Source: https://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2014/03/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 11:07:20+00:00

Document:
Fig. 1—Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid stacked the courts in Leader v. Facebook.
At 5,600 to 1 odds, two Obama cronies of Reid and Pelosi were assigned to the Leader v. Facebook patent infringement case. Hindsight is 20/20. These judges were installed to guarantee a win for Facebook prior to the Facebook IPO. Pelosi, Reid and their cronies were substantial beneficiaries.
Pelosi is heavily invested in Baidu, Inc. China into which her Facebook cronies have poured tens of billion of dollars to control the Chinese social networking market. Curiously, Baidu's CEO and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg became CEOs of their respective companies the very same month—Jan. 2004—just two months after Ohio innovator, Leader Technologies, Inc., finished debugging the critical modules of Leader's social networking invention.
At trial, Facebook's expert witness, Dr. Saul Greenberg, lied about this very module and misled the jury. At the same time, Judge Leonard P. Stark blocked the jury from hearing a proper Leader defense which would have included expert testimony from Leader's patent attorney, Professor James P. Chandler, III, President of the National Intellectual Property Law Institute. Professor Chandler oversaw Leader's invention secrecy protections. He would have handily debunked Facebook's fabrications from personal knowledge of Leader's strenuous work, guided by him as a Leader director and advisor, to protect the invention. The unrefuted court record attests to these practices.
Tellingly, Nancy Pelosi also holds investments with In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital fund, and NBC Universal. NBC is a prime mover in the inordinately pro-Obama reporting of the Mainstream Media. NBC is also closely aligned with Baidu, Inc. China as well.
(Mar. 26, 2014)—Our recovery effort after the Scribd censorship highlighted new evidence about Congressional leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi that was previously overlooked.
The Leader v. Facebook case had four main judges. District Court judge Leonard P. Stark, and three Federal Circuit judges: Alan D. Lourie, Kimberly A. Moore and Evan J. Wallach. This doesn't count the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit En Banc petitions.
Hindsight shows clearly that Reid and Pelosi helped President Obama stack the Leader v. Facebook courts with crony judges, namely district court judge Leonard P. Stark and Federal Circuit appeals judge Evan J. Wallach.
Senator Reid's collusion is readily apparent. He had employed Wallach as his chief counsel. Curiously, Reid nominated Wallach to the Federal Circuit just two (2) days after Leader Technologies filed its Leader v. Facebook appeal at the Federal Circuit even though Wallach has no patent law experience.
Representative Pelosi's duplicity is evident with 20/20 hindsight—after analyzing her 2012 financial disclosure where she declares her net worth at up to $185 million.
"A noble society must demand blind justice, and must toss out any judge who violates the public trust, even once."
In Jan. 2010, just a week after Facebook's disastrous performance in the Leader v. Facebook Markman Hearing, veteran judge Joseph J. Farnan was forced into retirement and Obama nominee, Magistrate Leonard P. Stark, was assigned, just one month before trial. This was surprising since Farnan had expressed his interest in taking the case to trial on numerous occasions. The same month as Stark's ascendancy from obscurity, Facebook's Cooley Godward LLP trial counsel, Michael G. Rhodes, was appointed chief counsel at Elon Musk's Tesla Motors, Inc. Musk is a notorious Obama donor who had just received $465 million in energy stimulus funds. The incestuous back scratching is apparent with hindsight.
Tesla Motor's funds were recommended by the McBee Strategic – Cooley Godward partnership led by Nancy Pelosi's man—Mike Sheehy.
Why was veteran judge Joseph J. Farnan forced to retire just one month before trial? Because Facebook knew they were going to lose in a fair fight.
This collusion explains how Facebook beat the odds that two of the judges in Leader v. Facebook just happened to be Obama nominees.
Justice is supposed to be blind. The odds of randomly picking two Obama appointees in Leader v. Facebook were at least 5,600 to 1—the same odds as randomly picking two Obama appointees out of this MLK crowd.
Fig. 2—Rev. Martin Luther King spoke before a crowd of 5,000 at Golden Gymnasium at what was then the Point Loma campus of California Western University on May 29, 1964.
There are seven judges and magistrates at the Delaware District Court. Therefore, the odds of selecting Stark out of a hat for Leader v. Facebook were 1 in 7. We say "at best" because the pool of candidates is not limited to active judges. Judges emeritus can be selected in special circumstances, like conflicts of interest. So, the odds were actually lower.
The Federal Circuit has 18 circuit judges and Wallach was one of about 45 Democratic chief counsels from which to choose. The odds of Wallach's appearance on the bench in Leader v. Facebook were 1 in 18x45=810 choices. This number is higher since the pool of candidates was likely much higher than 45. In other words, the selection of Wallach had a 1 in 810 chance of occurring, 1/18 x 1/45 = 1/810.
Fig. 3— The odds of picking two Obama appointee cards shuffled among 128 decks of cards is 1 in 5670 or 0.02%. The federal court system allegedly did just that. It blindly selected Leonard P. Stark and Evan J. Wallach. And, it was supposedly just dumb luck that these two judges were both Obama appointees closely associated with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Facebook's Cooley Godward LLP law firm in Leader v. Facebook.
Therefore, the odds that two Obama nominees would be assigned to Leader v. Facebook were 1 in 5670 or 0.02%, at best.
By way of analogy, the odds of picking Stark and Wallach were the same as randomly picking their names out of 128 decks of cards. See Fig. 3.
Through $7 million in Matthews International Capital, Pelosi holds major interests in Baidu, Inc., sometimes called "The Chinese Facebook." Baidu and Facebook are quit similar. Is that just coincidental?
CEO, Robin Yangong Li, was appointed in Jan. 2004, the same month that Mark Zuckerberg purportedly programmed Facebook at Harvard. Facebook launched on Feb. 4, 2004 after Zuckerberg said he developed the whole system in "one to two weeks." By contrast, Leader Technologies said it cost them $10 million and 145,000 man-hours to actually develop the innovations now called "social networking." In court, Leader proved that Facebook was guilty of all 11 of 11 infringement claims.
Robin Yangong Li established a Cayman Island presence to hold his Baidu stock, naming the company "Handsome Reward."
Chief of Patents, Parker Zhang, was a rookie attorney, not even a partner, at Fenwick & West LLP in Palo Alto, CA before being catapulted to the top intellectual property job at Baidu.
T.Rowe Price and Baillie Gifford, along with Robin Li, are the top three largest shareholders in Baidu. Baillie Gifford and T. Rowe were the 2nd and 4th largest fund investors in the Facebook IPO. Baillie Gifford "advised" Vanguard who was the 9th largest purchaser of Facebook stock.
IDG Capital Partners appears to have simultaneously directed the birth of Baidu (China) "The Chinese Facebook"), Facebook (US) and VKontakte (Russia) ("the Russian Facebook"). Russian oligarch Alisher Usmanov invested billions of "dubious" origins into Facebook private "dark pools" pre-IPO stock facilitated by Goldman Sachs, who was also Usmanov's partner in Moscow. This Alisher Usmanov's activity pumped Facebook pre-IPO valuation to $100 billion. Usmanov also owns 52% of VKontakte.
Former Treasury Secretary and Obama bailout director, Lawrence "Larry" Summers, mentored Usmanov's co-oligarch, Yuri Milner, along with Facebook COO, Sheryl K. Summers, when he was Chief Economist for the World Bank. Pundits believe Summers manipulated failing Soviet markets and created the current Russian oligarchies, including Usmanov.
IDG Capital Partners is led by the Breyer family: John P. Breyer (father) and James W. Breyer (son).
James W. Breyer is Facebook' largest shareholder and together with Mark Zuckerberg elicited Stanford students to write apps for the stolen Leader Technologies' platform on Oct. 22, 2005. See Mark E. Zuckerberg and James W. Breyer solicitation of Stanford Univ. students, Oct. 26, 2005, Stanford Ctr. for Prof. Dev, Video: YouTube and FBCP; See also the Transcript.
Facebook's law firm, Gibson Dunn LLP, withheld 28 Zuckerberg Harvard hard drives and emails from Leader Technologies, saying they were "lost." Yet magically, one (1) day after the Federal Circuit denial of Leader's petition, they produced all 28 in Ceglia v. Zuckerberg. What sins are they hiding? Why have the federal courts been so cooperative in preventing all access, even when after they were "found."
See Deposition of Bryan J. Rose, Facebook Forensic Expert, Paul D. Ceglia v. Mark E. Zuckerberg, 1:10-cv-00569-RJA (W.D.N.Y. 2010), Jul. 18, 2012; Deposition of Michael F McGowan, Facebook Forensic Expert, Id., Jul. 19, 2012.
Pelosi has up to $500,000 invested in Granite Ventures who is co-invests with the CIA (In-Q-Tel), Accel Partners LLP (James W. Breyer), IDG Capital Partners (James W. Breyer and John P. Breyer), Venrock (Robert P. Kocher, MD--Obamacare), Ann H. Lamont (Obamacare), Meritech (Facebook, Obamacare), Accenture (Obamacare), Microsoft and IBM.
Fig. 4—Nancy Pelosi, CA-12th, Financial Disclosure, 2012. Click here to download the PDF.
Equal treatment before the law is a sacred American democratic value. Leader v. Facebook has exposed serious flaws in the administration of justice in America. Citizens have no hope of justice, on any topic, when the leaders of the three branches of government all collude, as occurred here.
In Leader v. Facebook, the Executive Branch conspired with the leaders of the Legistlative Branch (Pelosi and Reid) to fix a court case managed by the Judicial Branch. The only honest actor was the jury, which when given proper evidence, ruled in Leader Technologies' favor on all 11 of 11 counts. They ruled that Facebook is in "literal infringement' of Leader's patent.
However, the guilty ruling was overwhelmed by attorney-fabricated sophistry on appeal, by dozens if not hundreds of colluding lawyers who know better, but who, like their couterparts at the White House, Patent Office and Legislature, were lavished riches that have seared their consciences with a hot iron.
The Founders thought a time might come when the checks and balances system itself might become corrupt by party interests. In that circumstance, they knew the normal avenues of appeal would not work. Therefore, they vested ultimate power in Congress, the People's body. There the representatives of the citizenry had the power of property and purse.
We encourage each and every one of our freedom-loving readers to submit the Request for Congressional Intervention. Our property rights and those of our children and grandchildren are teetering over a precipice. If Leader's rights are not fully restored and made right, then all of our rights will be next.
These bad Facebook actors are waiting to see if American citizens even care about their Constitutional rights any longer. They have seen how easily they give up their privacy to titillation and chronic distraction. Leader v. Facebook is a test.
If America lets them steal Leader's social networking invention, then nothing will stop them.
Write your representatives folks. Don't procrastinate.
A big thank you to AFI volunteers for helping us get the hundreds of censored Scribd documents relinked and back up. We are reminded of the Book of Genesis 50:20: "you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result" (NASB).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.