handling of the politically-motivated Leader v. Facebook 3rd patent reexamination.
The litany of Patent Office indiscretions is embarrassing. We see patent judges and personnel formerly employed by Facebook stakeholders pretending to be impartial. We see Director David J. Kappos encouraging his 10,000 employees to “like” the Patent Office Facebook page—before the Leader v. Facebook trial even began!
The Indiana businesswoman appealed the Patent Office’s refusal to provide even the most basic public information required by U.S. laws, like The Ethics in Government Act 5 CFR Part 2634 and 5 U.S.C. app. 4 §§ 101-111: Public financial disclosure requirements. That law identifies “an administrative law [Patent Office] judge” specifically.
The President and his cronies ignore inconvenient property laws
The Executive and Judicial Branches are evidently marching down a path where laws unhelpful to their agenda are simply ignored. The ship of state is listing badly, and the People’s body (Congress) must fix this mess. It appears that Congress must pass legislation to override the massively corrupt Leader v. Facebook decision.
Administration’s misconduct is unprecedented, but was contemplated by the Founders
Perhaps never before in history have we seen an entire 10,000-person agency of government like the Patent Office conflicted out of adjudicating a case (if they all “liked” Facebook, then they cannot be unbiased).
Perhaps never before have we seen more than a half-dozen federal judges corrupted by their holdings in a litigant like Facebook. Indeed, these judges have recused themselves before for far less serious conflicts, so they cannot plead ignorance.
The Founders contemplated such dire threats to the Constitution. Those procedures must now be followed. If not now, when? Enough sins to convict these scoundrels many times over have already been proven publicly. If we allow patent property to be stolen by such corruption, then the U.S. Constitution will not be worth the paper it is written on.
Every concerned American is encouraged to write your representatives, and file your own Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Requests. Send the signal to these corrupted institutions that this conduct will not be tolerated.
Ask Congress to order Leader’s property returned, and to ban Facebook from using Leader’s innovations. This lawlessness among our branches of government must be stopped.
* * *
 David J. Kappos, Ethics Agreement, Filer Detail, Jun. 02, 2009. U.S. Office of Government Ethics. Accessed Sep. 5, 2013 <http://www.oge.gov/DisplayTemplates/201_Form/FilerDetail.aspx?id=6442452822>; See also <http://www.oge.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=6442452825>; <http://www.scribd.com/doc/165727699/David-J-Kappos-EA-Re-OGE-Financial-Disclosure-Form-278-Accessed-Sep-5-2013>.
Post Comments below