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, June 13, 2014


Judge T.S. Ellis III holds a mountain of Facebook interests; Fenwick & West LLP compromised Van der Meer by representing both sides and tainted Leader v. Facebook; Deep State duplicity abounds

Contributing Writers | Opinion | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION  | Mar. 16, 2018, Updated May. 06, 2018 | PDF
Disgraced former Federal Circuit Chief Judge Randall R. Rader
Fig. 1—Randall R. Rader. Former Federal Circuit Chief Judge resigned in disgrace on Jun. 13, 2014 amidst the YFFL email scandal with Edward R. Reines, Weil Gotshal LLP. Judge Kimberly A. Moore was a former consultant to Weil Gotshal, yet has never disclosed her conflicts either.
Breaking News! 10:24 pm EDT
Rader quits the bench amid corruption scandal
According to The Wall Street Journal Law Blog just hours ago, former Federal Circuit Chief Judge Randall R. Rader quit the bench today, in the wake of his YFFL e-mail scandal ("Your friend for life -rrr") with backroom Silicon Valley crony Edward R. Reines, Weil Gotshal LLP. This event further validates the misconduct this site began uncovering in the wake of the Leader v. Facebook judicial corruption. A Leader v. Facebook mistrial seems inevitable. See our previous post for more links among the Rader resignation, David J. Kappos, the Patent Office and Leader v. Facebook. Note: Judge Rader and Judge Ellis are both faculty members of Professor James P. Chandler's National Intellectual Property Law Institute. Chandler and Fenwick & West LLP were both Leader Technologies' attorneys. The outlines of this white collar corruption are finally beginning to emerge.
Another Kangaroo Court? Judge T.S. Ellis, III, Eastern District of Virginia
Fig. 2—Judge T.S. Ellis, III presides over Rembrandt Social Media, LP v. Facebook, Inc. et al but failed to recuse himself due to his holdings of Facebook financial interests. An unbiased tribunal is impossible.

Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges tells them to "avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety." Here we see both. Is that Lady Justice over Judge Ellis' shoulder breaking her scales in frustration?

Ellis and Rader are close associates of Professor James P. Chandler III (along with the USPTO's David J. Kappos, IBM, Microsoft, Boston Scientific and Fenwick), Leader Technologies' former patent counsel.

Photo: Nolo.

(Jun. 13, 2014)—ABC News reports: “Facebook infringed on patents held by a Dutch computer programmer who tried to launch a similar site called ‘Surfbook’ more than a decade ago, according to a lawsuit heard by a federal jury Wednesday.” Click here for the ABC News coverage.

ABC had earlier reported when this case was filed. See “Facebook Sued Over The “Like” Button, ABC News, on Feb. 13, 2013.

Rembrandt Social Media, LP v. Facebook, Inc. et al, 1:2013-cv-00158-TSE, filed Feb. 4, 2013.

More duplicity

Corruption #1: Judge T.S. Ellis III holds large amounts of stock in Facebook interests, including:

  1. Goldman Sachs, Facebook underwriter
  2. Morgan Stanley, Facebook underwriter
  3. T.Rowe Price, holder of 5.2% of Facebook’s insiders shares at the IPO
  4. BlackRock, a top 10 Facebook IPO mutual fund winner
Thomas S. Ellis, III, Financial Disclosure Report, Eastern District of Virginia, Rembrandt Social Media, v. Facebook, for Reporting Year 2010

Thomas S. Ellis, III, Financial Disclosure Report, Eastern District of Virginia, Rembrandt Social Media, v. Facebook, for Reporting Year 2010
Fig. 3—Judge Thomas S. Ellis, III, 2010 Financial Disclosure revealing large amounts of conflicting Facebook interests. The law is clear that there must be a presumption of bias when a judge holds stock in one of the litigants. The current charade being played in the Facebook Cartel to hide their holdings behind mutual funds is farcicle. In any event, Ellis doesn't even have that excuse since Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are Facebook's underwriters, and T.Rowe Price holds more than 5% of Facebook's stock. Click here to download this PDF.

Bottom line: Judge Ellis had a duty to recuse himself in Rembrandt v. Facebook, and did not.

Curiously, Judge Ellis was a faculty member in Professor James P. Chandler, III’s National Intellectual Property Law Institute (“NIPLI”). Professor Chandler was Leader Technologies’ patent attorney who introduced Leader to Fenwick & West LLP. Suspicion is growing that Chandler and Fenwick played on both sides of the ball in the Leader v. Facebook... and Rembrandt v Facebook.

Also reminiscent of Leader v. Facebook, Judge Ellis blocked one of Rembrandt’s damages expert witnesses from giving testimony at trial. In the Leader case, Judge Leonard P. Stark allowed Facebook to add the on-sale bar claim just one month before trial and prevented Leader from performing discovery, and simultaneously blocked Leader from getting expert testimony from Chandler. The Chandler testimony was blocked even though Chandler is a recognized expert on intellectual property law and had personal knowledge of the events that Facebook would raise. A Delaware U.S. Attorney's Office official told AFI investigators recently that Chandler and Stark worked together when Stark was an Assistant U.S. Attorney.

Corruption #2: Fenwick & West LLP

Fenwick & West LLP began officially representing Facebook in about 2006 in securities and patent matters. However, Fenwick was the attorney who filed the patent for Van der Meer back in 1998. Sound familiar? Fenwick represents one inventor whose patent magically emerges inside Facebook’s portfolio, repackaged as a Facebook patent. Ellis ignored the obvious duplicity and attorney misconduct, probably since Fenwick was Chandler's compatriot in what appears now to have been an organized effort to kill all "cloud" patents not controlled by the Cartel, led by Fenwick.

Did Fenwick seek a conflicts waiver from Van der Meer before representing Facebook?

Is Facebook using Fenwick’s knowledge of the Van der Meer representation against Van der Meer? Is the Pope Catholic?

U.S. Patent No. 6,415,316 Joannes Jozef Everardus van Der Meer
Fig. 4—U.S. Patent No. 6,415,316 Joannes Jozef Everardus van Der Meer, revealing Fenwick & West LLP (Facebook's current attorney) as Van der Meer's attorney in 1998. The law is clear that there is a presumption of bias when an attorney flips sides on the same matter. Click here to download this PDF.

Is Rembrandt v. Facebook  another corrupt court like Leader v. Facebook ?

Given Judge Ellis’ bias toward Facebook, can the Van der Meer family and Rembrandt hope for justice?

Or, will this be yet another kangaroo court masquerading as American justice?

Pass this post around and make sure people in Washington D.C. get educated on the profound conflicts of interest in this case. It appears that our justice system, attorneys and judges alike, are totally ignoring their duties to ensure to the American public that justice is blind.

* * *


Click "N comments:" on the line just below this instruction to comment on this post. Alternatively, send an email with your comment to and we'll post it for you. We welcome and encourage anonymous comments, especially from whisteblowers.



    "Judge Rader, Author of Controversial Email to Lawyer [Edward R. Reines, Weil Gotshal LLP], to Resign from Bench" by Ashby Jones, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL LAW BLOG, Jun. 13, 2014

    This is great news for advocates of justice and the rule of law over crony capitalism and the Wall Street-Washington Cartel, for which Rader was a hired gun. Now we need to call for declarations of MIS-TRIALS on cases that have come before the Federal Circuit where Radar, Reines and Weil Gotshal LLP were involved and thus tainted the proceedings.



    Apparently, Judge T.S. Ellis III had to personally intervene in questions to experts to help Facebook get the verdict it wanted. All this result proves is that any judge and jury in the country can be bought, for the right price. Another sad day for American inventors and private property rights. Readers are encouraged to send emails of support to the REMBRANDT attorneys. We fight on.

    It is curious that Rader resigned on the same day. Do you think he knew this verdict was coming and chose to get out of the firing line on the appeal? That appeal needs to include extreme judge bias since Ellis held Facebook interests and did not recuse himself. Also, the list of un-compromised Federal Circuit judges is short -- most of them appear to be either on the make, or turning blind eyes to the judicial corruption on Lafayette Square.

  3. Email comment by: Kat

    So Leader is one of the 1% that get to federal court. And the only other Facebook one to get to trial. And yet, the best the "journalists" for ABCNews and Silicon Valley Mercury News could do is quote some Iowa professor who said the "only one other case where Facebook was the primary defendant in a patent-infringement trial that made it all the way to a jury" without mentioning LEADER TECHNOLOGIES by name.

    Do ya think they wanted to avoid having their readers find this blog and knowing the TRUTH about their favorite Facebook Kool-Aid? LOL. More mainstream media whitewash.

  4. LAW360 wrote this morning:

    "Rader Resignation A Head Scratcher Despite Email Flap"

    "Federal Circuit Judge Randall Rader's retirement announcement Friday amid a controversy over an email he sent praising a Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP patent attorney came as a surprise to legal experts, who say the incident didn't warrant leaving the bench but may cast a shadow over his time on the court."

    These Law360 writers and "experts" are either brain dead or coy, and we don't think they're brain dead. This corruption at the Federal Circuit has been staring the courts in the face for years, but these lawyers don't want to rat on members of the club. Who is going to watch out for the American citizen, the U.S. Constitution and justice for a change?

    A majority of non-lawyers on their euphemistically named "Disciplinary Boards" would be a good start. Layman won't put up with this old boy nonsense.

    1. Really? An article exposing corruption at the Federal Circuit would be the scoop of the century for journalists like this. You can't silence something like that. Believe me, if there was actually anything going on behind the scenes, the press would be ravenously exploring it.

    2. Just like CBS ravenously explored Sharyl Atkinson's investigations?

      Your perspectives are either horribly naive, or you are one of the people manipulating these courts.


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.