Top Judge Sets Liberal Course for New York - Jonathan Lippman - Judith Kaye - Proskauer Rose LLP - Iviewit Technologies - Connections and Affiliations

"" Gov. David A. Paterson nominated Jonathan Lippman to head the New York Court of Appeals in January 2009, making him the chief judge of the state.

The choice was a gamble: The judge, a longtime court administrator, did not have a long history of deciding cases, and there was almost no record of his political views.

Judge Jonathan Lippman has helped turn the Court of Appeals into a scrappier, more divided and more liberal panel, its rulings and court statistics show.

Now, a year in, the parameters of the Lippman court are coming into focus. He has helped turn the Court of Appeals into a scrappier, more divided and more liberal panel, its rulings and court statistics show.

To get the rulings he wants, the decisions show, the new chief judge has built alliances case by case with each of the four judges who were nominated by the last Republican governor, George E. Pataki, cracking the conservative majority.

The changes to the culture of the court, New York’s highest — which has sometimes been one of the most influential state courts in the country — are especially striking when Chief Judge Lippman’s approach is compared with the judicial style of his predecessor, Judith S. Kaye. She had prized unanimity.

In the past year, the court has issued a series of sharply divided decisions that have been surprising from a judicial body with a clear 4-to-3 conservative majority. They have included decisions favoring criminal defendants and injured workers, expanding environmental challenges and extolling individual rights against the police.

“The message he is sending is he doesn’t mind fighting for a much more progressive direction at the court,” Vincent M. Bonventre, a professor at Albany Law School who studies the court, said of Judge Lippman.

Though fiscal and political problems have plagued Mr. Paterson, a Democrat, Judge Lippman’s nomination may be one of his most enduring accomplishments in shaping policy. Judge Lippman, 64, does not reach mandatory retirement age until 2015.

Noting that the Supreme Court had yet to rule on questions presented by Global Positioning Systems, for example, the Court of Appeals ruled 4 to 3 that the State Constitution barred the police from placing GPS tracking devices on cars without a warrant.

A different Republican judge joined the three Democratic appointees in another divided ruling, this one striking down a youth curfew in Rochester as unconstitutional, though other courts around the country have approved such laws.

The Lippman court has also shifted ground on worker injury suits, saying that in the past the court too rigidly limited some of them. It has also signaled a new interest in arguments from criminal defendants, sharply increasing, at Judge Lippman’s urging, the number of appeals it is considering.
In an interview, Judge Lippman acknowledged that he had a different approach from that of Judge Kaye, a longtime collaborator in running the courts.

She was also nominated by a Democrat, former Gov. Mario M. Cuomo, but during her nearly 16 years as chief judge, she often worked for unified rulings.

“I am a result-oriented person,” Judge Lippman said, “and the result I am looking for is not necessarily unanimity.”

According to the court, unanimous rulings declined from about 82 percent during 2008, Judge Kaye’s final year, to 69 percent in Judge Lippman’s first year.

During Judge Kaye’s tenure, the court became more conservative partly because of the arrival of the four Pataki judges. Professor Bonventre, the Albany Law School expert, said that divided decisions became more common in Judge Kaye’s final years but that dissents increased further after Judge Lippman arrived.

The rulings indicate that on occasion, Judge Lippman has tailored his arguments to attract one of the four Pataki judges.

In a decision he wrote in September, the court waded into politics by overruling two lower courts that had said Mr. Paterson’s appointment of Richard Ravitch as lieutenant governor was unlawful.

That view, Judge Lippman wrote, would “frustrate the work of the executive branch.”
It was an argument that seemed crafted to appeal to Judge Susan P. Read, a staunch conservative but a former top legal adviser to Governor Pataki, who was not shy about exerting executive authority. It was a party-line vote, except that Judge Read broke with the other Pataki appointees.

In the environmental case, Judge Lippman and the other two Democratic appointees aligned with two of the Republican-appointed judges, Victoria A. Graffeo, a onetime Republican legislative lawyer, and Robert S. Smith, who had sometimes expressed libertarian views.
The decision, written by Judge Smith, appeared to involve tradeoffs.

It tartly noted that the suit sought to kill a proposed hotel to protect obscure species, the Eastern spadefoot toad and the worm snake.

The hotel got a green light. But in the process, the case gave environmentalists one of their most important court victories in New York in nearly 20 years. The majority said a 1991 ruling of the court had been too narrowly applied to limit those who could bring such suits to immediate neighbors.

Stephen F. Downs, the lawyer for Save the Pine Bush, the Albany group that brought the suit, said someone on the bench seemed to be paying for an environmental victory with a defeat for the spadefoot toad. “My impression,” Mr. Downs said, “was there was a certain amount of horse trading that went on.”

That would be vintage Lippman, people who know him say. He was a get-things-done administrator, said a retired judge, Betty Weinberg Ellerin, who has known him throughout his 38-year legal career. ""

Source of Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/nyregion/18lippman.html

New York Court Corruption, Affiliations and Conflicts of Interest. Time for Accountability in the New York Courts. Time Whistleblowers were heard and time Proskauer Rose to be accountable for their actions. The Iviewit Stolen Patent Case has many players, however Proskauer Rose is the Patent Attorney that STOLE the Trillion Dollar Patent and Judge Judith Kaye and Her Connections to Proskauer Rose through her Husband.. Stephen Kaye made a Trillion Dollar Patent Theft such as the Eliot Bernstein and Iviewit Technologies Stolen Patent, seem like a Simple "Standard of Practice"...

Pay Attention Folks as more Unfolds on the Connections, Cronism and Conflicts of Interest of Proskauer Rose LLP - Ex-Judge Judith Kaye, Andrew Cuomo ( whose Father Appointed Judith Kaye) and how this all relates to court corruption in New York...

posted here by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at
www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV

Marc S. Dreier SEC Investigation and Conviction - Excerpts from Eliot Bernsteins SEC Complaint.

"" The SEC Indictment and Conviction of Marc S. Dreier as it relates to Proskauer, comes from the connection to Patent Attorney Raymond A. Joao.

Joao initially introduced to Iviewit as a Proskauer partner by Wheeler, along with Rubenstein, when they were actually with Meltzer at that time.

Once investors in Iviewit learned Rubenstein and Joao were not with Proskauer as represented, Proskauer partner Christopher C. Wheeler (“Wheeler”) claimed they were transferring to Proskauer shortly.

Rubenstein then transferred almost overnight and Joao was to follow after he finished work at Meltzer but since he was actually writing the patent applications under Rubenstein’s direction for Iviewit, Iviewit had to take an additional retainer to Proskauer’s with Meltzer until Joao transferred.

However, Joao never transferred to Proskauer Rose and during his first year of work for Iviewit, it was discovered that Joao allegedly was not filing timely and correct patent applications and patenting inventions in his own name.

Joao now under ongoing investigation at the US Patent Office and FBI, ordered for by the First Dept and yet to be completed and more. Wheeler then claimed that Proskauer was beginning an investigation of Joao, ironically, and ignoring the conflicts this presented, as Joao was Proskauer, Wheeler and Rubenstein’s referral.

Christopher Wheeler then suggested his good friend William Dick (“Dick”) of Foley to replace Joao for filing the patents and reviewing Joao’s work, continuing under Rubenstein’s oversight, as described in the Wachovia Private Placement already exhibited herein.

What Christopher Wheeler failed to disclose to Iviewit is that Dick had been involved immediately prior to being retained by Iviewit, with both Wheeler and another Proskauer/Wheeler referral to Iviewit, Brian G. Utley, formerly employed by IBM and working with Dick, Utley then becoming President of Iviewit, in another allegedly failed Intellectual Property theft.

The prior attempted Intellectual Property heist was against another Florida businessperson, Philanthropist Monte Friedkin of Diamond Turf Equipment Co. and whereby all those addressed herein should take note of the Prior History of these alleged patent thieves, clearly indicating that this is an organized and repeated crime against inventors.

The SEC should note that Wheeler presented a falsified resume for his friend Utley to Iviewit that not only failed to disclose the attempted theft but also failed to disclose, and in fact materially falsified Utley’s resume concealing the facts by claiming Utley left the company Diamond Turf a success due to his innovations.

Factually, the attempted IP theft, according to Friedkin, led to the firing of Utley by Friedkin and Friedkin’s immediately closing the business and taking a multimillion-dollar loss directly due to the scheme perpetrated by Utley, Dick and Wheeler. Dick also failed to disclose this fact when joining Iviewit.

In both Utley and Wheeler’s depositions, already exhibited herein, both Utley and Wheeler contradict each other’s statements when confronted with the Friedkin information and Dick in his Virginia Bar Response to a complaint filed against him further contradicts both Wheeler and Utley regarding the Friedkin events. Supplementary evidence confirming these claims can be found on the Iviewit homepage at www.iviewit.tv .

When Dick replaced Joao, the press reported that Joao claimed he now had 90+ patents in his own name, many allegedly directly lifted from Iviewit.

Joao then joined the Marc S. Dreier law firm of Dreier & Baritz. This new information should be cause for the SEC to reanalyze the entire Dreier Ponzi Scheme in light of this new evidence, and in fact, the monies of the Dreier Ponzi allegedly directly relate to royalties from sales and licensing of Joao’s stolen Intellectual Properties.

The Dreier Ponzi is alleged to be another money-laundering scheme concocted by the Defendants in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit.

The SEC should also cease distribution of assets in the Dreier Ponzi, especially where the Trustee appears conflicted with Proskauer and again the court actions may be further attempts by these all too clever law firms to abscond with funds in further illegal legal actions and Fraud on the Court. ""

Where is the SEC and Mary Schapiro In All This ?

Click Here for Full SEC Complaint by Iviewit Technologies, Eliot I. Bernstein.

posted here by
investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

Iviewit Founder and Inventor Eliot Bernstein Files SEC Complaint on Trillion Dollar Patent Liability.

Proskauer Rose Named in SEC Complaint

" April 27, 1999 letter from Richard R. Rosman, Esq. to Hassan Miah regarding the Iviewit inventions and Proskauer Rose Partner Rubenstein’s opinion on the technologies. Note that Rubenstein and Miah know each other through MPEG and Miah’s former employer XING. Immediately after learning of the Iviewit inventions, Miah sold XING to Real Networks as indicated above.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/1999%2004%2026%20Wheeler%20Letter%20to%20Rosman%20re%20Rubenstein%20opinion.pdf "

Click here for SEC Complaint Naming Proskaur Rose LLP

" This FORMAL OFFICIAL COMPLAINT is filed with the Official SEC Complaint Intake Email Address: enforcement@sec.gov & CHAIRMANOFFICE@sec.gov and also filed with all investigators or committees the letter is addressed to, please make this Formal Complaint a part of all ongoing investigations or committees’ records regarding Iviewit companies and Eliot I, Bernstein, Inventor.

Re: Official Formal Complaint sent by Official SEC Email and Official Email Addresses to Other Investigatory Agencies and Committees addressed herein, Against Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., AOL Inc. and Time Warner, regarding Trillion Dollar alleged fraud on Shareholders; FASB No. 5 and other SEC, accounting violations and Violations of State, Federal and International Laws; Rescissory rights of Shareholders; Evidence and Important Information for the SEC regarding ongoing SEC Investigations of Bernard L. Madoff, Marc S. Dreier, Allen Stanford, Proskauer Rose, Galleon Enron Broadband, Enron, Arthur Andersen, and more.
Complaint filed against, including but not limited to;

Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. Chairman and CEO: Barry M. Meyer; President and COO: Alan F. Horn; EVP and CFO: Edward A. Romano; Vice President and Chief Patent Counsel: Wayne M. Smith

AOL, Inc. Chairman and CEO: Tim Armstrong; General Counsel and Executive Vice President, Corporate Development: Ira Parker; Assistant General Counsel - Patent Litigation, Prosecution, and Licensing: Christopher Day; Executive Escalation Team: Jerry McKinley
Time Warner, Inc. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer: Jeffrey L. Bewkes; Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Time Warner Inc.: Paul T. Cappuccio "

Source of Post and Full SEC Complaint Click HERE

Where is Mary Schapiro ?

Posted Here by Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger

Iviewit Silicon Graphics Bankruptcy Filing to Remove Judge Martin Glenn

""« IVIEWIT TRILLION $$ FED SUIT DEFENDANT PROSKAUER ROSE SUED IN GLOBAL CLASS ACTION RE ALLEN STANFORD PONZI - SHIRA SCHEINDLIN WHISTLEBLOWER CHRISTINE C. ANDERSON TO TRIAL FOR PUBLIC OFFICE CORRUPTION CHARGES
Iviewit Motion to Compel US Second Circuit (Circus) Court to Follow Law. Allen Stanford, Bernard Madoff, Marc S. Dreier links to Iviewit via Proskauer Rose and Foley and Lardner implicated in Trillion Dollar Suit. Citizen Arrest of Judge Ralph Winter & Clerk Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe. »

Iviewit Silicon Graphics Bankruptcy Filing
to Remove Judge Martin Glenn
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
In re
GRAPHICS PROPERTIES
HOLDINGS, INC., et al.,
Debtors.
Chapter 11
Case No. 09-11701 (MG)
(Jointly Administered)
—- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

ELIOT BERNSTEIN CLAIMANT-CREDITORS MOTION TO COMPEL THE DISQUALIFICATION OF BANKRUPTCY JUDGE GLENN AND VACATE ORDERS UNDER FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 60, BANKRUPTCY RULE 9024 AND FOR A STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND OTHER RELIEF IN RELATION TO ORDER SUSTAINING THE OBJECTION OF THE DEBTORS TO CLAIM OF ELIOT I. BERNSTEIN

TO THE HONORABLE MARTIN GLENN
SDNY BANKRUPTCY JUDGE:

I Eliot Bernstein, Creditor and Claimant previously filed an Emergency motion seeking injunctive and other relief in April of 2009, and filed Proof of Claim No. 225 herein, and recently moved for various relief including but not limited to an extension of time to respond to objections to my proof of claim with such objections filed by Special Counsel Ropes & Gray, motion for an adjournment of a hearing on Sept. 15, 2009 for the appointment of counsel to Eliot Bernstein, motion for the determination of conflicts of interest, and other relief now move to compel the immediate Disqualification of SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn, Vacating all Orders of SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Glenn in these jointly administered proceedings specifically including an Order dated September 15, 2009, and for an immediate stay of proceedings pending oversight and assignment of these proceedings to an independent and neutral Judge in accordance with due process and Rules and Codes of Conduct applicable herein.

MOTION TO COMPEL DISQUALIFICATION OF SDNY BANKRUTCY JUDGE MARTIN GLENN 28 USC 455 AND OTHER

SGI, hereinafter the Debtors, herein, filed for Ch. 11 Bankruptcy Protection on April 1, 2009 several months after emerging from a prior Ch. 11 case.

More importantly, however, is that SGI’s filing in Ch. 11 on April 1, 2009 came within 6 days of the filing of a formal SEC complaint by myself against the Intel Corporation announcing a Trillion Dollar fraud to the SEC also involving Debtors SGI as well thru a Company which was mutually owned by Intel and SGI along with Lockheed Martin called Real3d Inc of Orlando, Florida.

That company Real3d Inc. is at the heart and central of a host of investigations and complaints as well as having been under signed NDA with myself and the Iviewit technologies dating back to 1998 or so.
The alleged “sales” transactions between Intel, the Debtors SGI, and Lockheed Martin involving Real3d Inc. were expressly made a part of the Formal SEC Complaint filed on March 25, 2009, 6 days before the SGI bankruptcy on April 1, 2009.
As referenced in my Emergency Motion filed April 9, 2009, In House General Counsel for Debtors SGI Evelyn Ramirez was expressly placed on notice of the formal SEC Intel Real3d Inc and related complaint on March 25, 2009 just days before the Ch. 11 filing herein.
Despite this express notice on March 25, 2009, the April 1, 2009 Ch. 11 filing wholly failed to List the claims of Eliot Bernstein and related claims herein amounting to a Fraud in filing by SGI upon which THIS Court, SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn, was duly noticed.

SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn was further upon direct Notice as of April 9, 2009 with my Emergency filing of the existence of ongoing and open investigations involving multiple federal offices including at the USPTO where Harry Moatz, Director of the OED of the USPTO and a federal official had specifically directed me to file Fraud against the USPTO.

Further, Moatz assembled a team of patent office officials to work with myself to file to remove all former counsel from the applications and respond to outstanding issues to move the IP into a suspended status.

After review of the allegations, the Commissioner of Patents then Suspended various Patent applications herein pending investigation relating to the Trillion Dollar Technologies at issue. Inventor change forms filed to change the fraudulent inventors and certain IP that has falsified inventors were not changeable without an Act of Congress to change existing USPTO privacy policies, Senator Dianne Feinstein has been reviewing these matters, as well as, members of the House Judiciary Committee.

SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn was further placed on express notice of actions by the Office of Inspector General Glenn A. Fine of the US DOJ, pending matters with the OPR of the FBI and the federal whistleblower case of Christine Anderson now heading to trial in the Southern District of NY which my Amended Complaint at the US District Court was marked legally “related” to by District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin.

SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Glenn was further on direct notice that the Debtors SGI had simultaneously moved at the time of filing Ch. 11 on April 1, 2009 to simultaneously Employ as Special Counsel the law firm of Davis Polk Wardell (DPW) and Ropes and Gray, LLP by an application filed on such date by Ropes and Gray, LLP including a Declaration by William Kelly of DPW and that DPW was simultaneously representing the Lockheed Martin Corporation and SGI,

the Debtors herein, both of whom were Equity owners in Real3d Inc which was under signed NDA with my technologies and at the heart of my complaints and investigations herein.
Most shockingly, the Declaration of DPW attorney William Kelly places Mr. Kelly as an Inside Officer at SGI during ALL of the Relevant initial years of the Technologies theft with SGI and Real3d Inc. and later as Outside counsel for SGI while at DPW who simultaneously represents Lockheed Martin, the other Company with Intel at the heart of the Technology thefts with Real3dInc and violations of signed NDAs.
Thus, Clear Facial Conflicts appeared on the Records and Dockets of these proceedings certainly as of the date of my Emergency Motion filing on April 9, 2009 and thus SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn should be charged with knowledge of such conflicts as of at least April 9, 2009.
Additional specified conflicts made in writing prior to the Sept. 15, 2009 hearing which have been knowingly, deliberately and intentionally disregarded as part of the wall of conflicts machinery of RICO activity in legal proceedings include DPW further simultaneously representing Lockheed, SGI owners in Real3d Inc, while also simultaneously representing the Financial Accountants KPMG employed by SGI in this Ch. 11 bankruptcy while further representing other major companies under NDA with my technologies such as CIBC and Morgan Stanley creating conflict within conflict herein.
It is noted for Historical reference at this time that the Formal SEC complaint filed in March of 2009 expressly referenced failures to follow FASB No. 5 and similar Accounting Rules in this Trillion dollar fraud. As of the filing of my Emergency Motion on April 9, 2009, the Nation ( United States ) has heard almost daily reports of Financial Fraud and related investigations after the collapse of Wall Street, the $65 Billion plus Madoff fraud, and $8Billion Stanford fraud and more while Davis Polk Wardell simultaneously represents multiple players in the Wall Street debacle and most interestingly Recruited and Hired back to DPW former head of Enforcement at the SEC Linda Chatman Thomsen who left the SEC under fire for the failures that lead to the $65Billion Madoff fraud. Such facts involving the Madoff and SEC and Linda Chatman Thomsen matter were of such public knowledge that SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn should be presumed to have taken judicial notice herein. Published sources claim that Linda Thomsen was recruited back to DPW in April 2009 shortly after my filings herein.
Many threads tie together several of these financial schemes with the Iviewit technologies and companies, including Madoff, Dreier and Stanford, as pled in my federal RICO case, fully incorporated herein by reference, US 2nd Circ. Docket No. ( 08-4873-cv ) Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al. and USDC SDNY Docket No. ( 07cv11196 ) Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al.

FUNDAMENTAL NOTIONS OF DUE PROCESS REQUIRE
INDEPENDENT AND NEUTRAL JUDGE

As noted by the US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in an appeal of a case coming out of Operation Greylord, a massive FBI investigation into Judicial corruption in Cook County of Illinois, the United States Supreme Court “has observed that “[a] fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process.” In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136, 75 S.Ct. 623, 99 L.Ed. 942 (1955); see also McBride, 428 F.3d at 667 (”Fairness of course requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases …”).” See, Guest v McCann, http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/474/474.F3d.926.04-3736.html .
28 USC 455 provides in part as follows: “(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
Disqualification is thus mandatory and shall be compelled where “impartiality might reasonably be questioned”.
SDNY Bankruptcy Judge Glenn is required under the federal Rules of Judicial Conduct as follows:
“CANON 2: A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES
A. Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all
times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the

judiciary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ""

Source of Post and More information
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=76

Question: How Do you Deal with a Trillion Dollar Patent Theft and Billions upon Billions of Liability to Shareholders and States?

Answer: Ignore it and Hope it Just Goes Away.

More on the Iviewit Trillion Dollar Patent Theft at
www.Iviewit.TV and www.DeniedPatent.com

Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger

Did the Iviewit Stolen Patent Have Anything to Do with the Enron Fiasco? and How Was Proskauer Rose Involved?

It is Said that Enron's Broadband Division is what sunk the company. It is Said that The Broadband division was doing a deal with Blockbuster for delivery of a high quality video and had booked hundreds of millions in revenue based on these new technologies.

It is presumed these technologies were to be the stolen Iviewit Technologies. As Proskauer Rose Was involved with Iviewit's Stolen Patent, the SGI Bankruptcy and was representing Enron Somehow Right?

Enron was involved in a technology transfer and alliance agreement with Iviewit companies that may have been fraudulent companies with stolen patents.

Submitted by iviewit
2007-04-18 10:38:25

" It is amazing that an energy company was suddenly booking revenue as a broadband internet company. Blockbuster was started by Iviewit seed investor Wayne Huizenga. Arthur Andersen while conducting an audit for Crossbow Ventures, an Iviewit investor, funded by two thirds SBIC loans, was conducting an audit when they discovered two identically named corporations but one with missing minutes and stock records.

Andersen accused accountant for Iviewit, Erika Lewin, of misleading auditors regarding the Iviewit corporate structure and failing to state all the companies. Upon discovery of possible fraud and at the first signs that agreements such as the Enron/Iviewit deal were being done with these "other" identically named companies, Andersen suddenly went out of business with Enron and a shredding party like never before occured.

One must question why the Enron Broadband division escaped investigation and prosecution of its members when they were the cause of the collapse which had serious impact on shareholders and states like California.

All roads of the Bush Administration's corruptions lead to Patentgate. Check out www.iviewit.tv for more info. "

Source of Post
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=5&id2=5255


More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at http://www.deniedpatent.com/
Posted by
Industry Whistleblower
Crystal L. Cox

What Does the Iviewit Stolen Patent Have to Do With Enron?

It is Said that Enron's Broadband Division is what sunk the company. It is Said that The Broadband division was doing a deal with Blockbuster for delivery of a high quality video and had booked hundreds of millions in revenue based on these new technologies.

It is presumed these technologies were to be the stolen Iviewit Technologies. As Proskauer Rose Was involved with Iviewit's Stolen Patent, the SGI Bankruptcy and was representing Enron Somehow Right?

Enron was involved in a technology transfer and alliance agreement with Iviewit companies that may have been fraudulent companies with stolen patents.

Submitted by iviewit
2007-04-18 10:38:25

" It is amazing that an energy company was suddenly booking revenue as a broadband internet company. Blockbuster was started by Iviewit seed investor Wayne Huizenga. Arthur Andersen while conducting an audit for Crossbow Ventures, an Iviewit investor, funded by two thirds SBIC loans, was conducting an audit when they discovered two identically named corporations but one with missing minutes and stock records.

Andersen accused accountant for Iviewit, Erika Lewin, of misleading auditors regarding the Iviewit corporate structure and failing to state all the companies. Upon discovery of possible fraud and at the first signs that agreements such as the Enron/Iviewit deal were being done with these "other" identically named companies, Andersen suddenly went out of business with Enron and a shredding party like never before occured.

One must question why the Enron Broadband division escaped investigation and prosecution of its members when they were the cause of the collapse which had serious impact on shareholders and states like California.

All roads of the Bush Administration's corruptions lead to Patentgate. Check out www.iviewit.tv for more info. "

Source of Post
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=5&id2=5255


More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at www.DeniedPatent.com
Posted by Industry Whistleblower Crystal L. Cox

Bain Capital LLC and Hellman & Friedman LLC to buy Neuberger Berman Inc. from Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. for $2.15 billion

"Boston-based private equity firm Bain and San Francisco based private equity firm Hellman & Friedman agreed to acquire equal stakes in investment advisory and asset management firm Neuberger Berman from New York City-based Lehman. Also, current portfolio managers, management team, and senior professionals will gain a significant stake in the company, and remain in their positions.

The transaction includes all capabilities of Neuberger, which is primarily equities products and services, mutual funds, and a strong emphasis on high net worth and institutional clients.

The deal also includes Lehman Brothers Asset Management, with its fixed income, commodities, and quantitative portfolio management capabilities, and Lehman's private funds investment group. The deal doesn't include Lehman's merchant-banking, real-estate, or venture-capital direct private-equity businesses. The transaction is expected to be completed by early 2009.

Seller financial advisor: Barclays Capital
Bidder financial advisor: Citigroup
Seller legal advisor: Weil Gotshal & Manges; Willkie Farr & Gallagher
Bidder legal advisor: Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton; Proskauer Rose; Ropes & Gray "

Source of Post
http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/12372026?f=msdynamics

Proskauer Rose LLP