Docstoc

Leader v. Facebook Judicial Misconduct WALL OF SHAME

Document Sample
Leader v. Facebook Judicial Misconduct WALL OF SHAME Powered By Docstoc
					Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame




                Attention: This Search indexes this AFI blog, AFI Scribd, Donna Kline Now!, Origins of Facebook's Technology and LeaderDocs.




             TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2013                                                                                FOLLOW BY EMAIL

                                                                                                                                                           Submit

             Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
                                                                                                                      LEADER V. FACEBOOK BACKGROUND

             Judges go to jail for far less serious misconduct                                                            1. Brief Summary (PDF)
                                                                                                                          2. Backgrounder (PDF)
             Contributing Writers | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION | Jan. 29, 2013
                                                                                                                          3. Facebook Secrets (PDF)

                 Click here for the Leader v.
                                                                                                                          4. Instagram-scam? (PDF)
                                                                                                                          5. USPTO-gate? (PDF)
                 Facebook judicial WALL OF                                                                                6. Zynga-gate? (PDF)

                         SHAME PDF
                                                                                                                          7. Insider Trading (PDF)
                                                                                                                          8. Disciplinary Complaints (PDF)
                          (Suitable for Handbills & Bulletin Board Posting)
                                                                                                                          9. Federal Circuit Cover-up? (PDF)

             (Jan. 29, 2013)—Judicial bribery appears to be all the rage                                                 10. Congressional Briefings
             in Washington these days. Therefore, should it be any                                                       11. Prominent Americans Speak Out
             surprise that Mark Zuckerberg, the one proven guilty of                                                     12. Petition for Writ of Certiorari
             infringing Leader Technologies' patent on 11 of 11 counts,
                                                                                                                         13. Two Proposed Judicial Reforms
             would use attorneys who have no qualms about bribing
                                                                                                                         14. S. Crt. for Schemers or Inventors?
             judges? Interesting question.
                                                                                                                         15. Attorney Patronage Hijacked DC?
             Facebook's main law firms involved in Leader v. Facebook are Gibson Dunn LLP, Cooley
             Godward LLP and White & Case LLP, not to mention that Facebook's inside counsel Samuel
             O'Rourke worked previously for Heidi Keefe and Mark Weinstein at White & Case. The other
             two attorneys that play prominently in this case are Gibson Dunn's Thomas Hungar (also
             Microsoft's attorney), Cooley's Jeffrey Norberg and Michael Rhodes. Directing the whole                     16. Dr. A's Friend of the Court Briefs
             effort is Facebook's attorney Theodore Ullyot who made out like a bandit in the Facebook
                                                                                                                         17. Justice Denied | Battle Continues
             IPO. Oh by the way, did we talk about the cozy relationship between these lawyers and
                                                                                                                         18. FB Robber Barons Affirmed by S. Crt.
             The Federal Circuit Bar Association . . . and Supreme Court clerks?

                                                           Judicial bribery and payoffs in Leader v. Facebook         POPULAR POSTS
                                                           seem all but certain considering the breadth and
                                                           depth of the collective misconduct. These judges              A Cocksure Facebook?
                                                           would have had no other motive than money to have
                                                           acted together so flagrantly. They risked their life          Supreme Court ushers in the tech robber
                                                                                                                         baron Age?
                                                           appointments and incarceration for the Facebook
                                                           cause. See "Wall of Shame" below. You'll have to              Leader v. Facebook [Justice] Denied
                                                           decide for yourself.
                                                                                                                         Prominent Americans speak out for Leader
                                                                                                                         Technologies
                                                  Judges and givers of bribes should go to jail. For
                                                  example, former attorney Paul Minor and former                         Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
             judges Wes Teel and John Whitfield are serving sentences for corruption and racketeering
             after Minor backed loans to the judges in exchange for favorable court rulings. See                         "Boy Kings" Briefing for Rep. Jim Jordan
             “Corrupt Mississippi Judges and Former-Attorney who Bribed them Head Back to Prison.                        (OH), House Oversight Committee, Nov.
                                                                                                                         27, 2012
             Bad Lawyer, Jun. 14, 2011.
                                                                                                                         Leader Technologies files a Petition For
             Facebook's Offer to the Leader v. Facebook judges: Stock value                                              Writ Of Certiorari at the U.S. Supreme
                                                                                                                         Court on Nov. 16, 2012
             appreciation in exchange for a favorable ruling?
http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
                                                                                                                Congressional Briefings re. Leader v.
                                                                                                                Facebook
             Given the way in which the Federal Circuit decisions were timed to Facebook-friendly
             events, like the beginning of their IPO road show, and a national Fox Business interview           Bibliographic Research Resources for
             with Leader's Michael McKibben, the Court-Facebook love-fest is apparent. Of course, they          Leader v. Facebook
             say its all coincidence. Yeh, right.

                                                                                                              EDITORIALS
             Promises of Facebook stock appreciation from the IPO in exchange for a favorable Leader
             v. Facebook ruling is a strong motive for corruption. How is that different from Paul Minor
             loaning judges money to pay their debts? Did these Leader v. Facebook judges seriously              1. DC Bar refuses to investigate attorney
             think we would not notice?                                                                             misconduct in Leader v. Facebook -
                                                                                                                    Unwillingness of DC attorneys to self-
             If one is tempted to doubt how widespread judicial corruption is, read this from the U.S.              police may explain why Washington is
             Department of Justice’s website:                                                                       broken, Dec. 30, 2012


                    "Bribery is endemic to our courts, because those persons vested with                         2. Will the U.S. Supreme court support
                    authority to prosecute judicial bribery are indifferent. They fail to do their                  schemers or real American inventors?
                    job." OpenDOJ                                                                                   Facebook's case dangles on a
                                                                                                                    doctored interrogatory. Eighteen (18)
             Wall of Shame                                                                                          areas of question shout for attention,
                                                                                                                    Dec. 27, 2012

             In addition to public outrage and shaming (which is growing in popularity given the lack of
                                                                                                                 3. Two Policy Changes That Will Make
             self-policing in the legal community), the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, as well
                                                                                                                    America More Democratic (and less
             as other committees, like the House Committee on Government Reform, are the primary                    contentious), Dec. 21, 2012
             legislative checks and balances.

             David Luban writes “Equality before the law, like universal suffrage, holds a privileged
             place in our political system, and to deny equality before the law delegitimizes that            OUR MISSION
             system. . . . when these rights are denied, the expectation that the affronted parties           American citizens must fight abuse of the
             should continue to respect the political system . . . that they should continue to treat it as   constitutional right for authors and inventors
             a legitimate political system--has no basis.” Lawyers and Justice: An Ethical Study, 251,        to enjoy the fruits of their inventions, as a
             264-66 n.12 (Princeton Univ. Press, 1988).                                                       matter of matter of basic property rights and
                                                                                                              sound public policy. Otherwise, instead of
                                                                                                              innovation, creativity, genius, ideas, vision,
             Leader v. Facebook—the most egregious example of judicial                                        courage, entrepreneurship, respect,
             corruption ever? It was a veritable Facebook love-fest.                                          property, rejuvenation, morals, ethics,
                                                                                                              values, renewal, truth, facts, rights, privacy,
                                                                                                              solutions and judicial faithfulness,
             We have before us in Leader v. Facebook perhaps the most egregious example of judicial
             corruption in the history of American jurisprudence.                                             . . . our society and economy will be
                                                                                                              dragged down (and eventually destroyed) by
             We have a federal district court                                                                 copying, infringement, thievery,
             judge Leonard P. Stark                                                                           counterfeiting, hacking, greed,
             permitting Facebook to add                                                                       misinformation, exploitation, abuse, waste,
             significant new claims (too late;                                                                disrespect, falsity, corruption, bribery,
                                                                                                              coercion, intimidation, doublespeak,
             at least by the Rules) while
                                                                                                              misconduct, lies, deception, attorney dark
             denying Leader time to prepare
                                                                                                              arts, destruction, confusion, dishonesty,
             their defenses to those new                                                                      judicial chicanery and lawlessness.
             claims. We have this same Judge
             Stark who ignored two of his own                                                                 If we do not speak up, impeach derelict
             key jury instructions, and ignored                                                               judges and imprison corrupt attorneys, we
             the jury’s own words to him that                                                                 cannot possibly hope to start fixing the
             they made their on-sale bar                                                                      current ills in our society. Without justice
                                                                                                              and respect for private property, democracy
             decision against Leader without
                                                                                                              has no sure foundation.
             evidence. Did we mention that he
             permitted Facebook to show the                 The Federal Courts: Hacker Way of Bust
             jury a heavily doctored                                                                          CURRENT EDITORIAL FOCUS
             Interrogatory No. 9 (60% was blanked out) at trial and denied Leader's request to show the       We are an opinion blog that advocates for
             un-doctored version?                                                                             strong intellectual property rights. We
                                                                                                              welcome commenters and contributors. The
             We have a Federal Circuit panel of three judges (Alan D. Lourie, Kimberly A. Moore, Evan         Leader v. Facebook patent infringement case
             D. Wallach, along with Randall R. Rader and Clerk Jan Hobaly) who did not disqualify             first came to our attention after learning
             themselves since some of them held stock in Facebook while Facebook went public in the           that the trial judge, Leonard P. Stark, U.S.
                                                                                                              District Court of Delaware, ignored his jury’s
             largest tech IPO in US history—during the Leader v. Facebook appeal. We have this same
                                                                                                              admission that they had no evidence to
             panel ignoring basic English and legal definitions of verb tense and utterly ignoring their
                                                                                                              support their on-sale bar verdict, but the
             own tests of the evidence.                                                                       judge supported it anyway.

             Did we mention that the Federal Circuit's own opinion debunked all of Facebook's evidence        The judicial misconduct has deteriorated
             by the time it was all said and done. Even they could not keep up Facebook's scam.               from there, replete with two of the three
                                                                                                              judges on the Federal Circuit appeal panel,
             Not to be deterred from the Facebook love-fest, did we mention that the Federal Circuit          Judges Alan D. Lourie and Kimberly A.
                                                                                                              Moore, holding Facebook stock that they did
             panel then fabricated whole new arguments for Facebook in secret after Facebook’s

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
                                                                                                                not disclose to the litigants, and later tried
             arguments fell apart?
                                                                                                                to excuse through a quick motion slipped in
                                                                                                                at the last minute by the Clerk of Court, Jan
             Did we mention that the panel did not give Leader a chance to challenge these new                  Horbaly, and his close friends at The Federal
             arguments?                                                                                         Circuit Bar Association. (The DC Bar
                                                                                                                subsequently revealed that Mr. Horbaly is
             Did we mention that the courts ignored damning new evidence that Mark Zuckerberg had               not licensed to practice law in Washington
             withheld 28 hard drives from Leader before the trial? New testimony in another case                D.C.)
             indicates that these hard drives might prove that Zuckerberg had Leader's actual source
                                                                                                                The judges ignored shocking new evidence
             code—that's potentially criminal and would have raised the stakes in the trial dramatically.
                                                                                                                that Mark Zuckerberg withheld 28 hard
                                                                                                                drives of 2003-2004 evidence from Leader
             Did we mention that The Federal Circuit Bar Association and the Clerk of Courts                    Technologies that could prove actual theft
             collaborated to file a motion absolving the judges of their conflicts of interest, only to         (and therefore claims even more serious
             withdraw it secretly once their scheme was exposed? This motion was chock full of easily           than infringement). In addition, Facebook's
             provable false and misleading CYA statements.                                                      appeal attorney, Thomas G. Hungar of
                                                                                                                Gibson Dunn LLP, has close personal ties to
                                                                                                                just about every judicial player in this story.
                     Follow the links on the right sidebar of this article to study the facts for yourself. >
                                                                                                                The misconduct appears to reach into the
                                                                                                                U.S. Patent Office through abuse of the
             Several grassroots movements are developing to press this case until justice is served. They       reexamination process by Facebook. We will
             are drafting a set of criteria for what qualities a judge to be on the "Hall of Shame:"            stay focused on Leader v. Facebook until
                                                                                                                justice is served, but we also welcome news
                1. Their corruption is based on publicly available facts.                                       and analysis of intellectual property abuse in
                2. They have ignored well-settled law.                                                          other cases as well.
                3. They have a conflict of interest that breaches the Code of Conduct for federal
                   judges.                                                                                      WELCOME TO DONNA KLINE NOW! READERS
                4. They have ignored material new evidence.
                                                                                                                                AFI has been supporting
                5. They have made false statements.                                                                             Donna and is now picking up
                6. They have violated Fifth and 14th Amendment due process                                                      the main Leader v. Facebook
                                                                                                                                coverage (she will continue
             The Judicial Corruption WALL OF SHAME                                                                              coverage as well).

                                                                                                                               Anonymous Posts Are
             The following Leader v. Facebook judges qualify for the Judicial Corruption Wall of Shame.                        Welcomed! Blogger has more
             What would motivate such a diverse group of judges with "for life" appointments from                              posting constraints than
             marching lockstep off the ethical cliff, unless bribed or coerced by promises of big money .       Donna's WordPress, but we will continue to
             . . on the side of course . . . wink, wink?                                                        welcome anonymous posts. Simply send us
                                                                                                                an email at amer4innov@gmail.com with
                                                                                                                your post. Once the moderator verifies that
                               Judicial Corruption "Wall of Shame"                                              your email address is real, your comment
                                                                                                                will be posted using your real name or
                                                                                                                handle, whatever you wish, like John Smith
                                                                                                                or Tex.


                                                                                                                BLOG ARCHIVE

                                                                                                                 Blog Archive

                                 Kimberly A.        Evan D.         Randall R.                    Leonard P.
              Alan D. Lourie                                                        Jan Horbaly
                                   Moore            Wallach           Rader                         Stark

                    Shame Checklist                 Subject: Judicial Conduct in Leader v. Facebook*

                               Ignored well-accepted precedent tests
                               Breach: Group One v. Hallmark Cards, Pfaff v. Wells Elecs., Inc.
               1.


                               Failed to disclose Facebook stock holdings
                               Breach: Code of Conduct for United States Judges
               2.


                               Ignored evidence that Zuckerberg concealed 28 hard drives
                               Breach: Rules of Civil Procedure
               3.


                               Made multiple knowingly false statements in judicial orders
                               Breach: Rules of Profession Conduct
               4.


                               Fabricated new appeals arguments for Facebook in secret
                               Breach: 5th & 14th Amendment
               5.


                               Failed to let Leader challenge the new arguments
                               Breach: 5th & 14th Amendment)
               6.


                               Censored docket and avoided public exposure of misconduct

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame




                               Breach: Rules of Civil Procedure
               7.


                               Ignored English language use of verb tense
                               Breach: The Dictionary Act, Carr v. US
               8.


                               Ignored own court orders re. interrogatories & jury instructions
                               Breach: Rules of Civil Procedure)
               9.


             *Ref: Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Leader Technologies, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc.,
             No. 12-617 (U.S. Nov. 16, 2012).                                                                   CODE OF CONDUCT FOR UNITED STATES JUDGES

                                                                                                                "CANON 2: A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID
                                                                                                                IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF
                                  Click here for the Leader v. Facebook                                         IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES"
                                       judicial WALL OF SHAME PDF
                                               (Suitable for Handbills & Bulletin Board Posting)                GALLERY OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT?


             Should Facebook users voluntarily pay user license fees to Leader in a citizens movement to
             do the right thing since the courts have forsaken our laws and respect for property rights?

             Interesting solution.


                                                            Open Question to Facebook Users:
                                                            Voluntarily pay Leader a license fee
                                                                                                                Judge Leonard P. Stark, U.S.
                                                            for your use of their technology that               District Court of Delaware, trial
                                                            Facebook has stolen?                                judge in Leader Techs, Inc. v.
                                                                                                                Facebook, Inc., 770 F. Supp. 2d
                                                                                                                686 (D.Del. 2011). Judge Stark
                                                    What do you say Facebook users? If someone gave you
                                                                                                                heard his jury foreman admit that
                                                    the keys to a car to use freely, then told you six          the jury made the on-sale bar
                                                    months later that the car was stolen, would you keep        decision without any evidence
             using the car? At the very least, wouldn't you want to pay the car owner for the privilege of      other than speculation, and yet
             continued use of his car?                                                                          he supported that verdict anyway.
                                                                                                                Just months before trial, Judge
                                                                    ***                                         Stark allowed Facebook to add the
                                                                                                                on-sale bar claim
                                                                                                                after the close of
                                                                                                                all fact discovery
                                                                                                                and blocked
              Posted by K. Craine at 1:37 PM                                                                    Leader from
                                                                                                                preparing its
                                                                                                                defenses to this new claim.

                                                                                                                Judge Stark allowed the claims
                                                                                                                despite Leader's prophetic
                                                                                                                argument that the action would
             1 comment:                                                                                         confuse the jury and prejudice
                                                                                                                Leader. (Read Leader's May 20,
                                                                                                                2010 motion here.) He also
                     K. Craine        January 30, 2013 at 8:28 AM                                               permitted the jury to ignore the
                                                                                                                Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc. test
                     Comment by: Facebook user feeling guilty                                                   for on-sale bar, even after
                                                                                                                instructing the jury to use it. (See
                     Tell me where to send my license fee to Leader. If these "boy king" bastards at Facebook   that Jury
                     aren't going to do the right thing, then us users will just have to do it for them.        Instruction No. 4.7
                     Reply                                                                                      here.) He also
                                                                                                                contradicted his
                                                                                                                own instruction to
                                                                                                                Leader to answer
              Add comment                                                                                       Interrogatory No. 9 in the present
                                                                                                                tense (2009), then permitted the
                                                                                                                jury to interpret it as a 2002
                                                                                                                admission as well. See his Sep. 14,
                                                                                                                2009 Order. Facebook's entire on-
                                                                                                                sale bar case is based upon this


http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
                                                                                                               interrogatory. (Editorial: Hardly
                                                                                                               sufficient to meet the "heavy
                                                                                                               burden" of the clear and
                                                                                                               convincing evidence standard.)



                                                                                                               Judge Alan D. Lourie, U.S.
                                                                                                               Court of Appeals for the Federal
                                                                                                               Circuit, panel judge in Leader
                                                                                                               Techs v. Facebook, Inc., 678 F.3d
             Comment as:                                                                                       1300 (Fed. Cir. 2012). Judge
                                                                                                               Lourie stood to benefit financially
                                                                                                               from undisclosed holdings in
               Publish    Preview


                                                                                                               Facebook. See analysis of Judge
                                                                                                               Lourie's T. Rowe Price holdings re.
                                                                                                               the Facebook IPO. Judge Lourie
                                                                                                               also failed to
                                                                                                               apply his own law-
                                                                                                               test in Group One
                                                                                                               v. Hallmark Cards
                                                                                                               to the evidence.
                                                                                                               After debunking
                                                                                                               all of Facebook's evidence on
                                                                                                               appeal, Judge Lourie created new
                                                                                                               argument in the secrecy of
                                                                                                               chambers to support Facebook and
                                                                                                               prevent the on-sale bar verdict
                                                                                                               from being overturned—a clear
                                                    Home                                          Older Post   breach of constitutional due
                                                                                                               process.
             Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)




                                                                                                               Judge Kimberly A. Moore,
                                                                                                               U.S. Court of Appeals for the
                                                                                                               Federal Circuit, panel judge in
                                                                                                               Leader Techs v. Facebook, Inc.,
                                                                                                               678 F.3d 1300 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
                                                                                                               Judge Moore stood to benefit
                                                                                                               financially from undisclosed
                                                                                                               holdings in Facebook. See
                                                                                                               disclosure of substantial holdings
                                                                                                               in Facebook and Facebook-related
                                                                                                               stocks. Judge
                                                                                                               Moore failed to
                                                                                                               follow the long-
                                                                                                               held precedent for
                                                                                                               testing on-sale bar
                                                                                                               evidence in Pfaff
                                                                                                               v. Wells Electronics, Inc.—an
                                                                                                               evident and intentional omission
                                                                                                               coming from a former patent law
                                                                                                               professor. After debunking all of
                                                                                                               Facebook's evidence on appeal,
                                                                                                               Judge Moore created new
                                                                                                               argument in the secrecy of
                                                                                                               chambers to support Facebook and
                                                                                                               prevent the on-sale bar verdict
                                                                                                               from being overturned—a clear
                                                                                                               breach of constitutional due
                                                                                                               process.




http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
                                                                                                              Judge Evan J. Wallach, U.S.
                                                                                                              Court of Appeals for the Federal
                                                                                                              Circuit, member of the three-
                                                                                                              judge panel in Leader Techs v.
                                                                                                              Facebook, Inc., 678 F.3d 1300
                                                                                                              (Fed. Cir. 2012). Judge Wallach is
                                                                                                              not a patent attorney. This begs
                                                                                                              the question as to why a judge
                                                                                                              with no knowledge of patent law
                                                                                                              was assigned to the case. Would
                                                                                                              anyone ask a dentist to perform
                                                                                                              brain surgery? The Federal Circuit
                                                                                                              was specially formed to appoint
                                                                                                              patent-knowledgeable judges to
                                                                                                              patent cases.

                                                                                                              There is no evidence so far in the
                                                                                                              judicial disclosures that Judge
                                                                                                              Wallach holds stock in Facebook,
                                                                                                              although when he was asked on a
                                                                                                              motion to disclose potential
                                                                                                              Facebook holdings and other
                                                                                                              conflicts of interest, he refused
                                                                                                              along with the other judges. See
                                                                                                              Motion to Disclose Conflicts of
                                                                                                              Interest.

                                                                                                              Judge Wallach
                                                                                                              continued in
                                                                                                              silence even after
                                                                                                              Clerk of Court
                                                                                                              Horbaly failed to
                                                                                                              provide him with
                                                                                                              Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam’s
                                                                                                              motions (according to his Federal
                                                                                                              Circuit staffer Valeri White), and
                                                                                                              yet the Clerk signed an order
                                                                                                              regarding that motion on Judge
                                                                                                              Wallach’s behalf. See a full
                                                                                                              analysis of these events at Donna
                                                                                                              Kline Now! Judge Wallach also
                                                                                                              failed to police his court’s
                                                                                                              violation of Leader’s Fifth and
                                                                                                              14th Amendment constitutional
                                                                                                              right to due process when he
                                                                                                              participated in the fabrication of
                                                                                                              new arguments and evidence for
                                                                                                              Facebook in the secrecy of judge's
                                                                                                              chambers after he had just
                                                                                                              invalidated Facebook’s sole
                                                                                                              remaining item of evidence (using
                                                                                                              disbelieved testimony as ostensible
                                                                                                              evidence of an opposite).

                                                                                                              Judge Wallach also failed to police
                                                                                                              his court when he failed to apply
                                                                                                              the Supreme Court's Pfaff v. Wells
                                                                                                              Electronics, Inc. test for on-sale
                                                                                                              bar evidence, which included even
                                                                                                              the Federal Circuit’s own Group
                                                                                                              One v. Hallmark Cards, Inc. test—
                                                                                                              a test which Judge Lourie should
                                                                                                              have advised Judge Wallach to
                                                                                                              follow since Judge Lourie helped
                                                                                                              write that opinion. Group One test
                                                                                                              omission analysis.




                                                                                                              Clerk of Court Jan Horbaly,
                                                                                                              U.S. Court of Appeals for the
                                                                                                              Federal Circuit, clerk who signed
                                                                                                              all the opinions in Leader Techs v.

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
                                                                                                              Facebook, Inc., 678 F.3d 1300
                                                                                                              (Fed. Cir. 2012). Clerk Horbaly and
                                                                                                              his staff obfuscated when the
                                                                                                              court's ruling was challenged by an
                                                                                                              amicus curiae brief revealing clear
                                                                                                              mistakes of law and new evidence.
                                                                                                              See analysis of the misconduct and
                                                                                                              misrepresentations within the
                                                                                                              Federal Circuit Clerk of Court in
                                                                                                              Leader v. Facebook.

                                                                                                              Mr. Horbaly failed to disclose his
                                                                                                              conflicts of interest and close
                                                                                                              associations with numerous
                                                                                                              Facebook attorneys and law firms,
                                                                                                              as well as his
                                                                                                              close association
                                                                                                              with one of
                                                                                                              Facebook's largest
                                                                                                              shareholders,
                                                                                                              Microsoft, who is a
                                                                                                              Director of The Federal Circuit Bar
                                                                                                              Association where Mr. Horbaly is
                                                                                                              an ex officio officer. Additionally,
                                                                                                              the DC Bar revealed in a written
                                                                                                              statement that Clerk Horbaly is
                                                                                                              not licensed to practice law in the
                                                                                                              District of Columbia. [Editorial:
                                                                                                              What does that make the Federal
                                                                                                              Circuit with its location within in a
                                                                                                              stone's throw of the White House?
                                                                                                              A self-governing state?]




                                                                                                              Judge Randall R. Rader, U.S.
                                                                                                              Court of Appeals for the Federal
                                                                                                              Circuit, chief judge responsible for
                                                                                                              the (mis)conduct of his judges and
                                                                                                              Clerk of Court in Leader Techs v.
                                                                                                              Facebook, Inc., 678 F.3d 1300
                                                                                                              (Fed. Cir. 2012). Judge Rader
                                                                                                              failed to manage his court
                                                                                                              resulting in a likely situation
                                                                                                              where his judges never even
                                                                                                              received briefs that they allegedly
                                                                                                              ruled on in favor of Facebook.
                                                                                                              Judge Rader also
                                                                                                              failed to disclose
                                                                                                              his conflicting
                                                                                                              relationships with
                                                                                                              a Leader principle
                                                                                                              with whom he
                                                                                                              may have had deep professional
                                                                                                              differences during his time at the
                                                                                                              Senate Judiciary Committee—his
                                                                                                              former professor of law at George
                                                                                                              Washington University Law Center,
                                                                                                              former Leader director Professor
                                                                                                              James P. Chandler. See analysis of
                                                                                                              Judge Rader's undisclosed conflicts
                                                                                                              of interest in Leader v. Facebook.

                                                                                                              Judge Rader also
                                                                                                              did not stop his
                                                                                                              judges from
                                                                                                              creating new
                                                                                                              arguments and
                                                                                                              evidence for
                                                                                                              Facebook in the secrecy of
                                                                                                              chambers—after they had
                                                                                                              debunked all of Facebook's
                                                                                                              evidence on appeal, which is a

http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame
                                                                                                              clear breach of constitutional due
                                                                                                              process.


                                                                                                              Click here to view a Federal
                                                                                                              Circuit Leader v. Facebook
                                                                                                              Conflicts of Interest Map.

                                                                                                              See "Cover-up In Process At The
                                                                                                              Federal Circuit?" Donna Kline Now!
                                                                                                              Sep. 17, 2012.

                                                                                                              Leader v. Facebook Legal Research
                                                                                                              Links




                                                                                                              NOTICE: OPINION

                                                                                                              This is an opinion blog. Any information
                                                                                                              contained or linked herein should be
                                                                                                              independently verified and should be
                                                                                                              considered the sole opinion of the writer.
                                                                                                              Free Speech and Freedom of the Press are
                                                                                                              protected by the First Amendment of the
                                                                                                              U.S. Constitution and other local, state,
                                                                                                              national and international laws. Therefore,
                                                                                                              as with all opinion, such opinion should not
                                                                                                              be relied upon without independent
                                                                                                              verification.


                                                                                                              AFI LOGO (WITH TEXT)




                                                                                                              AFI LOGO (NO TEXT)




http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
Americans For Innovation: Leader v. Facebook Wall of Shame


                                                  Author and Site attribution is sufficient. Simple template. Powered by Blogger.




http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2013/01/leader-v-facebook-wall-of-shame.html[1/30/2013 1:11:45 PM]
  Is Leader v. Facebook the largest case of judicial
misconduct in the history of American jurisprudence?




                     Concerned Americans United
            A Grass Roots Movement Demanding Just Courts

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: Judicial misconduct seems all the rage in Washington these days. Therefore, should it be any surprise that Mark Zuckerberg, the one proven guilty of infringing Leader Technologies' patent on 11 of 11 counts, would use attorneys who have no qualms about bribing federal judges?