Proskauer Rose Law Firm involved in Major Patent Scandal over Stolen 13 Trillion Dollar iViewit Technology. Proskauer Rose Above the Law? Not on My Watch .

Proskauer Rose is desperate to cover up the iViewit Story, even though there is over 1200 documents of Proof of Proskauer Rose LLP Fraud, Deceit, Deception.. and there is voice recordings... yet Proskauer Rose still claims innocence in the Stealing of the IViewit Technology.

Proskauer Rose ... iViewit Scandal

"“Why did the Hon. Jorge LaBarga of the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial District, Florida deny Iviewit’s Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to Assert Counterclaim for Damages (concerning the aforementioned allegations)” and “Why did the Supreme Court of Florida - The Florida Bar (‘TFB’) dismiss the complaint against Christopher C. Wheeler, Esq. (‘Wheeler’ and, a non-patent attorney, a main protagonist of the above referenced allegations) despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary” and “Why did the Supreme Court of Florida deny Iviewit’s Petition to begin the immediate investigation of the Wheeler complaint (when TFB admitted in writing that the answer to the Wheeler complaint was authored by an attorney, Matthew Triggs of Proskauer Rose, in flagrant violation of his public office obligations)” and “Why did the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division First Department - Departmental Disciplinary Committee stall Iviewit’s complaint against Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary” and “Why, despite the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department’s Court Order (unanimously voted on by five Justices) to begin the immediate investigation of Rubenstein, Steven C. Krane (former NYSBA President &

Proskauer Rose partner who handled complaints against Joao and  Kenneth Rubenstein while maintaining undisclosed roles at the First Department) and Joao, for conflicts and violations of New York Supreme Court public offices, did the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department - Departmental Disciplinary Committee charged with conducting an immediate investigation dismiss on review the Kenneth Rubenstein and Joao complaints and stating that they were ‘not under the jurisdiction’ of the First Department Court” [thus no witnesses were contacted, no evidence was tested and the attorneys did not even have to respond formally or informally to the charges against them] and "When conflicts were discovered at the Second Department with Krane why were complaints refused by the Second Department to be formally docketed against their members caught in conflict, those members denying complaints against themselves???"

and “Why did the Virginia Bar Association dismiss the Dick complaint despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary and the fact that the United States Patent Office had suspended the Iviewit patents based on a Foley and Lardner intellectual property docket submitted to the VBA that had factually false and misleading information regarding patent inventors, owners and assignees” and “Why did the Supreme Court of the United States decline to hear Iviewit’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court to overturn the Florida Court’s decision, which acted to block Iviewit from filing complaints against Florida Supreme Court officers caught in conflicts of interest and violations of public offices” and “why did John Doll & Jon Dudas, Commissioners' of Patents at the USPTO, fail to correct the inventors, and refuse to take or return Iviewit’s call or respond to formal office filings, including a petition filed more than three years ago by Iviewit and its lead investor Crossbow Ventures/SBA, which led to the suspending of patent applications pending ongoing investigations” and Iviewit finds itself answering “THAT IT IS ALL PART AND PARCEL OF THE TOTAL DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS IN THE PATTERN OF FRAUDS, DECEITS, AND MISREPRESENTATIONS THAT RUN SO WIDE AND SO DEEP THAT IT TEARS AT THE VERY FABRIC OF WHAT HAS BECOME TO BE KNOW AS FREE COMMERCE IN THIS COUNTRY, AND, IN THE FACT THAT IT PERTAINS TO INVENTORS RIGHTS, TEARS AT THE VERY FABRIC OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.”

Source of Proskauer Rose Post
http://www.iviewit.tv/