The Iviewit Stolen Patent Story is very interesting to Say the Least as it Exposes Corruption in US Courts, Exposes Patent Attorneys Ease in which they can Steal Inventions, Exposes Supreme Court Judges and Attorney Bar Association that Cover Up the Corruption, Side Deals and Favoritism among preferred - Elite - Wealthy Attorneys, and Really wakes you up to Big Corporations Like Intel Corp., Lockheed Martin, Time Warner Inc., Sony, and all the Other major Corporations participating in this Cover Up to Deny Inventors Rights, Deny Due Process and Continue Using their Technology - Simply Ignore 8 and 10 year old Contracts, Blatantly VIOLATED Confidentiality Agreements and violating Law after Law with thus far - No Accountability.
The US Patent Office Deny Rights of Inventors and Seem to be Holding up Investigations for year after year while Real Peoples Live are On Hold and In Danger.
The US Bankruptcy Court System has blatant Obvious Proven Fraud as in the Silicon Graphics Bankruptcy - the Conflicts of Interest and Illegal behavior and For Some Reason, thus far the US Bankruptcy Courts can't seem to see what has happened.
And though there are Literally thousands of Pages of documents of Proof, the US Court Sytem Seems to be Aiding And Abetting the Criminals in all this, Seemingly just because they are Major US Corporations, Meg-Law Firms, Court Judges, Supreme Court Judges, and State Attorney Bars - there is so Much Corruption Truly Where Does One Begin.
We Begin by Understanding the Iviewit Stolen Patent Story, who the Criminals Are, Who are the seemingly Protected Patent Attorneys in all this, Which Supreme Court Judges are Looking the Other way to this Blatant and Obvious Corruption, Who in the State Attorney Bar Complaint Process is Allow this. Once we understand this at least to Some Degree we can see how this happens in the US Courts and How those In Judicial Power Either Willing Let it Happen, Accept Bribes and Pay Offs, or are Threatened Somehow.
How Does a Trillion Dollar Patent Heist Get Pulled Off and For over a Decade So Far.
Well Go to the Links Below and Find Out More on How this Level of Corruption Happens in Your United States Court System.
Click Here to Read what Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, U.S.D.J had to Say in August of 2008 about the Fraud, Deceit, and Misrepresentation in the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case.
Also Check Out www.DeniedPatent.com for Names and Players and How A Theft of this Magnitude Can Be Pulled Off in the United States.
Also Go to www.Iviewit.TV Scroll Down Read Through some Documents, I know it is a Lot to Take in, but boy does it Open your Eyes to How Easy Trillion Dollar Heists Really are when you Know the Right People and have the Right Money.
Showing posts with label Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin Ruling ...
"' Whatever the new media version of "EXTRA! EXTRA!" READ ALL ABOUT IT!" might be, imagine me doing it.
Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin, famously of the Zubulake decisions that were the crucible of modern e-discovery practice, has done it again. In the course of an 87-page opinion and order, Her Honor invokes the only line anyone ever remembers from George Santayana and sanctions 13 plaintiffs for negligence and gross negligence in connection with their--ahem--'lackluster' preservation of and search for ESI.
The Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan, et al. v. Banc of America Securities, LLC, et al., U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, January 10, 2010)
It's a decison that will ruffle feathers in high places. E.g., Her Honor observes: "[T]he admitted failure to preserve some records or search at all for others...leads inexorably to the conclusion that relevant records have been lost or destroyed." (at 35).
Also, while Judge Scheindlin isn't the first to state that the failure to issue a written legal hold notice is "gross negligence," she seems to afford no quarter to effectuating a defensible hold any other way. It appears a face-to-face meeting, phone call, voice mail or course of dealing won't suffice to deflect a determination of gross negligence.
Too, that written hold notice had better be a strong, unambiguous directive to find, preserve and collect, coupled with close supervision of the effort. Total reliance on an employee to search and select won't cut it in Judge Scheindlin's court.
The decision puts a nail in the coffin of custodial-delegated holds and persuades me that, at least in the SDNY, no nabob should delegate preservation and search to minions, and certainly no lawyer should leave search to clients alone.
The opinion prompts further resignation to keep everything--especially all e-mail--and cease rotating tapes ahould someone so much as whisper the word "lawsuit."
Make no mistake: the plaintiffs were no models of probity and diligence. But, reading the particulars of their misconduct, I was struck less by the gravity of their negligence than by how unremarkable their sleepy, sloppy conduct sounded.
Granted, they brought the suit and were duty bound to make production, but think about it: These folks had already lost $550 million to botched investments.
Can't you imagine how thrilled they must have been to devote more time and money to answering discovery requests from the folks that (allegedly) flushed their fortunes away?
They say the rich are different. But not when it comes to e-discovery. They botch it, too! "'
Link to Source and Lots More ..
http://www.eddupdate.com/2010/01/zubulake-revisted.html
Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin, famously of the Zubulake decisions that were the crucible of modern e-discovery practice, has done it again. In the course of an 87-page opinion and order, Her Honor invokes the only line anyone ever remembers from George Santayana and sanctions 13 plaintiffs for negligence and gross negligence in connection with their--ahem--'lackluster' preservation of and search for ESI.
The Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan, et al. v. Banc of America Securities, LLC, et al., U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, January 10, 2010)
It's a decison that will ruffle feathers in high places. E.g., Her Honor observes: "[T]he admitted failure to preserve some records or search at all for others...leads inexorably to the conclusion that relevant records have been lost or destroyed." (at 35).
Also, while Judge Scheindlin isn't the first to state that the failure to issue a written legal hold notice is "gross negligence," she seems to afford no quarter to effectuating a defensible hold any other way. It appears a face-to-face meeting, phone call, voice mail or course of dealing won't suffice to deflect a determination of gross negligence.
Too, that written hold notice had better be a strong, unambiguous directive to find, preserve and collect, coupled with close supervision of the effort. Total reliance on an employee to search and select won't cut it in Judge Scheindlin's court.
The decision puts a nail in the coffin of custodial-delegated holds and persuades me that, at least in the SDNY, no nabob should delegate preservation and search to minions, and certainly no lawyer should leave search to clients alone.
The opinion prompts further resignation to keep everything--especially all e-mail--and cease rotating tapes ahould someone so much as whisper the word "lawsuit."
Make no mistake: the plaintiffs were no models of probity and diligence. But, reading the particulars of their misconduct, I was struck less by the gravity of their negligence than by how unremarkable their sleepy, sloppy conduct sounded.
Granted, they brought the suit and were duty bound to make production, but think about it: These folks had already lost $550 million to botched investments.
Can't you imagine how thrilled they must have been to devote more time and money to answering discovery requests from the folks that (allegedly) flushed their fortunes away?
They say the rich are different. But not when it comes to e-discovery. They botch it, too! "'
Link to Source and Lots More ..
http://www.eddupdate.com/2010/01/zubulake-revisted.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)