Intel Corporation Researching, Bruce Sewell - Kenneth Rubenstein, and RICO Compaint

Portland, Oregon,
Intel Corporation
(134.134.139.72)

Hey Intel are You Worried.. well You are Guilty - Guilty - Guilty

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom Searching for Information on Apple's General Counsel Bruce Sewell.

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Searching Bruce Sewell - Hmmm.. so what connections does the Corrupt Formor Intel Corp. General Counsel Bruce Sewell have to Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.  Or better yet what does Now Apple General Counsel Bruce Sewell have in Connection to Judith Kaye ?  Now we are getting somewhere...

Obviously it would take a very high Ranking Supreme Court Judge to keep Proskauer Rose out of a Trillion dollar Scandal as in the Massive Shareholder Fraud brough upon the American People by the Stolen Iviewit Techologies Company's Intellectual property by Proskauer Rose and then used by Intel Corp. - which Bruce Sewell was at the time General Counsel when Intel Corp. was made FULLY aware of the Iviewit Stolen Technology...

So did Bruce Sewell - Apple General Counsel know that Enron Collapsed to do with the Iviewit Technology Theft by Proskauer Rose, did Bruce Sewell have something on Stephen Kaye, Proskauer Rose - or Say Steven Krane - Judith Kaye's Snap to It Boy.. ???

Why is the Law Firm that Former Supreme Court Judge Judith Kaye works at .. googling "Bruce Sewell" and interested in the Iviewit Stolen Technology?

more on the Iviewit Scandal
www.Iviewit.TV   and
www.DeniedPatent.com

posted here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

Got a Tip on the Bruce Sewell ~ Judith Kaye Connection ?
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC and FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro, against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Proskauer Rose

SEC Complaint Filed, is the SEC Listening .. It Does not sound like it. The SEC must be covering up for Favors owed, covering and protecting billionair tech companies and Above the Law Law Firms Like Foley and Lardner and Proskauer Rose.

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC & FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro & Others against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Intel, SGI, Lockheed Martin, Proskauer Rose, Foley & Lardner.

"" March 14, 2010 --

FORMAL CRIMINAL COMPLAINT TO SEC & FBI
RE SHAREHOLDER FRAUD BY LEADING BLUE CHIPS

Corp Management of Time Warner (NYSE: TWX), Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., AOL Inc. (NYSE: AOL), Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC), Silicon Graphics, Inc. (delisted NYSE: SGI) & successor Silicon Graphics International (NASDAQ: SGI), Sony Corporation (NYSE/ADR: SNE) , Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT), Ernst & Young Global Limited have known about the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Liabilities for years & allegedly have concealed the liabilities from Shareholders & in some instances reorganized to the detriment of Shareholders in alleged fraudulent transactions, which may lead to Shareholder Rescissory Rights & catastrophic damage to the companies as complained of to Fed Officials.FEB 12, 2010 CRIMINAL COMPLAINTThe SEC Complaint filed Feb 12, 2010,

“Iviewit & Eliot I. Bernstein Official Formal Complaint…against Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., AOL Inc. & Time Warner, regarding Trillion Dollar alleged Fraud on Shareholders; FASB No. 5 & other SEC accounting violations & violations of State, Federal & Int’l Laws; Rescissory Rights of Shareholders; Evidence & Important Info for the SEC regarding ongoing SEC Investigations of Bernard L. Madoff, Marc S. Dreier, Sir Robert Allen Stanford, Proskauer Rose, Galleon, Enron Broadband, Enron, Arthur Andersen & more”

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=274

and

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf

SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGIA SEC complaint also was filed by Iviewit against Intel, SGI & Lockheed & similar allegations were levied against these corps for Patent Theft, knowing infringement & Shareholder Fraud.

The March 29th 2009 SEC Complaint to Shapiro titled “Complaint Regarding Intel Corp & Possible Trillion Dollar Fraud on Intel Shareholders & Others”http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090325%20FINAL%20Intel%20SEC%20Complaint%20SIGNED2073.pdf

12 COUNT 12 TRILLION DOLLAR FED RICO & ANTITRUST SUIT LEGALLY MARKED “RELATED” TO NY SUPREME COURT WHISTLEBLOWER SUIT

Liabilities for the complained of companies centers on both knowing technology infringements & liabilities from failure to report the Fed RICO & ANTITRUST filed by Iviewit & now legally marked “RELATED” to the Whistleblower suit of Christine C. Anderson, a former staff attorney for the NY Supreme Court Appellate Division. Anderson gave riveting testimony of systemic corruption to the NY State Senate Judiciary & in sworn testimony in before Judge Shira Scheindlin of Whitewashing & Criminal Obstruction by Court Officials for “Favored Lawyers & Law Firms, the US Attorney in New York, the DA and Asst DA” or words to that effect. Anderson further fingered one of the “CLEANERS” of ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT COMPLAINTS at the NY Supreme Court as Naomi Goldstein.A “CLEANER” at the ETHICS department of NY responsible for attorney regulation in Manhattan & the WallStreet financial district, perhaps the reason the country is suffering from a lack of attorney regulation in the heart of the financial district that has led to lax or complicit regulators and prosecutors and a worldwide economic meltdown.

Anderson’s testimony http://www.iviewit.tv/20090608nysjudiciaryhearing/index.htmhttp://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=205

Bernstein testimony before the NY Senate Judiciary of systemic corruption that has blocked due process & procedure via corrupt infiltration of the NY Courts @http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=189http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=165

HOUSE OF CARD COLLAPSING ON NY CRIME SYNDICATE INSIDE NY COURTS, ETHICS DEPARTMENTS, PUBLIC OFFICES & REGULATORY AGENCIES BY CRIMINAL LAW FIRMS & LAWYERSThe House of Cards is Crumbling on Key Players in the Iviewit Scandal as the NY Corruption Scandal Elevates to Senior NY Political Figures including Cuomo & members of the NY Supreme Court & US Fed Courts in NY. Proskauer Rose.

Proskauer, mastermind of the bungled attempt to steal the Iviewit patents through Fraud on the US Patent Office & further bungled attempts to cover up the crimes in the NY Courts is under further scrutiny with Proskauer’s direct involvement in the Stanford Financial Ponzi & subsequent resignation of partner Thomas Sjoblom, a former SEC enforcement officer, allegedly found coaching Stanford employees on how to lie to SEC & FBI investigators at a Miami Airport Hanger preceding the arrest of Stanford & his employees.

Proskauer also sued in a Class Action suit for the entire 7 billion dollar Stanford losses & sued by an arrested Stanford employee. Proskauer has further direct ties to both the Madoff & Dreier Ponzis.NY Attorney General CuomoFollowing the illegal representation by the NY AG in the Iviewit RICO & ANTITRUST suit & Anderson’s Whistleblower suit under Spitzer as NY AG, the Cuomo Admin continues to represent illegally State Defendants in both cases left over by Spitzer (a named Defendant in the RICO and Antitrust).

As the Iviewit & Anderson claims are further investigated & litigated these present the largest liability to Cuomo’s run for any office as the largest scandal brewing in NY begins to unravel with his offices dead center.

Anderson’s filing http://www.frankbrady.org/TammanyHall/Documents_files/Anderson%20111609%20Filing.pdf

Iviewit filings of Illegal rep by Cuomo @http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080305%20Final%20Plaintiff%20Oposition%20to%20AG%20Cuomo%20letter%20email%20copy.pdfhttp://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090129%20Final%20Extension%20of%20Time%202%20SIGNED%20low.pdf

The US District CourtWith Anderson’s revelations in the US District Court & the Jury finding that her 1st Amendment Rights to Free Speech regarding Whistleblower Allegations had been violated, the whole case has been called into question & further questioned due to the ILLEGAL REPRESENTATION of the NY AG Cuomo’s office. Based on Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Officials, Anderson filed for an entirely new hearing based on the Cuomo’s mass conflicts. Iviewit alleges that NY AG Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Defendants, Officially & Personally, violates his office duties & obligations of honest services to NY, public office rules and violates state & federal laws, whereby the Conflicts of Interest act to block investigation of the State Defendants fingered by Whistleblower Anderson & in Iviewit’s suit, causing Obstruction of Justice through Fraud on the Court. Serious allegations for Cuomo who continues to illegally represent State Officials on public funds, while failing to investigate those same public officials, including former NY Chief Judge Judith Kaye.

Also of concern is if these massive liabilities have been reported to State Auditors by Cuomo?The US 2nd CircuitIn the US Second Circuit, Iviewit filed a “Motion to Compel” compelling that court to follow law, as with Anderson’s revelations exposing court members, that court has tried to ILLEGALLY Dismiss all the legally “related” cases to Anderson in attempts to bury them & keep the lids on the scandal that may lead them to exchange their legal robes for prison garb. Motion to Compel

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=78http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf ""

"Addressed to:
SEC Chair Mary Shapiro
SEC IG, H. David Kotz
IG OF THE US DOJ, Glenn Fine
FBI
HOUSE & SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
NY SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
US AG, Eric Holder

Treasury IG, David Gouvaia
SBA IG, Peggy Gustafson & Daniel O’Rourke

US DEP OF COMMERCE IG, Todd Zinser
Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Dir of the USPTO, David Kappos
Deputy Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Deputy Dir of the USPTO, Sharon Barner

USPTO - OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT & DISCIPLINE DIR, Harry I. Moatz
US PRESIDENT, Hon President of the US, Barack H. Obama II
FILED AGAINST
Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Barry Meyer

Pres & COO: Alan Horn
EVP & CFO: Edward Romano
VP & Chief Patent Counsel: Wayne Smith
AOL, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Tim Armstrong
GC & EVP: Ira Parker
Counsel - Patent Lit, Prosecution & Licensing: Christopher Day
Exec Escalation Team: Jerry McKinley

Time Warner, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Jeffrey Bewkes
EVP & GC: Paul Cappuccio
MARCH 29, 2009 SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGI "

Press Release for Immediate Release

Intel Executive Make Decisions that Shareholders Take the Hit On? Looks like a RICO Pattern and History to ME. Massive Shareholder Liability Alert.

Funny Intel Shareholders don't even Know what CEO Paul Otellini is hiding from them and has been for many - MANY years on the Biggest Liability that Intel Corp. has ever seen.

Way before the Legal Issues with Advanced Micro Devices, and Billions in Fines .. there was and Still is the Trillion Dollar Liability of the Iviewit Technologies Company and the Stolen Technology that has made Billions on top of Billions and still is for Intel Corp. and many others involved in this High Finance Liability that shareholders will one day soon be FORCED to looked at AND that will be a Very Jagged Pill to Swallow.

November 2009 Article - Charles A. Gilman Got Moxy and Charles Gilman is VERY right in this request, Intel Executives are not Playing fair and NOT disclosing KNOWN Liabilities to this Day.

It is NOT the Intel Shareholder's Fault, they were no part of the Decisions and SHOULD not take the Financial Hit for It.

"" Intel shareholder wants execs to pay $2.7B in fines

He doesn't want the company on the hook for antitrust fines, settlement
By Sharon Gaudin.

Computerworld -

An Intel Corp. investor, frustrated that the chip maker has been hit with $2.7 billion in fines and settlement payments, has filed suit in U.S. District Court in Delaware against the company and its top executives.

Charles A. Gilman wants the court to force company executives, including Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini, to fork over money for the fines and payments so shareholders don't take a financial hit.

The lawsuit was filed the same week Intel reached a settlement with Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) to end all antitrust litigation between the two companies. As part of the deal, Intel agreed to pay rival AMD $1.25 billion.

That followed a ruling in May by the European Commission in which Intel was found guilty of antitrust violations in the market for PC microprocessors and fined it $1.44 billion.

Gilman, who refers to himself in court documents as a "long-time shareholder," doesn't think the company and its shareholders should suffer for Intel's actions.

In a document filed in court, Gilman's attorneys contend that shareholder attempts to influence Intel's board of directors have "proved fruitless. ...Indeed, shareholder demands have been met with outright hostility, which can only bespeak bad faith."

The document also contends that Intel's board refused to investigate the antitrust charges against the company or to appoint an independent committee to review the charges and take remedial action, if needed.

" The antagonism of Intel's Board of Directors to the shareholders' demand is readily explained by growing evidence that the antitrust scheme, which spanned three continents, and which has so far led to over $1 billion in fines, was personally directed by CEO Otellini and by Intel's former board chairman, Craig R. Barrett," the document alleges.

Ezra Gottheil, an analyst with Technology Business Research, Inc., said he's not surprised by the suit. "Someone always sues," he said, adding that he's never heard of company executives being forced to pay for any fines or settlements.

One of Gilman's attorneys, Roy Jacobs, of the firm Law Offices of Roy Jacobs in Manhattan, declined to comment on the suit. So did another Gilman attorney, Robert Goldberg, who is with Biggs and Battaglia, a Delaware law firm.

For its part, Intel promised to fight the suit. "We disagree with the plaintiff in the matter and we are planning a vigorous defense," said Chuck Mulloy, an Intel spokesman

In addition to Otellini, those named in the suit include: former CEO and ex-Chairman of the Board Barrett; directors James Plummer and Susan Decker; and former directors Carol Bartz, D. James Guzy Sr., David Pottruck, Jane Shaw, David Yoffie, Charlene Barshefsky, John Donahoe and Frank Yeary. ""


Source of Post and Article Link
http://www.computerworld.com/
s/article/9141168/Intel_shareholder_wants_execs_to_pay_2.7B_in_fines


Posted here by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger

More on the Intel Liability with the Iviewit Technologies
Stolen Patent at www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV

Also Check out www.CEOPaulOtellini.com and www.BruceSewell.com
for Intel Corp's Role in this Massive Shareholder Fraud.
Intel CEO Paul Otellini
Durward Bruce Sewell
Shareholder Activism, Advocate - Shareholder watch

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

"" Introduction – background info

I, Eliot Bernstein, of 2753 NW 34th Street, Boca Raton, Florida 33434, as one of the Original Owners and Inventors of revolutionary "backbone technologies" that transformed digital video and imaging, am filing this FORMAL COMPLAINT with the SEC and all agencies and committees addressed herein, against Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Inc. and Time Warner Cable, whereby these companies and all of their subsidiaries, affiliates, contractors, agents and employees collectively are referred to herein as (“Warner Bros et al.”).

Please note that these companies previously were under the same corporate structure during most, if not all, of the critically relevant times to this complaint.

This timeframe includes both the original merger of Warner Bros et al. to the recent breakup of Warner Bros et al. and the allegations levied herein may have directly, and illegally, influenced those transactions to the detriment of Shareholders.

Future detrimental effects on Shareholders, if failure to investigate these matters is not instant, may result in causing further massive losses to Shareholders of these highly traded New York Stock Exchange companies.

The losses could be thousands of times greater than the Ponzi Schemes of Stanford, Madoff and Dreier combined and those schemes evidenced herein have ties to the alleged crimes described herein.

For your convenience, I have attached the following link to a Press Statement issued about the Merger of Warner Bros et al. back in 2000[1].

In addition, I make a special note concerning the urgency and Time Sensitive nature of these matters predicated upon various factors, including but not limited to, the recent corporate split of AOL Inc. and Time Warner, Inc., which itself should be fully and completely investigated by the SEC as part of this complaint with direct correlation to the matters herein, for all of the reasons set forth herein.

The Investigation should, include but not be limited to, all original stock and securities related transactions in the original Warner Bros et al. merger and all transactions forward. All of these transactions dating back to 1998 may have been influenced by the alleged fraud and involvement in criminal activity described herein.

Leading Industry Experts working inside Warner Bros et al. (See attached Exhibit 1 – List of Warner Bros et al. contacts) and related companies, tested, used, viewed, approved, validated, Contracted and Licensed[2] my technologies under multiple Non Disclosures and other Licensing Agreements.

Attached hereto are various Internal communications within Warner Bros et al. documenting the relationship and admitted uses, including an ADMISSION by technologists within the organization, that my Technologies were being infringed upon AFTER NDA’s had been executed.

These agreements then resulted in a Signed and Executed Licensing Agreement at that time as illustrated and exhibited herein. Warner Bros et al. and others complained of herein may be perpetrating Massive Fraud on their Shareholders through concealment of these Massive Liabilities resulting from the theft and unauthorized uses of my technologies over almost a decade.

The technologies have revolutionized digital imaging and video hardware and software and instantly heralded by leading experts in 1998 as the “Holy Grail” of the Internet that allows quality video and imaging as now used worldwide by almost every user of a PC.

But broader than merely the Internet the technologies are used on virtually every camera, video camera, television, medical imaging device, telescope, microscope, satellite, DVD, graphics chip, gaming hardware and software, flight and space simulators, etc. and paved the way for new markets entirely, such as cell phone video and Voice Over Internet Protocol (“VOIP”).

Then it was discovered that our Intellectual Property Attorneys from Proskauer Rose LLP (“Proskauer”), Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley”) and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein Wolfe & Schlissel LLP (“Meltzer”) with the help of early licensors of my technologies, including Intel Corporation (“Intel”), Lockheed Martin (“Lockheed”), Silicon Graphics Inc. (“SGI” ), Warner Bros., AOL, IBM and more, tried to grab the “Grail”.

When caught, as evidenced herein, these powerful law firms and blue chip companies resorted to terrorist styled attacks on the key inventor, including a Car Bombing and Death threats.

As I have attempted to pursue my rights and report their crimes, they have further resorted to a litany of cover up crimes in the courts and at regulatory agencies and again they were caught violating law and public offices over the last nine years in efforts to stave off prosecution for their crimes.

All of these offenses are subject to multiple ongoing State, Federal and International investigations and a Twelve 12 Twelve, 12 Trillion Dollar Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit[3].

The Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit has been marked legally “RELATED” to a Federal Whistleblower Lawsuit of a New York Supreme Court Staff Attorney, discussed herein in under the section Titled “Discussion of Ongoing Lawsuits and Related Cases to Federal Whistleblower Lawsuit of Christine C. Anderson” .

Sony, Intel, Lockheed, IBM, Silicon Graphics and others are also complained of herein and all authorities this complaint is addressed too should investigate all those Defendants in my Amended Complaint exhibited herein, many for similar and identical crimes. ""

Full Complaint and Source of Post Click Here

Intel - Proskauer Rose - New York Courts - Foley Larder - Public Hearing Senator John L. Sampson in New York September 2009

"" « September 24, 2009 Public Hearing: Standing Committee On The Judiciary New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Chairman – Testimony of Eliot Bernstein, Inventor, Iviewit Technologies re Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner
Prepared Statement of Eliot I. Bernstein of Iviewit to New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Regarding Trillion Dollar Iviewit Federal Lawsuit Naming Proskauer Rose, Foley & Larnder, IBM, Intel, SGI, Lockheed and More »

September 24, 2009 Public Hearing Senator John L. Sampson NY: Standing Committee On The Judiciary New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Chairman – Testimony of Eliot Bernstein, Inventor, Iviewit Technologies re Trillion Dollar Lawsuit Naming Proskauer Rose, Foley & Lardner, Intel, IBM, SGI & Lockheed Martin.

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Senator John Sampson Chairman

SUBJECT: The Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts and the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct

PURPOSE: This hearing will review the mission, procedures and level of public satisfaction with the Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts as well as the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct

Monday June 8, 2009
NYC
250 Broadway
NY NY
10 A.M.
19th Floor

ORAL TESTIMONY BY INVITATION ONLY
Witness List for Judiciary Hearing 9/24/09
The Judicial & Attorney Disciplinary Process in the State of New York

1. Richard Kuse of New City, NY
2. Victor Kovner of the Fund for Modem Courts
3. Douglas Higbee of Mamaroneck, NY
4. Judith Herskowitz of Miami Beach, FL

5. Peter Gonzalez of Troy, NY
6. Andrea Wilkinson of Rensselaer, NY
7. Maria Gkanios of Mahopac, NY

8. Dominic Lieto of Mahopac, NY
9. Regina Felton Esq of Brooklyn, NY
10. Kathryn Malarkey of Purchase, NY

11. Nora Renzuli, Esq. of Staten Island, NY
12. Stephanie Klein of Long Beach, NY
13. Ike Aruti of Rosedale, NY

14. Terrence Finnan of Keene, NY
15. Gizella Weisshaus, NY
16. Eliot I. Bernstein of Boca Raton, FL
17. Suzanne McCormick & Patrick Handley of NY

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court is the entity that is legally responsible for enforcing the Rules of Professional Conduct governing the conduct of attorneys in New York State. The Appellate Division Departments have created grievance committees that are charged with the investigation of complaints against attorneys.

Within the First Judicial Department the Departmental Disciplinary Committee of the Appellate Division investigates complaints against attorneys.

The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct was created by the State Constitution and is charged with investigating complaints against Judges and Justices of the Unified Court System.

According to the 2009 Report of the Commission on Judicial Conduct, there were 1,923 complaints filed in 2008. Yet of these complaints only 262 were investigated and of those, 173 were dismissed.

This hearing will examine the processes and procedures that are followed by the various agencies charged with the responsibility of enforcing the rules and regulations that must be followed by the Judiciary and the Bar in the State of New York. It will also evaluate public satisfaction with the disciplinary process. ""

Full Article, Source of Post and VIDEO Click Below
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=159

posted HERE by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger