Fig. 1—The Facebook crowd is waging LAWFARE against the American public and the world. Justice advocates today called on Congress to step in and fix the Wild West abortions of American justice that have been exposed by the Leader v. Facebook scandal. CLICK HERE to view a document received today titled Lawfare which highlights the big picture of the Leader v. Facebook corruption. Readers should note that we have been writing about “lawfare” for some time. It was a highly successful assymetric warfare tactic of the former Soviet KGB’s Department of Disinformation. Facebook’s Moscow partners have evidently dusted off the training manuals and find the American Congress and Public easy marks. —The U.S. Patent Office continues to dig its Leader v. Facebook ethics hole deeper. For starters, the Deputy FOIA Officer, Kathryn W. Siehndel, still does not disclose her prior employment by Facebook’s attorney, White & Case LLP. Now, she refuses to provide any biographical or financial information about herself, Director David R. Kappos or any of the Leader v. Facebook patent judges.
Tellingly, Siehndel provides no required public disclosure information about Judge Stephen C. Siu, the judge assigned by Director David Kappos to oversee the 3rd Leader Technologies politically-motivated patent reexam. She uses HIPAA healthcare information protection statutes as her justification for withholding mandated judicial financial and background disclosures. The request did not ask for healthcare information, and more than 70% of the information identified was withheld. Public disclosure of judicial and senior staff financial records is required by law. Therefore, the FOIA response breaks the law by refusing to provide those reports in a public FOIA request. The Patent Office’s disturbing FOIA conduct directly contradicts their own words in their current USAJOBS posting. A reasonable person can only assume that the Patent Office is running some sort of protection racket. Perhaps these judges become compromised once they are employed, then it becomes the FOIA counsel’s and Director’s jobs to protect those individuals from exposure of their misconduct.
Perhaps this is where the side deals to protect cronies begins. Wink. Wink. Since they are refusing to release even one financial report, one can only conclude that they must be hiding many sins. Rhetorical questions: Does the USPTO’s daily consumption of Facebook bias their perspectives? Of course it does. Can one taste-test two burgers impartially when one has been gorging on one of the brands for years? Of course not. This is precisely why we have conflicts of interest disqualification laws; none of which were followed by the entire U.S. Update Aug. 21, 2013—AFI investigators just uncovered another smoking gun. Not only did Kathryn W. Siehndel conceal FOIA information about Facebook and Director Kappos, but she failed to even provide a May 20, 2010 USPTO press release by Director David J. Kappos announcing the USPTO’s new Facebook Page. Here are a few statistics about the Patent Office’s Facebook Page. Worse, Siehndel even redacted information that the judges themselves have disclosed on their LinkedIn Profiles. ] also cited in the second table below.
The USPTO Leader v. Facebook judges and Siehndel are highlighted below in yellow. Three-term President, Patent & Trademark Office Society (Conflict). See USPTOAPANET Facebook Page. The National Law Center at George Washington Univ. Leader Technologies’ patent attorney was Judge MacDonald’s law professor, Professor James P. Chandler, III, Director of the National Law Center at George Washington University. Was the relationship good or strained? Either way, it deserves disclosure and investigation. Judge Morgan’s information is a jumble. Three different sets of disclosures. The statutory conflicts database is largely whited-out. Nowhere does he disclose his Microsoft conflict. See Judge Siu above . Verisign is a company funded by Facebook’s largest investor and Zuckerberg business master, James W. Breyer, Accel Partners LLP. Patent judges are claiming a privilege of privacy not even claimed by the justices of the U.S. CLICK HERE to see the U.S. No. Unwarranted invasion of privacy. No public interest identified. Even the U.S. Supreme Court justices make their biographies public.
Patent judges are claiming privileges not granted in any jurisdiction. No. Unwarranted invasion of privacy. No public interest identified. No records. Custodians of this information unknown. Identify the location of this information within the USPTO systems. The Patent Office clearly cannot sustain this level of badness for very long. The rules and common sense are against them. The light of public accountability shines, and compliance is inevitable. The chorus for transparency and fairness is growing louder each day. We encourage whistle blowers to step forward. The public must be able to trust the impartiality of the Patent Office. Deputy Counsel Kathryn W. Siehndel is evidently protecting Facebook and their cronies. Is the Patent Office and its parent, the Executive Branch, one big, ethically-challenged Humpty Dumpty? ] USPTO FOIA Response: Kathryn W. Siehndel, FOIA Deputy Counsel, U.S. Patent Office FOIA Response re. ], Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies.” Presidential Documents, Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 15, FR Doc. Like members of Congress, justices serving on the highest court in the land are required by law to annually disclose information about their personal investments. ] When judges should disqualify themselves.
28 USC § 455 – Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge. ] No reasons needed for a FOIA request (USPTO): Public Information, Freedom of Information and Privacy, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce, 37 CFR Part 102, § 104.4, Rules and Regulations, Federal Register, Vol. ] No reasons needed for a FOIA request (case law): North v. Walsh, 881 F. 2d 1088 – Court of Appeals, Dist. ] No reasons needed for a FOIA request (Justice Department): Freedom of Information Act Guide, May 2004, Procedural Requirements. U.S. Department of Justice, fn. ] Justice Sonia Sotomayor disclosed her extensive biography without claiming breach of privacy: S. Hrg. 111-503 – CONFIRMATION HEARING ON THE NOMINATION OF HON. SONIA SOTOMAYOR, TO BE AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, Jul. 13-16, 2009, pp. ] Judges and judicial employees must disclose their prior professional and personal relationships: Canon (3)(C)(1)(c). Code of Conduct for United States Judges, United States Courts. Codes of Conduct, Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees. ] Conflicts screening for judicial employees is mandatory: Written Testimony of The Honorable M. Margaret McKeown U.S. ] FOIA appeal of a previous obstructed USPTO disclosure: FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) Renewed Appeal To U.S. PATENT OFFICE Response, Leader v. Facebook, Apr. 2, 2013, F-13-00064, A-13-00009, p. ] Ethical standard for White House and Patent Office employees (Executive Branch): 5 C.F.R. Part 2635: Standards of ethical conduct for employees of the executive branch. U.S. Office of Government Ethics. ] Lawfare—Soviet Assymetric Warfare Tactics: Bartman Christi Scott. ] U.S. Patent Office USAJOBS posting for an administrative patent judge requiring a Financial Disclosure Report. Government. If selected for this post ion you will be required to file a Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form 278). The OGE 278 is available to the public.
November 2018 is most certainly a good month for the auction house Christie’s. Last week, Christie’s recorded the highest sale for an artwork created by a living artist. ‘Portrait of An Artist (Pool with Two Figures)’ by David Hockney, sold for 90.3 million dollars, beating Jeff Koons’ ‘Balloon Dog’ (58.4 million dollars). ] question: ‘who owes the re-sale right royalty: seller or buyer? ’. This point of law had been agitating the French jurisprudence since 2012, despite a ruling of the CJEU in 2015, against which the French appeal judges subsequently resisted. The dispute began by reference to Christie’s standard terms and conditions, providing that the buyer of the artworks shall settle the resale right royalty. The ‘Syndicat National des Antiquaires’ (read — National Union of Antique Dealers) (SNA) took issue with this clause, which they argued was a breach of the French Intellectual Property Code (IPC). The resale right is discharged by the seller.
The SNA submitted that Article L 122-8 was of ‘public order’ (‘ordre public’) and therefore it could not be waived by contract. It should be noted that Article L 122-8 of the IPC was implemented to transpose the 2001/84/CE Directive on the harmonisation of sales and re-sales of art works in the common market. Christie’s then appealed the decision of the Paris Court of Appeal to the French Supreme Court (here). The Supreme Court chose to refer this question to the CJEU, which replied in a decision of the 26 February 2015 (C-41/14 – Christie’s France SNC v Syndicat national des antiquaries, see previous post here). In short, it does not matter who pays the re-sale right royalty, so long as it is paid. To everyone’s surprise, in a decision dated 24 March 2017, the Versailles Court of Appeal resisted the interpretation put forward by the French Supreme Court and the CJEU.
How can it be that the Versailles decision complies with the CJEU ruling? The answer, according to the Versailles Appeal Court, is that basic EU law principles still govern. ] Article L 122-8 transposes into national law a directive which, by definition, is only binding on EU Member States insofar as its objective is concerned. The means to achieve this goal however are for national legislators to do so as they see fit. On 9 November 2018, the Plenary Assembly of the Supreme Court reversed this interpretation of the IPC (here). The very concise ratio decidi of the decision states that the Versailles Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted Article L 122-8 as proscribing that the burden of the re-sale right may be borne by the buyer – without any further explanation. The submission of Advocate General Ingall-Montagnier, supported overturning the position of the Versailles Court of Appeal (here), relying on three main elements.
] The parliamentary debates regarding the drafting of this particular provision of the IPC are sufficiently clear to unequivocally support either decision. As such, it should not be inferred that the IPC prohibits the re-allocation of the burden of the re-sale right to the buyer. ] It is the aim of a rule that determines whether or not the rule has the quality of “public order” or not, and can be waived or not by contract as a result. In this case, the aim of the rule is to ensure that the author of the work is paid. No other purpose or objective is enshrined in either the Directive or the IPC. On that basis, it does not matter which party discharges the re-sale right, as long as one of them does. ] The means adopted by a Member State is to achieve the goal of a directive must be justified and proportionate when it is not prescribed by the directive.
Historically black colleges are colleges that by statute (The Education Act of 1965) are defined as colleges established before 1964 with the principal mission of educating black Americans. Most of these colleges were established after the American Civil War in response to the exclusion of blacks from state colleges by several states. This was more prevalent in the south and the former slave states. Colleges established after 1964 that serve mainly black students are called predominantly black colleges because segregation in public schools was officially outlawed by the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education ten years earlier. There are 105 historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in the United States. U.S. News and World Report, as part of its ranking of best colleges in the United States, ranks historically black colleges and universities. Here are the top black U.S. All of these top 10 historically black colleges are private and therefore cost an appreciable amount of money. They are also competitive so all the rules for applying to competitive colleges, HBCU or not, also apply. To be successful in your college application to any of the top black U.S. Identify the schools to which you plan on applying early on, if possible by the fall of your senior year. This allows you enough time to prepare the best application packet for the various schools. If at all possible, visit these colleges before you apply and be sure to make connections with individual students, admissions staff and professors. When they can put a face to a name, it is easier to get the help you need should something go wrong during the application process. Finally, a few words about college rankings.
1.4 billion Thirty Meter Telescope atop Mauna Kea, a mountain considered sacred by many Native Hawaiians. 1.4 billion telescope project to resume construction atop the Big Island’s Mauna Kea, a mountain considered sacred by many Native Hawaiians. In a 4-1 ruling on Tuesday, the court upheld a 2017 decision by the state’s Board of Land and Natural Resources to grant a construction permit on Mauna Kea for the Thirty-Meter Telescope, better known as TMT. The court said it had carefully considered the arguments put forth by the project’s opponents who’ve described the telescope’s construction as an attack on indigenous culture and a desecration of sacred land. The ruling also noted the telescope’s potential to “answer some of the most fundamental questions regarding our universe” ― a benefit that won’t just be enjoyed by Native Hawaiians but all of humankind. The TMT project will be considerably larger than any of these existing structures, however. The telescope is projected to be 18 stories tall with structures spanning 1.44 acres. TMT’s backers, which include Canada’s National Research Council and the University of California, have said the project will open doors to unparalleled scientific opportunities.
Astronomers will be able to see 13 billion light-years away with the advanced instrument and observe “forming galaxies at the very edge of the observable Universe, near the beginning of time,” the project’s builders have said.. Supporters of the telescope have said the project will also provide jobs and other opportunities for Hawaiian workers and students. But opponents of the project have stressed that these upsides are beside the point. Many Native Hawaiians believe Mauna Kea is the origination point of the Hawaiian islands. The mountain, which measures about 32,000 feet from seafloor to summit, is home to burial sites and is where Native Hawaiians have been known to bury their umbilical cords as a way of connecting to the sacred land. Plans for the TMT project date back to 2009 ― and the project has been mired in controversy since then. Protests broke out in 2011 after an initial construction permit was granted by the state’s land board.
Three years later, activists blocked groundbreaking attempts at Mauna Kea’s summit and in 2015, thousands of protesters rose up across the Hawaiian islands to denounce the project and more than 30 people were arrested for protesting on the mountain. Later that year, the Hawaiian Supreme Court invalidated the 2011 permit, ruling that the land board’s approval process had been flawed. The project’s builders were forced to apply for a new permit, which was granted by the board in 2017 and later appealed by opponents. Following the state’s Supreme Court decision this week to uphold the permit, Hawaii’s attorney general Russell Suzuki told AP that further legal action could still be possible. A request could be sent to the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision, he said. Activists, however, have expressed doubt as to whether further legal pursuit would actually be helpful. “The court is the last bastion in democracy,” Kealoha Pisciotta, one of the leaders of the opposition movement, told AP. There is still strong opposition to the telescope’s construction across Hawaii, but recent opinion polls have shown that the number of Hawaiians who approve of the project has increased.
A March newspaper poll found that 72 percent of Native Hawaiians supported TMT’s construction on Mauna Kea, compared to just 39 percent in 2016. Overall, 77 percent of Hawaii residents said they approved of the telescope. Reacting to the court’s decision, Henry Yang, chair of TMT’s board, said the project was “grateful” for the ruling and vowed to be “good stewards” on Mauna Kea. “We thank all of the community members who contributed their thoughtful views during this entire process,” Yang said in a statement. “We remain committed to being good stewards on the mountain and inclusive of the Hawaiian community. “We’re pleased the court carefully considered and weighed all the varied and passionate testimony about TMT. We believe this decision is fair and right and will continue to keep Hawai‘i at the forefront of astronomy,” Ige said. The project will now need to submit its construction plans to the land board for review and approval, Ige’s office noted, adding that those plans will have to take cultural protocols into consideration.
That Pakistan as a whole is suffering is apparent in the daylong electricity shutdowns experienced in many parts of Pakistan largely because of frequent disruptions of gas from the Sui gasfields by the underground Balochistan Nationalist Army. The disruptions escalated dramatically after the Pakistan Army killed patriarch Akbar Bugti under mysterious circumstances during General Pervez Musharraf’s regime. The Chief Justice had announced in open court that security forces must stop abducting Balochi youth on suspicion of being supporters of the Balochistan Nationalist Army. Many of them were never seen again. Musharraf have gone but Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Kiyani is continuing his policies in Balochistan in much the same way. One of the demands at the time was adequate compensation to accrue to the tribes for the exploitation of gas and mineral deposits in Balochistan. One reason for this may well be that in Quetta and along the Balochistan-Afghanistan border there are large number of Pashtoon tribes who are well armed and deeply involved in the insurrection in Afghanistan.