Dear Guilty as Shit Parties,
IVIEWIT
Eliot I. Bernstein
Founder
Direct Dial: 561.364.4240
Sunday, April 18, 2004
IVIEWIT HOLDINGS, INC.
P. Stephen Lamont
Chief Executive Officer
Direct Dial: 561-364-4240
And
Eliot Bernstein
Acting President & Founder
Direct Dial: 561-364-4240
April 18, 2004
CULPABLE
CULPABLE PARTIES LETTER 7
Goldstein Lewin & Co. - Gerald Lewin, CPA & Donald Goldstein, CPA 9
Proskauer Rose, LLP – Robert Kafin, Esq. 51
Proskauer Rose, LLP - Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. 69
Proskauer Rose, LLP/ Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolf & Schlissel, P.C. - Raymond Joao, Esq. 73
Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolf & Schlissel, P.C. – Lewis Meltzer, Esq. 73
Where to - Brian G. Utley 75
Foley & Lardner - William Dick, Esq. & Barry Grossman 79
Foley & Lardner - Steven Becker, Esq. 81
Foley & Lardner - Douglas Boehm, Esq. 86
Tiedemann Investment Group - Bruce Prolow & Carl Tiedemann 88
Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman LLP - Norman Zafman, Thomas Coester & Farzad Ahmini 90
William Kasser 95
Raymond Hersh 98
Goldstein Lewin & Co. - Erika Lewin 99
Michael Reale 101
Proskauer Rose LLP - Donald E. “Rocky” Thompson 102
Proskauer Rose LLP - Gregg Reed, Esq. 103
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP - Andrew Barroway, Esq., Richard Schiffrin, Esq. & Krishna Narine, Esq. 104
Christopher & Weisberg, P.A. - Alan Weisberg, Esq. 108
Proskauer Rose LLP - Mara Lerner Robbins, Esq. & Gayle Coleman, Esq. 109
NON-CULPABLE PARTIES 110
Martyn W. Molyneaux, Esq. - Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP 111
Maurice Buchsbaum 112
Ross Miller, Esq. 113
Crossbow Ventures™ 115
UBS/Paine Webber Inc. - Mitchell & Isa Welsch 120
Eliot I. Bernstein 121
Simon L. Bernstein 122
Iviewit Acting CEO - P. Stephen Lamont 130
INVESTECH 131
Marketing Entertainment Group of America, Inc. 132
Daniel Socolof 132
SRO Consultants 133
Mike McGinley 133
McGhee Entertainment 134
Doc McGhee 134
Warner Bros. 135
Sony Digital Pictures 136
Douglas Chey 136
Selz & Muvdi Selz, P.A. 137
Kevin Lockwood 141
Donald G. Kane, II. 142
Quintile Wealth Management 143
Guy Iantoni 144
James F. Armstrong 145
Clearview Networks 146
Aidan Foley 146
Larry Mondragon 147
Hirsch Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer Austen Mandelbaum & Morris 148
Alan Epstein, Esq.Eric Chen 148
Eric Chen 149
When did you first meet Eliot Bernstein and whom introduced you? Explain you relationship to Crossbow Ventures? Caroline P. Rogers, Esq. 149
Caroline P. Rogers, Esq. 150
Mark Gaffney, Esq. 151
Jeffrey Klafter, Esq. - 152
Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP 153
Intel Corporation - Larry Palley 154
and 154
Gerald Stanley, Former CEO Real 3D, Inc. acquired by Intel Corporation 154
Boca Research, Inc. 155
Robert Ferguson 155
Flaster Greenberg P.C. 156
Arthur Andersen & Company SC 157
Ex-Partners 157
Paraag K. Mehta 157
Tom Nelson 157
Mark Laurence Berenblut 157
SHAREHOLDERS 159
Federal or State Agencies contacted regarding Iviewit 165
The New York Bar 166
The 15th Judicial Circuit Court - The Honorable Judge Jorge Labarga 167
Lorraine Christine Hoffman, Eric Turner & The Chairperson for the 15C District 169
THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 170
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 171
THE BOCA RATON POLICE DEPARTMENT 172
THE SEC 172
INVENTOR & NON-INVENTOR STATEMENTS 174
Statement for anyone named herein in any capacity 174
INVENTOR 174
NON-INVENTOR STATEMENTS 174
Re: Letter of Potential Liabilities and claims filed citing FRAUD UPON THE UNITED STATES PATENT & TRADEMARK OFFICE, Subject to Legal Counsel Review, in Iviewit Holdings, Inc. and its Subsidiaries, Affiliates, Related Companies, and Respective Successors and Assigns (collectively, “Company”) as Former Officers, Directors and Advisory Board Members.
Dear Sirs:
By way of introduction, I am Chief Executive Officer (Acting) of the Company since December 3, 2001, and I write in conjunction with Eliot I. Bernstein, Founder and President (Acting), to advise of your potential liabilities, subject to legal counsel review, and the information request attached herein as Appendix A incorporated herein by reference, as a result of circumstances I shall generally outline below. Moreover, outside counsel has not reviewed the contents of this letter, nor has outside counsel reviewed any of the documentation described herein.
PATENTS PENDING -- ASSIGNMENTS
It has come to the attention of the Company, while investigating the trail of patent assignments in conjunction with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), that many critical patent applications are not assigned to Iviewit Holdings, Inc. (“Holdings”), as some of you, and through no fault of your own, as Officers, Directors, and Advisory Board Members had formerly represented to shareholders, but are factually assigned to Alpine Ventures currently, although the Company disputes these assignments as of today this is where the United States Patent & Trademark Offices has indicated many of them are.
What is more disturbing is that our most recent counsel, Blakely Sokoloff Zafman & Taylor, has failed to list Alpine as assignor on our Intellectual Property dockets that we have been using for shareholders and investors as recently as November of 2003. Furthermore, and we are still awaiting information from the USPTO and foreign offices as to the exact information on all patents, the assignment trail prior may be fraught with errors that have direct impact on shareholder holdings. It is also apparent that prior to Alpine Ventures taking assignment, there appears to be many assignment done by Kenneth Rubenstein, Raymond Joao, William Dick and Norman Zafman of the law firms Proskauer Rose LLP, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel, Foley & Lardner and Blakely Sokoloff Zafman & Taylor, whereby either Iviewit Technologies, Inc. (“Technologies”) or , Inc. (“DotCom”) and other entities wrongly were assigned the patents and in some instances no assignments were made at all. Furthermore, although we do not have all the information on all patents yet, it has been represented by the patent office that on a patent application the Company had never authorized, applied for by William Dick of Foley & Lardner on behalf of Brain Utley, that the Company may have absolutely no rights, title or interest in the application and is currently unable to ascertain any information from the USPTO at all.
Finally, concerning assignments it is entirely unclear that if the inventors are not properly listed, as will be discussed in greater detail below, the shareholders may have invalid or only partial interests in these patents and the assignees may also hold invalid or partial assignments to the rights, titles and interests of the patents. In response to this issue Iviewit has filed in conjunction with Stephen Warner CEO of Crossbow Ventures, who maintain a significant investment interest in Iviewit, have filed jointly a complaint with the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks a claim of FRAUD UPON THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE by prior counsel considered culpable for such crime. This claim must be evaluated if changes in inventorship are to be acknowledged and the rights, titles and interests turned back over to the proper inventors and assignees and ultimately the shareholders. EXHIBIT (“A”).
INCORPORATION RECORDS
When reviewing the trail of how patents applications were assigned to wholly owned, partly owned, related, affiliated companies, or, perhaps, entities of which the Company has no ownership position at all, not authorized by some of you, the Company finds the corporation books that had been maintained by Proskauer Rose who transferred them to a non-officer with no authorization William Kasser who later tried to demand $250,000 of ransom for their return until confronted by legal counsel, in complete disarray, missing, in some instances, entire corporate books for some entities, entire stock ledgers, board meeting notes, stock certificate stubs, and entire stock certificates. Moreover, upon information and belief, there was one or morecompanies incorporated without your authorization, said companies formed by Proskauer Rose LLP (“Proskauer”) and Brian G. Utley, former President and Chief Operating Officer (“Utley”), under the name of Iviewit Holdings, Inc., since changed to Iviewit Technologies, Inc, I.C., Inc. formerly , Inc. and perhaps other the Company needs to investigate further.
In regard to Iviewit Technologies, Inc. presently, Proskauer is one of the shareholders in Technologies, but it is entirely unclear if the present day Holdings with the main shareholders possesses any share ownership in Technologies, and, again, Technologies happens to be the assignee under most of the Company’s critical patent applications with Utley listed as an inventor. In reviewing an incomplete audit whereby after ten months of work Arthur Andersen quit working on the account due to lack of information and insulting letters sent to them, when they asked for similar verification of stock holdings. When asking the Company to prove that the shareholders in Uview/Iviewit Holdings, Inc. where the majority of shareholders have their interests had any ownership in Iviewit Holdings, Inc./Iviewit Technologies, Inc. were Proskauer Rose has its interest they were met with insulting letters accusing them of having had something to do with improper tax returns and claiming that our accountants daughter was “miffed” that she was being accused of misleading auditors. Upon review of the Arthur Andersen letters the Company finds that the corporate structure that was presented to the auditors appears false and misleading and very confusing as to why there are two companies with the exact same name and it appears that the one with the patents has the minority of shareholders, including Proskauer. We attach letters from the Arthur Andersen audit for your review. EXHIBIT (“B”).
Acting management has also found that Kenneth Rubenstein & Christopher Wheeler of Proskauer have been lying to State Agencies and in direct deposition testimony, whereby they have claimed that Kenneth Rubenstein and Proskauer and had no involvement with Companies and did no patent work for the Company. Nothing could be further from the truth and it poses the single largest conflict of interest to the shareholders of Iviewit and those who put sweat, seed money and inventions into the Company, a conflict whereby our trusted lawyers are profiting from the global proliferation of our technologies and you the shareholders are not. Rubenstein, as many of you know, took the original invention disclosures from three of the original inventors Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario, opined on the “novel” (patent lingo for never before seen and patentable) nature of the inventions and many shareholders relied on his statements whether direct or indirect through Wheeler. This was for good reason; Rubenstein had formed patent pools namely MPEGLA, DVD (put all in) and was the single reviewer, the proverbial gatekeeper of patents for inclusion into such pools (estimate trillion dollar PSL) and if he put our patents into such pools we had hit the crude Jed. For example, each DVD player or DVD sold in the world, has technologies, which make it work, and all the patented technologies used share a common royalty and each member gets a cut. Same for digital cameras with zoom and pan. Same for video streams and all the equipment that creates and streams it to your computer, television, cell phones or other hand held devices. Since some these inventions like video phones could not occur without Iviewit technology in such low bandwidth environments it is not only core technology it is essential.
Iviewit’s technologies have been deemed backbone and core by Wheeler and Rubenstein and many other outside sources have confirmed similar information regarding the applications of the technologies. Rubenstein was patent counsel for Iviewit and an Advisory Board member who had total control of the fate of the company’s patents. It is most damaging to note that Rubenstein denied knowing Bernstein and other inventors in his deposition, denied knowledge of the Company that he owned stock in, was an Advisory Board member of who controlled the patents, maintained patent records in he and Wheelers office, directed Raymond Joao’s every move, induced investment from numerous shareholders, and opined on the technologies whether directly or through Wheeler. Further, after billing for, co-authoring and disseminating a Private Placement Memorandum whereby it is clearly stated that Rubenstein was Iviewit patent counsel and sent by Utley to the Company’s single largest investor Crossbow Ventures it appears almost ludicrous to read his deposition statements that he denies knowledge or existence of the Company and its technologies. EXHIBIT (“C”).
The reason Rubenstein and Proskauer are denying the Company’s existence is clear, they are monetizing Iviewit processes whereby Proskauer is the only benefactor and the shareholders are not. What was represented as a six month patent process, has turned into an almost six year fiasco and not a single patent issued and all being put into a six month suspension by the USPTO and reviving abandoned patents such as “Zoom and Pan On A Digital Camera” and attempting to find out how much damage, and to stop further damage to what remains. It appears that after reviewing our technologies, Proskauer a prior real-estate firm with virtually no patent department, went out and found Rubenstein who had formed these pools. As many of you know the prior MPEGLA standard of video at low bandwidths such as the internet was horrible and at the upper ends, like HDDVD the processors had maxed out, until Iviewit technologies solved for the problem. In virtual worlds the tiny boxes and fisheyed views limited prior by similar problems with file size and distortion were fixed and incredible for the first time, small picture files had beautiful full screen qualities and incredible zoom features, making it perfect for digital cameras and other hosts of other imaging products like TIVO and handhelds, these applications were also supposed to be paying us royalties.
Proskauer now has for client accounts these very patent pools according to deposition statements of Rubenstein and if this is so, and our technologies are generating our law firm monies and find them proliferating the technologies across a broad array of products whereby the knowingly our using technologies, the shareholders may have significant claims against Advisory Board members and patent counsel Kenneth Rubenstein and Christopher Wheeler of Proskauer and be owed several years of royalties totaling well over a hundred million dollars. Management is estimating that shareholders have claims against all perpetrators insurance contracts as we retained Proskauer Rose LLP to do patent work and hired Kenneth Rubenstein as patent counsel and he induced investment and then lied about his involvement because he cannot know you and be using your technologies for his or Proskauers gain, not putting the Companies patents into the pools, and not paying royalties to the shareholders. This is a form of very anti-competitive behavior.
Acting management has filed complaints with:
• The Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks in conjunction with Crossbow Ventures claiming FRAUD UPON THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICES against all law firms involved (Proskauer, MLGS, Foley, & BSZT) and all known culpable parties involved at the time of occurrence.
• The United States Patent & Trademark Office Office of Enrollment and Discipline against six of the attorneys involved
• A Department of Justice complaint for anti-completive practices maintained by the patent pools in Rubenstein’s exclusion of technology he is using in dire conflicts of interests to shareholders
• A Federal Bureau of Investigation complaint
• A New York Bar Complaint against Rubenstein and Joao
• A Florida Bar Complaint against Christopher Wheeler
Foley & Lardner appears to have tried to move the patents further out of the reach of shareholders after replacing MLGS as counsel Raymond Joao (who now claims to have filed 90 patents in his own name) whereby aiding and abetting the prior actions of (Proskauer), (Proskauer/MLGS), Foley, Utley, Dick, Boehm, Becker have attempted to abscond with the patents to a company Iviewit Technologies, Inc. and perhaps others. As mentioned earlier the corporate records indicate the shareholders may have no proven interest in such Company. Original stock certificates are missing from the records as mentioned prior whereby out of all the Companies reviewed by Arthur Andersen after ten months, this is the only one they cannot find shareholder interests in and fi true Proskauer may be a 75% owner of (quite a bit different than the 2.5% founders shares the Company granted them based on their continued promise that patents would be put into the patent pools and pay royalty to the shareholders) such Company. It appears that after Utley was naming himself either solely (soullessly) on patents or replacing inventors with himself and that the patents and the companies they were going in were playing some sort of shell game with name changes and misleading information procured by our attorneys to walk off with our patents after bankrupting or other dubious methods of getting rid of Iviewit and the many shareholders who built it. The mere fact that the patents are found in this Company where Proskauer may be one of two or one of four shareholders is absolutely as unethical as can imagined. Where further Utley and Dick have previously tried to abscond with patents from Utley’s last employer and further never disclosed these past patent malfeasances to anyone at our Company, and Wheeler who forced Utley upon the Company with a bogus resume that misrepresented the facts. All of these issues were discovered over months of investigation with authorities and in depositions, which were taken, and recent information procured in State Bar statements by the key attorneys involved.
The Companies acting management has taken the following steps to protect shareholders interests in these matters:
• Filed a charge with the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks in conjunction with Crossbow Ventures claiming FRAUD UPON THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICES against all law firms involved Proskauer, MLGS, Foley, & BSZT and all known culpable parties involved at the time of occurrence.
• Filed a police report with the Boca Raton Police Department who is conducting an investigation in conjunction with the SEC for stolen patents naming all law firms involved at the time and Brian Utley;
• Filed a Virginia State Bar action against William Dick;
dditionally, when reviewing the trail of patent applications in conjunction with the USPTO, Technologies, apparently, benefited from other patent assignments during the patent counsel tenure of Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley”), where said assignments were not authorized by you and are contrary to the prior representations of some of you to shareholders.
OWNERSHIP ISSUES: IVIEWIT ENTITIES
As described above, Technologies, according to the records of the USPTO benefits from the assignment of the critical patent applications of the Company, but when viewing the incorporation books, it is unclear what percentage ownership Holdings, if any, has in Technologies and this is entirely irrelevant as the patents should be in Iviewit Holdings with the rest of the shareholders and the company Iviewit Technologies, Inc. was to be an operating Company. In fact, it appears that in the thirteen days that Iviewit Technologies was formed as Iviewit Holdings, Inc. significant assignments may have been made whereby the patents were switched from the Company with over 30 shareholders to a Company whereby Proskauer may have a 75% interest in critical core and essential patents with Utley listed as an inventor and no true and proper assignments taken either at time of filing or subsequently that was required by shareholders and investor agreements.
OWNERSHIP ISSUES: PATENT APPLICATIONS
Additionally, the Company has knowledge that one or possibly more of the patent applications of the Bernstein/Schirajee/Rosario/Friedstein/Armstrong, Daniels, Iantoni, Frenden and Mink inventions currently reside in the name of Utley or misrepresented with Utley replacing respective inventors and leaving them entirely off others, without proper assignment to the Company, and as a result of discussions with the USPTO, these patent(s) may not even be the property of the Company, actions of which were not authorized by some of you, and where such actions were contrary to the representations of some of you to shareholders.
Moreover, such ownership issues were misreported by Proskauer Rose LLP, Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel, Foley & Lardner, and later, Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman, LLP to shareholders and or financial institutions and other interested third parties.
BREACH OF CONTRACT and FAILURE TO PERFORM LEGAL SERVICES AND OTHER CONTRACTED THINGS SUCH AS OPERATING BUDGET AND PATENT COSTS FOR FILING AND REPAIR
• Describe Schiffrin & Barroway
1. Contract & Retainer for representation signed and binding
2. Acted under such contract
3. Breached Under Contract
1. Filed demand and performace letter
2. State Bar action filed in PA.
4. Failed representation in Proskauer case costing the Company over five-hundred thousand dollars (U.S. $500,000.00) in a default judgement caused by their failure under the signed and binding LOU/Retainer and
5. Failed Representation at the USPTO whereby causing the Company and its shareholders to be represented currently by inventor Bernstein, not a registered agent of the Patent and Trademark Office
1. Christopher Weisberg
6. Failed actions to pursue NDA violators and infringers
7. Failed operating budget including patent filing and repair costs
8. Failed payment for legal services
EXHIBIT (D) – SB Contract and Demand Letter
STOLEN CASH ESTIMATED AT BETWEEN 655,000.00 TO 1,155,000.00.
• FILED BOCA PD
• FILED FBI
EXHIBIT (“G”) – DONALD KANE, II. STATEMENT TO ELIOT BERNSTEIN AND ALAN EPSTEIN, ESQ.
CONCLUSION
As a result, those of you who were former Officers, Directors, and Advisory Board Members during the time periods in question, the potential exists that you may have liabilities, subject to legal counsel review, concerning possible breaches of fiduciary duties with respect to shareholders, and it is with this in mind that the Company submits this information request attached herein as Appendix A. In forming the Culpable and Non-Cupable list contained herein, the acting management has found a common thread linking almost every culpable party to referrals stemming from Gerald Lewin and Christopher Wheeler see EXHIBIT (E).
Consequently, the Company finds it necessary to report theses unpleasant happenings to you with a view towards each of you retaining personal counsel, the choice of which resides solely with you. Additionally, one or more of you may find it fortuitous to assist the Company in engaging an independent CPA firm to conduct a full audit of the Company’s financial books and, similarly, to engage both a corporate and patent law firm to conduct a full investigation of the Iviewit entities and where shareholdings may or may have been held or transferred and intellectual property, so as to forestall possible actions by irate shareholders.
Furthermore, in light of these occurrences, the Company has taken steps with the USPTO to petition the USPTO Commissioner to stay actions on any and all Company patent applications, of which two have been approved, claiming in conjunction with Stephen Warner, CEO of Crossbow Ventures, FRAUD UPON THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, both active and abandoned, effectively putting the process into a six (6) month state of suspension, and it is entirely unclear of how much damage has already been done on a patent pool that should have been inuring royalties estimated over the twenty year life of the patents to be approximately seventeen billion dollars (U.S. $17,000,000,000.00) EXHIBIT (F) based on work done by CEO P. Stephen Lamont (upon request the entire program that calculated this can be obtained by calling Lamont at 914.217.0038) in pricing the various royalty streams due on all patent applications except those described under Section IV, Ownership Issues: Patent Applications while the Company’s claims are investigated by the USPTO and the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline (“OED”), the governing body of the USPTO Patent Bar. The cost of fixing, if possible, these patents has been estimated to be over five hundred thousand dollars (U.S. $500,000.00) on an already wasted one and half million dollars (U.S. $1,500,00.00) of professional fees bills to firms some or all of which may have had conflicting interests versus the interests of shareholders. As some of these patents may irrecoverable, the damages may be a significant portion of the seventeen billion dollar estimated value of the patents.
Still further, the Company, in addition to six complaints filed with OED, has filed written statements with the West Palm Beach Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Boca Raton Police Department whom has involved the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, the AICPA, and the Bar Associations in the States of Florida, Virginia, and New York, and the United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division as a result of these occurrences; in light of the fiduciary responsibilities of Mr. Bernstein and myself, the Company expects to issue a shareholder communication regarding these issues with thirty days, and should you wish to discuss these matters prior to such shareholder letter, please feel free to contact us regarding same.
Lastly, replies to the enclosed questions attached as Appendix A are appreciated within ten (10) business days, and the Company is evaluating its legal options with respect to the protection of shareholders, former officers, former directors, and former advisory board members against the possibility of liabilities resulting from and framed within the questions attached herein as Appendix A, as the Company has knowledge of legal complaints that may be forthcoming from some shareholders. Furthermore, and on the advise of Alan J. Epstein of Hirsch Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer Austen Mandelbaum & Morris not acting as counsel to the Company, every person implicated in these questions may have to notify their respective lenders, insurance companies, and business partners (in some cases), but you should consult with personal counsel as to any required disclosures.
We have attached a listing of the Culpable parties and the Non-Culpable parties, EXHIBIT () distinguished by the Company’s current evidence of culpable parties involved with the transactions and Non-Culpable parties whereby the Company lacks any evidence in wrong doing on your part at this moment.
The Company will further attempt to make claims against all insurance policies held by the culpable parties and therefore it is requested that all information and disclosure of any insurance policy information be forthright and complete in aiding the shareholders to file claims for malpractice and any other remedies available. If you are in Appendix
Finally, all Non- Culpable individuals and/or entities including those on the carbon copy (“cc”) list below will be getting a series of questions to answer and distribute only back to the Company andare requested to deliver a signed, notarized reply to the forthcoming questions regarding any knowledge of any of the events of the culpable parties actions you and questions regarding your involvement with the Company and what and how you became affiliated with the Company. After review of your answers and statements to your non-involvement a General release will be offered to the limited ability of the Company’s acting management based on a complete lack of evidence showing your involvement in the alleged criminal activitiesWithin ten (10) business days of your return answers and information requested, and, for good and valuable consideration, the Company shall deliver to you a General Release. within thirty (30) days once your signed and notarized reply has been received and reviewed by the Company.
Very truly yours,
IVIEWIT HOLDINGS, INC.
By:
P. Stephen Lamont
Chief Executive Officer (Acting)
By:
Eliot I. Bernstein
Founder & President (Acting)
cc: Shareholders
EXHIBIT A
USPTO LETTER
SUSPENSION LETTERS
IVIEWIT & STEPHEN WARNER FRAUD CLAIM ON THE USPTO
EXHIBIT B
ARTHUR ANDERSEN LETTERS AND IVIEWIT AUDIT INFORMATION
CROSSBOW VENTURES COMPLIANCE LETTER
EXHIBIT C
Rubenstein as patent counsel and advisory board member in Wachovia Private Placement Letter SENT to Crossbow Ventures
rubenstein patent opinion written through christopher wheeler
business plans listing rubenstein as advisor and patent counsel
Rubenstein letter to Court
RUBENSTEIN DEPOSITION STATEMENTS
rubenstein statements to new york bar
wheeler statements to florida bar
utley statements
EXHIBIT D
Schiffrin & Barroway and iviewit letters of understanding
Schiffrin & Barroway demand letter
EXHIBIT E
CULPABLE PARTIES INTERRELATIONSHIPS
EXHIBIT F
PROJECTED ROYALTY REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR THE IVIEWIT INVENTIONS OVER THE PATENT TERM
EXHIBIT G
DONALD KANE II – LETTER TO ELIOT BERNSTEIN REGARDING PROLOW TRANSACTION
FRENDEN STATEMENT
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
As always, with best regards and thank you very much!
Eliot I Bernstein
Founder
cc & ec:
Shareholder Communication 5
CULPABLE PARTIES LETTER 7
Goldstein Lewin & Co. - Gerald Lewin, CPA & Donald Goldstein, CPA 9
Proskauer Rose, LLP – Robert Kafin, Esq. 51
Proskauer Rose, LLP - Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. 69
Proskauer Rose, LLP/ Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolf & Schlissel, P.C. - Raymond Joao, Esq. 73
Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolf & Schlissel, P.C. – Lewis Meltzer, Esq. 73
Where to - Brian G. Utley 75
Foley & Lardner - William Dick, Esq. & Barry Grossman 79
Foley & Lardner - Steven Becker, Esq. 81
Foley & Lardner - Douglas Boehm, Esq. 86
Tiedemann Investment Group - Bruce Prolow & Carl Tiedemann 88
Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman LLP - Norman Zafman, Thomas Coester & Farzad Ahmini 90
William Kasser 95
Raymond Hersh 98
Goldstein Lewin & Co. - Erika Lewin 99
Michael Reale 101
Proskauer Rose LLP - Donald E. “Rocky” Thompson 102
Proskauer Rose LLP - Gregg Reed, Esq. 103
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP - Andrew Barroway, Esq., Richard Schiffrin, Esq. & Krishna Narine, Esq. 104
Christopher & Weisberg, P.A. - Alan Weisberg, Esq. 108
Proskauer Rose LLP - Mara Lerner Robbins, Esq. & Gayle Coleman, Esq. 109
NON-CULPABLE PARTIES 110
Martyn W. Molyneaux, Esq. - Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP 111
Maurice Buchsbaum 112
Ross Miller, Esq. 113
Crossbow Ventures™ 115
UBS/Paine Webber Inc. - Mitchell & Isa Welsch 120
Eliot I. Bernstein 121
Simon L. Bernstein 122
Iviewit Acting CEO - P. Stephen Lamont 130
INVESTECH 131
Marketing Entertainment Group of America, Inc. 132
Daniel Socolof 132
SRO Consultants 133
Mike McGinley 133
McGhee Entertainment 134
Doc McGhee 134
Warner Bros. 135
Sony Digital Pictures 136
Douglas Chey 136
Selz & Muvdi Selz, P.A. 137
Kevin Lockwood 141
Donald G. Kane, II. 142
Quintile Wealth Management 143
Guy Iantoni 144
James F. Armstrong 145
Clearview Networks 146
Aidan Foley 146
Larry Mondragon 147
Hirsch Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer Austen Mandelbaum & Morris 148
Alan Epstein, Esq.Eric Chen 148
Eric Chen 149
When did you first meet Eliot Bernstein and whom introduced you? Explain you relationship to Crossbow Ventures? Caroline P. Rogers, Esq. 149
Caroline P. Rogers, Esq. 150
Mark Gaffney, Esq. 151
Jeffrey Klafter, Esq. - 152
Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP 153
Intel Corporation - Larry Palley 154
and 154
Gerald Stanley, Former CEO Real 3D, Inc. acquired by Intel Corporation 154
Boca Research, Inc. 155
Robert Ferguson 155
Flaster Greenberg P.C. 156
Arthur Andersen & Company SC 157
Ex-Partners 157
Paraag K. Mehta 157
Tom Nelson 157
Mark Laurence Berenblut 157
SHAREHOLDERS 159
Federal or State Agencies contacted regarding Iviewit 165
The New York Bar 166
The 15th Judicial Circuit Court - The Honorable Judge Jorge Labarga 167
Lorraine Christine Hoffman, Eric Turner & The Chairperson for the 15C District 169
THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 170
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 171
THE BOCA RATON POLICE DEPARTMENT 172
THE SEC 172
INVENTOR & NON-INVENTOR STATEMENTS 174
Statement for anyone named herein in any capacity 174
INVENTOR 174
NON-INVENTOR STATEMENTS 174
Corporate Questions 179
General Corporate Questions 179
Patent Questions 181
Shareholder Communication
Dear Iviewit Board members, Advisory Board members, Officers and Shareholders
We are writing to you on behalf Iviewit and affiliates on behalf of all Officers, Directors, Advisory Board Members and Shareholders, as it has come to our attention that actions that you may have had a significant role in may have severe consequences with potentially huge liabilities on each and every member of the Board and Officers of the Company unless adequate explanations can be obtained for all issues detailed below. You or your firms involvement in these affairs may have significant and profound impact on all of the members of the Company and shareholders, and with shareholder suits looming it is imperative that all these loose ends be immediately clarified by you to protect the shareholders and ultimately the Officers and Directors not involved. We request that your answer be notarized and sworn to and sent with all attachments to each and every member of the Iviewit Board, Advisory Board, Officers and shareholders listed in the cover letter to this document. Since each member of the Officers & Directors has fiduciary, responsibilities please send a copy of your answers and any documentation to every member listed on the cover letter. Please have your answers sworn to before a notary and forwarded within 15 business days of receipt of this letter.
The crimes being investigated range from fraud upon The United States Patent & Trademark Office, fraud upon the Shareholders of Iviewit, malpractice issues against several of our outside counsels, conspiracy and several other criminal allegations. The net result appears to be that the shareholders may have no rights in some instances to patent applications that were supposed to be the property of the Company, that many of the patents have appeared to be assigned improperly or not assigned at all, that in some instances it appears that our counsel may be directly or indirectly inuring benefits for themselves and their firms, all at the cost of shareholders intended rights in the inventions.
Management has reviewed thousands of pages of evidentiary materials and have found huge discrepancies in what was portrayed to the shareholders by some of our Directors, Officers, Outside Counsel and Advisory Board members who influenced and controlled the Company corporately and in regard to the patents. From initial review it appears that the patents may have been put into a Company that the shareholders have no interest in and this Company had maintained an exactly identical name to the Company most of you are invested in. In the Company with the patents one of the main benefactors, if the shareholders have no interest, is the law firm Proskauer Rose LLP with a 25% or more ownership and it is uncertain if the two other inventors Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario have ever given consideration of any sort for their stock and thereby could have lost their rights in such stock, leaving Proskauer Rose LLP with 75% of the Company with our core critical inventions. It further appears, that the reason for inserting Brian Utley into patent applications may have had far greater devious intent than merely erroneously adding inventors onto patents wrongly and with intent to deceive. It may have been so that once Proskauer Rose LLP had seized the patents and forced out of business Iviewit Holdings, Inc. that the shareholders are in, that with their Company Iviewit Holdings, Inc./Iviewit Technologies, they could have left with the core patents and monetized them with Brian Utley as the inventor. Worse yet, we have learned that Brian Utley and William Dick (Foley and Lardner) have had similar problems with patent misappropriations that forced another S. Florida businessman the loss of his business. None of this past history was disclosed by any of the parties who had knowledge to the Company or it’s shareholders, the knowledgeable parties were Brian Utley, William Dick and Christopher Wheeler and it was Wheeler (Proskauer Rose LLP) who recommended Utley to act as President, COO and a director on the representation that he was a best friend of his with a remarkable career. What was remarkable about the career was that Wheeler and Utley failed to disclose the past patent malfeasances at his prior job and instead submitted a bogus resume to cover it up with false and misleading information contained in it.
A claim is being filed against the Officers & Directors insurance policies that were in force throughout the period for which these actions took place. Provide answers to the following questions whereby you may have answers or information to any of the following questions:
CULPABLE PARTIES LETTER
Directors, Officers, Advisory Board, INVESTORS and Outside Professionals or Consultants
Dear Culpable Parties,
The company, based upon information and belief, has become aware of potential lawsuits based upon recent communications with United States Patent and Trademark Office whereby it was expressed that certain patents may not be property of the Company and others may have wrong inventors and assigned companies that shareholders may or may not have known about. In the event that the Company has found you or your firm to be part of the transactional paperwork that is in question we are asking that you immediately respond with answers to the following questions. If you were a Director, an Advisory Board member, Officer, Consultant, or in any fiduciary capacity we demand your answers in 10 business days with all documentation, statements notarized, delivered overnight for signature or any other method for true recipient signature only) to every member of the Shareholders, Directors, Advisory Board members and Officers.
The Company is making every effort to notify all shareholders and authorities of the alleged crimes and in notifying you of the problems that appear to be throughout the patent representations and the corporate structure for the Companies made to the Company and Shareholders, by management and advisors. Currently the Company, upon notification from the USPTO has found inconsistency and under audit we have found our accounts to have perhaps been misled and accused by auditors of misleading auditors. It appears that Arthur Andersen upon asking for proof that the Shareholders owned a Company with patents was unclear and missing stock certificates, that the Company cannot say exist for we are currently missing such records maintained by our past counsel and others. Culpable at this time is an indication that the documents point to involvement you may or may not have. You will be asked a series of questions and we ask that each question and all supporting documents be provided in detail to explain the many malfeasances alleged to have occurred.
We are asking for a list of all insurance carriers for malpractice or other coverage’s you may have that would be available to the Shareholders in the event that suits or claims are filed by them or management. If you are reporting this potential liability to your carrier please indicate so, and if not please indicate why not.
Please send one additional copy to the following addresses in addition to the one copy for each and every Shareholder, Officer, Director, Advisory Board member and Consultant listed herein.
We ask that all materials and statements be forwarded to Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq. as a carbon copy to the address listed below:
Cornell Partners
Attention: Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq.
1949 Cornell Avenue
Melrose Park, IL 60160
And the Company Iviewit at:
10158 Stonehenge Circle
Suite 801
Boynton Beach, FL 33437
Goldstein Lewin & Co. - Gerald Lewin, CPA & Donald Goldstein, CPA
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Provide the exact time you met Eliot Bernstein regarding technologies invented by Bernstein, Shirajee and Rosario. Provide all roles and involvement from that point forward maintained by you or your firm concerning Iviewit. Provide all notes or correspondences of any form regarding your meetings with Iviewit.
2. Describe the exact time you contacted Christopher Wheeler on behalf of Simon & Eliot Bernstein regarding inventions by Bernstein, Shirajee and Rosario. Describe what role you maintained with the Bernstein’s initially and how and why you assumed responsibility for seeking patent protection for the inventions.
3. Describe the technologies to the best of your ability for video and imaging and the exact date that you learned of such technologies.
4. Why was it suggested that patents should be secured for the inventions?
1. Did you offer to secure patent counsel for Eliot Bernstein & Simon Bernstein and suggest a friend Albert Gortz, Esq. of the Proskauer Rose LLP firm, who had a partner Christopher Wheeler, Esq. who found a New York partner Kenneth Rubenstein who had particular knowledge and singular control over inclusion of patents into such pools and was patent counsel to such video and imaging patent pools that could currently be using Iviewit technologies?
5. Are you familiar with the MPEGLA patent pool and DVD patent pool overseen by Rubenstein? Describe to the best of your knowledge how these patent pools if the Iviewit patents were included would yield benefits for the shareholders? Was Rubenstein listed in the advisory board as not only an advisor but as patent counsel for Iviewit, was his relation to MPEGLA mentioned?
6. Did you receive or have any input into the creation of Iviewit business plan or private placement memorandums with Wachovia, please refer to EXHIBIT () and describe if the management, directors, officers and advisory board members are correct. Is Kenneth Rubenstein listed as patent counsel? Are you aware or have you ever been made aware that Brian Utley is not a college graduate as he states in this Wachovia Private Placement document? What actions have you taken to expose such false statements in a plan your accounting firm had oversight and billing for?
7. Were you at technology meetings and Board meeting where the technologies were discussed and displayed? Describe the technology meetings you attended on behalf of Iviewit and whom was present and the outcome of all such technology disclosures or display meetings? Are you aware of any companies that were displayed Iviewit technologies are using them in any way?
8. How many Board meetings did you attend as the Company accountant, shareholder of 5% of the Company and as a Board member and provide all notes and records you authored, maintained, were distributed by you or by any member of your firm in relation to Board directives that your firm executed on behalf of Iviewit. Likewise, provide same for those sent to you by anyone including Brian Utley or any other Board member. Provide dates and times and include billings from both paid and unpaid invoices for any Iviewit or related company?
9. Explain your meetings with Zakirul Shirajee, Jude Rosario & Jeffrey Friedstein and was it your understanding that they were inventors of the Iviewit technologies?
10. Did you leave an open cell phone in a patent disclosure meeting that you were asked to leave because you were not invited to such meeting, at the Proksauer Rose LLP (“PR”) law firm, who had you called? On what day did this disclosure take place?
11. Did you misrepresent you relationship with Visual Data Corporation (“VD”) and Hotelview to Iviewit and what actions did you take when you were made aware that you had misrepresented your affiliation with VD and further what actions did you take to have VD remove all Iviewit technologies from their websites? Provide all correspondences and details regarding this Company and your actions to correct the infringement of Iviewit technologies and your misrepresentation to Iviewit of your referral. Are you aware of any current infringement of Iviewit technologies by VD or any affiliates?
12. What actions did Christopher Wheeler take to protect Iviewit shareholders from the conflict of interest caused by your failure to properly disclose your relationship with VD? Due to your friendship and as the referral source to Wheeler for the Company do you think he should have done the releases for your firm? Further, it has come to our attention that Wheeler may have also been counsel, or his firm, to VD and if so would this make it even more conflicting for him to obtain the releases? Were you aware that PR may have had VD as a client as well?
13. Provide all details regarding BigE/Hollywood and Mitchell & Laurie Rubenstein and when you displayed Iviewit technologies to them at your home. Were proper confidentialities secured and were copies sent to Mr. Wheeler as with all other NDA’s? What did you do to protect Iviewit when it was found that had begun infringing upon the Iviewit inventions? What actions did Wheeler take?
14. Are you aware of continued infringement of the Iviewit processes by ? Are you aware of any royalty payments from Big E/ that are currently being paid to Iviewit for use of technologies? Are you aware of any companies that Mitch Rubenstein could have contacted regarding the use of Iviewit technologies through ? Describe your relationships with Mr. Rubenstein and his spouse both business and personal.
1. Since you are familiar with cost and pricing models your firm developed for Iviewit, please provide an analysis of what the potential revenue stream from would be to Iviewit for use of their technologies for the last 5 years since your introduction.
15. Provide all details relating to all meetings and correspondences with Huizenga Holdings/Investech and describe your relationship both past and present with any member of the Huizenga group. Describe the nature of each meeting you attended with Huizenga organization, who was present and what the outcome was.
1. Did you ever ask Eliot Bernstein to remove his father from the Board of Directors due to a meeting at Huizenga Holdings? Provide all information regarding this conversation, who was present on the call and what rationale was there for this horrible request to Eliot Bernstein?
16. Provide all information, dates, times, billings for your meetings with Hassan Miah,. Describe the nature of the meetings and the conclusions reached. Were you present when Hassan Miah claimed that the video invention was the “Holy Grail”?
17. Provide all information, dates, times, billings for your meetings with Real 3D and Gerald Stanley. When asked by Gerald Stanley of Real 3D the value of the technology what did Rosalie Bibona state the values of technologies to be worth? Were you aware of video inventions prior to this meeting? Did you ever do a video for Iviewit as a Director, if so, please indicate the date the video was created, where it was created and what you stated at that time to the shareholders of Iviewit as Iviewit’s accountant, Director and Shareholder.
18. Provide tax returns for each Company quarter by quarter for each Iviewit entity, along with work papers. What periods did your firm represent Iviewit for, name any succeeding accountants you may have transferred work to upon your terminating representation?
19. Did you resign from the Board of Directors? If so, had you had any knowledge of potential wrongdoings at the time of your departure that could have posed massive risks to shareholders?
20. Provide all bank accounts you established or maintained any control of for Iviewit, did you maintain computer records and books, if so please provide on CD any copies.
21. Has Iviewit ever asked you to produce ALL information of any sort for their review? Was this completed in entirety and if not, why?
22. Provide all audit work products, completed audits for investors or auditors Arthur Andersen and Ernst Young and all work paper and correspondences.
23. Describe your departure from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your departure.
24. Provide a company-by-company breakdown of all stock issued for each company while the corporate books were in the possession of PR and while Goldstein Lewin & Co. was accountant for the Company responsible for the books and records of the Company. Explain historically the corporate structure in detail and the shareholdings for each entity. Detail the corporate structure with all Board meeting notes for each corporate entity with any modifications voted on as well.
25. Iviewit Corporation and Iviewit Inc. - Why are the records or information relating to this Company in which PR has sent corporate formation documents, billed under, and assigned Trademarks and perhaps other intellectual properties too? Why is this Company missing from PR correspondences and Goldstein Lewin & Co. regarding corporate structure given to auditors and investors
26. Iviewit, Inc. - It is represented in the corporate book that Gerald Lewin, Barbara Lewin, Erika Lewin & Jennifer Lewin received shares of this Company, did they? If so, provide details. How many Companies were any Lewins’ issued shares of stock in?
27. Describe your relationship or your firms with the following individuals at Boca Research or its Board of Directors and what conversations or meetings you had with them regarding Iviewit and the outcome of each and any forms of communications you may have had with them.
1. Robert Ferguson
2. Gerald Stanley
28. Did you suggest that Iviewit hire your daughter Erika Lewin and for what position was she hired and what did you suggest for her pay rate?
29. As a Board member did you ever receive information concerning a missing briefcase of cash reported to have been stolen by management Brian Utley and Michael Reale from an investor Bruce Prolow, whereby Utley went to work for Prolow after leaving Iviewit? What due-diligence was performed to ascertain where such briefcase of cash may have been taken from?
1. In a sworn statement from employee Anthony Frenden EXHIBIT () are you familiar with Bruce Prolow the named investor in this statement? How were Mr. Prolow and any group of investors’ he brought in monies accounted for by the Company? Provide all records of this transaction and all signed documents for the transfer of the monies? Were you aware of the loan prior to the transfer of the money as a Board member?
2. In EXHIBIT () shareholder and board member Donald G. Kane II. is concerned that the Iviewit management is doing things that make him uncomfortable such as taking loan monies without Board approval and having no signed or approved documents for such transactions? Define why as the accountant for the firm and a fellow board member, what steps you took to account for this transaction, and did you find anything to make you uncomfortable? Did you receive signed and completed documents that completed the transaction ever? If anything was wrong with the transaction provide your actions as shareholder, board member, and accountant for the Company what agencies you reported this transaction to.
30. What were you aware of as a board member regarding Iviewit having to terminate Brian Utley, Christopher Wheeler, Raymond Hersh, and Foley and Lardner? What were the circumstances of their departure?
1. Had you been apprised that Utley had written patents into his name with Foley and Lardner and the Company was unaware of such filings? If so, what did you do to report missing assets of the Company? When were such actions of reporting these crimes made and what was the outcome?
2. Were you ever made aware that people might have been stealing Iviewit inventions? Steeped with fiduciary responsibilities as the Company accountant in charge of the priceless patents as assets of the Company, what did you do to protect the shareholders, investigate the claims and report any suspected wrongdoings to the authorities both in your accounting capacity for the Company and as a Board member?
31. See attached EXHIBIT () whereby Raymond Hersh expresses to auditors for Arthur Andersen that your daughter, Erika Lewin, is “miffed” at the implication that she misled auditors, were you aware of this situation? If so, provide all details of what corrective actions were taken and all correspondences that arose from this accusation. Did you report this information to the Board of Directors or the AICPA?
32. Where you a founding shareholder of Iviewit?
33. Describe your relationship with Simon Bernstein providing accurate details of dates of any personal or professional relationship?
34. Describe your relationship with Christopher Wheeler and Albert Gortz at PR providing accurate details of dates of any personal or professional relationship? Did you ask Wheeler to find patent counsel for Iviewit? Are you aware of any accounts since 1998 that both your firm and PR now have interests of any sort in? If so, please provide all names of any Company’s.
35. Review EXHIBIT () PPM or Business Plan and describe if the role for yourself and the role of Kenneth Rubenstein and the biographies submitted are true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Was a Wachovia PPM sent to you on occasion for review and input, was this copy ever sent to you or Goldstein Lewin & Co. by anyone?
36. Were you aware that Crossbow Ventures was securing their loans with Iviewit patents and if so how were such loans sold to the Board and were you responsible for the accounting of such transactions?
37. List all Proskauer attorneys or employees or any affiliate, that has worked on the Iviewit account in any way.
1. Have each attorney/employee detail all referrals or conversations they may have had with anyone regarding Iviewit or Iviewit technology?
38. Deposition Questions. This section is based on your prior deposition statements and are in areas whereby further clarification is necessary.
1. Per the statement below, clarify for the shareholders since it is of utmost importance for them to date the technologies and those involved with the exact date, now that you have time to review all records in your possession. Provide as much validation of this date as you maintain.
Q. When did you first become involved with
the Iviewit companies?
A. I'11 give an approximate date. I would
say about four years ago, could be a little longer.
I'm n o t - - You know, I 'm not certain. Could be five
years. Somewhere around four, five years ago.
Q. Do you recall the year being 1998?
A. That would make it four years ago. That
sounds right.
2. Is the statement below correct? Did you know any patent attorneys at this time that you assumed this responsibility for the Company? It appears clearly that upon meeting the Bernstein’s there were patent processes, and that you further sought patent counsel. Would it further be correct that when you contacted PR it was to patent these processes and was this what you were directed to find?
[pic]
3. Review the statement below and do you have any professional relationship with Mr. Bernstein and if so describe any professional relationship you maintain with him? Describe when any professional relationship began or may have ended.
[pic]
[pic]
Now that you have time to review your notes provide the exact date that you became a board member, and the days whereby you or any member of your family received any stock from any entity in Iviewit.
[pic]
4. Review the testimony below and describe if this information was truthful? Is Foley & Lardner a New York law firm? What is not your strength as reflected in the statement does it refer to your honesty or ability to correctly remember and answer questions?
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
Now that you have time to reflect on your testimony, provide information regarding the attorney described below who referred the Company to Foley & Lardner, if that in fact is whom the Company was referred to at this time, and if not accurate describe the inaccuracies and correctly answer the question? Was Foley and Lardner involved at the start of the Company as you represent under direct deposition statements? What is the difference between consulting and actual work. Would it change your deposition testimony to know that the attorney you are referring to is Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose and not Foley & Lardner, who at the time you are describing the Company did not know?
[pic]
Provide the exact date and describe if at the time you resigned you had information regarding any problems with the Company’s core assets, the patents?
[pic][pic]
Now that you have had time to reflect, provide the answer to this question.
[pic]
Describe why you began missing board meetings and provide your notes from Board meetings you attended. Did Wheeler attend Board meetings and if so in what capacity? Was Wheeler ever described in business plans you reviewed as acting in any capacity with the Board? Did Wheeler have input into either the corporate formations with the Board or influence any management decisions, if so provide all roles Wheeler played at such Board meetings? Did Wheeler or PR have any influence on the patents in any way whatsoever? Did Wheeler attend technology disclosure meetings and make representation to the Board regarding the outcome of such meetings with any potential investor or client?
[pic]
Read the statement below and describe if it accurately reflects the truth? Are there any false statements of fact? You state in your deposition testimony below that Kenneth Rubenstein worked as consultant for the Company and his work came into question at the Board meetings regarding his oversight role. Therefore, it was conveyed to the Board members that Rubenstein had an involvement and a direct oversight role in decisions that affected the Iviewit patents according your deposition, is this still a truthful statement? In this statement below you mention that Rubenstein had oversight of Foley & Lardner, is this still a true and correct statement of fact? Was Kenneth Rubenstein attending Board meetings and if not, how were concerns about his work presented, would Wheeler be present as a representative of PR and shareholder of Iviewit when Rubenstein problems would be discussed? Was Wheeler charged by the Board to investigate any complaints into Rubenstein’s patent work or the work he was overseeing? If not, who was charged with such responsibilities? What did you do as a Board member, shareholder and accountant for the Company once information that problems could have been caused by Rubenstein that would affect the patents? Were you ever presented information that clarified the claim that patent work might have been improper? As this relates to the assets of the Company, describe the actions you took, since Rubenstein and PR were your direct referral to the Company for patent work to protect the shareholders from any problems arising out of referrals made by you. You claimed that you were charged upon meeting the Bernstein’s with finding patent counsel, was Mr. Rubenstein ever represented as patent counsel or any other role for Iviewit?
[pic]
[pic]
It appears that your deposition testimony below may be entirely false and misleading in regards to Rubenstein’s oversight role of Foley and Lardner, was there any other attorney at the beginning of the Company, since Foley and Lardner was not yet involved, that you may be referring to? If so, provide the correct name of the referral provided by Rubenstein and describe how they were portrayed to by PR when you hired them for Iviewit as your referral. Similar to your statement below whereby you state that one is responsible for the oversight of their referrals, did you feel the same responsibility in your referral of PR. If yes, reiterate the actions you took once you became aware of problems in the patents that could affect the shareholders of your referral and all actions you took to protect such shareholders from your referral.
[pic]
39. In your deposition testimony below, you claim that you became aware of the possibility that patents were being stolen, a very serious charge, and one that currently is being investigated by the United States Patent and Trademark Office in regards to the Iviewit patents, when did you become of aware of such alleged claims of theft and how many times was this problem exposed? Explain how the patents were being stolen and by whom? Is the claim of stolen and misfiled patents a claim that is “general complaining” or something of a far more serious nature? As the Company accountant what would your typical procedure be for hearing of claims of stolen patents or misfiled patents to alleviate your fiduciary responsibilities upon hearing such claims? How were the patents misfiled? Was it ever represented to you that inventors were missing from the applications? Was it ever represented to you that counsel had begun filing patents into Brian Utley’s name solely or in part by replacing original patents? Did you ever become aware that Utley had at his prior employer Monte Friedkin of Diamond Turf Equipment had been involved with William Dick in patent misappropriation that caused Friedkin to fire Utley and close his business? Do you know Mr. Friedkin, if so provide all details? Upon learning of any of these issues, provide your actions to protect the shareholders?
[pic]
40. Describe why you are trying to erase your memory.
[pic]
41. It is your deposition testimony that Raymond Hersh was acting as a consultant and not the CFO, did you ever have Board meetings whereby you signed any document that voted Raymond Hersh into the role of CFO, would such document change your deposition testimony? Do you maintain any documents that reflect such role for Hersh?
[pic]
42. It is your direct testimony below that at the time of your deposition PR was still acting as Iviewit counsel to the best of your knowledge and that at no time as a Board member were you made aware that they had been fired or quit for any reason, is this still a true and accurate statement?
[pic]
43. In your deposition you state you are unclear on the Corporate structure for Iviewit, as accountant and a board member did you have any influence on the structure of the Iviewit entities? Now that you have time to reflect on the structure, provide a detailed account of the structure and who dictated each entities creation and what your firm did for each of them? Did you file proper tax forms for each entity? Did you provide timely reporting to the Company and its investors regarding each and every Company? Provide all such records.
[pic]
44. Provide details and your understanding of the formation of these Companies below? Were you aware that two Iviewit Holdings, Inc. existed? Explain, why it was decided that patents would flow to a Company Iviewit Holdings, Inc. that was named so for 13 days and what entity did that become? Why did the Board elect to form a Company of an exactly similar name to the name of the company , Inc. with all the shareholders was changing its name to and why were patents directed to this other Company without all the main shareholders. Describe and distinguish the two Iviewit Holdings, Inc. and who the shareholders are for each? When Iviewit Technologies was formed as you state below under deposition, how was it formed? Are two of the four shareholders in Technologies, Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario, shareholders to the best of your knowledge? Did the Company receive consideration timely for their shareholdings? If not, would their shareholdings be questionable? If so, would PR and Wheeler be 75% owners of Iviewit Technologies with 25% ownership owned by New Media Holdings, LLC. Who were the shareholders of Iviewit LLC, how were there interests transferred to Iviewit Technologies, Inc. It appears in the Company records that H. Wayne Huizenga/Huiznega Holdings through Investech Holdings LLC invested in Iviewit LLC and that patents were transferred into this Company. Who were the shareholders of this Company? If the shareholders were similar to Technologies, why did Huizenga not transfer into Technologies with the rest of the members of that Company and follow the patents?
[pic]
[pic]
45. Below you state in deposition that you have no affiliation with the Iviewit companies. Is this a true statement? Did you return your stock to the Company? Upon terminating your representation of Iviewit, if you ever did, as accountants for the Company, who did you turn your records over to and by what authority did any transfer occur.
[pic]
46. Your next statement under deposition is very confusing and needs to be clarified so that shareholders may understand why the Company opened every single Company and what the purpose was. Is it your statement that companies were opened for the benefit of Proskauer Rose receiving stock? Was this billed for to the Company by Proskauer Rose? If a Company was opened for the convenience of Proskauer Rose and a minority of the shareholders, is it surprising that this Company would have direct interests in the patents versus the Company with the majority of shareholders? Would you find as the accountant for the Companies anything particularly wrong with such a situation? If not, please explain. You state that the Companies were a single entity, if this is the case what protection did the patents have in the corporate structure and was it conveyed to the Board that certain patent companies would have no operations and direct affiliation with other companies, such that could cause the patents to come into harms way. Explain how each Company was formed to accommodate shareholders as you maintain under deposition.
[pic][pic]
47. Now that you have time to review the accounts payable you prepared and maintained, provide the answer to the following deposition statement and provide a breakdown for each company and the billings by PR.
[pic]
48. Do maintain that you had no involvement in the Iviewit patents as stated in your deposition testimony below? Were you ever present at client meetings were such processes were discussed or fully disclosed, did you ever present the technology to 3rd parties at your home or offices, did you ever use Iviewit technology?
[pic]
49. In your deposition you state that you spoke with Brian Utley and that not much of Iviewit was spoken about. What was discussed regarding Iviewit? Had you been made aware at that point that Utley was alleged to have put patents of Iviewit in his sole name or replaced rightful inventors with himself? If so, did you discuss this as Utley comes as a referral from your referral Christopher Wheeler? Were you aware at this time that you spoke to Utley about his past patent problems with Diamond Turf Equipment, did you ask him about this situation? Do you maintain a relationship with Brian Utley and if so, when are all the times you have spoken with him and regarding Iviewit, provide details.
[pic]
50. It is your direct deposition testimony that you do not know Raymond Joao? Are you maintaining this position? Would it change your deposition testimony if there are many correspondences in the Companies possession that show you and Mr. Joao sending correspondences to each other? Would it change your deposition testimony to know that Joao is the attorney that Rubenstein, your referral, referred to file the patents he had direct oversight role of? Would that further change other parts of your deposition testimony? Were you ever made aware that Raymond Joao a Company patent attorney was writing patents that seemed to lay upon claims of Iviewit technologies? Did you ever meet personally Raymond Joao when he came to Florida or anywhere else? In reviewing business plans from the inception of the Company did you ever see Joao listed in any capacity?
[pic]
51. Your deposition statements refer to the original patent firm having been represented as not having done a good job for shareholders and that the Board was unhappy with the work. Describe the problems that were presented to the Board and did these issues raise a cause for concern that made the Company switch counsel? You state that Brian Utley chose succeeding counsel Foley and Lardner, which would force you to correct your prior statements at the beginning of your deposition, if this is the case, was it made public to the Board that Dick and Utley had past patent problems with Diamond Turf Equipment? If it was presented to the Board, who was present? Did the Company secure any form of protection to prevent similar occurrences with these two? If you were notified what was your reaction and provide all notification documents or notes or any other form of communication regarding this severe conflict this would pose to Iviewit. When you were informed of their past relationship in patent malfeasances, what were the actions as accountant for the Company with oversight and responsibility as you claim for your referrals, and Utley and Dick are merely referrals of your referral Wheeler, to protect the shareholders?
[pic]
52. Your direct testimony below states that you cannot recall if there were filing errors on the names. Would this indicate that the inventors names may not have been represented properly on the patents? You further state that patents may have been filed improperly. Since the main asset of the Company is its patents and these errors seem critical to the safety of the main asset of the Company, were you ever presented with opinion from any patent firm regarding the errors? Now that you have had time to review your notes, provide how you became aware of filing errors and what protections you put in place to make sure that these errors had not caused damage to the patents and the shareholders interests? Were your concerns, or those of the Board ever relieved and if so how and by whom?
[pic]
[pic]
53. It appears after review of your deposition statements that you clearly believe that a professional referral to another professional binds the refer as accountable for his referral as you stated for Rubenstein’s referral, and that any problems that befall the client fall back as responsibilities of the referrer as well. If this is the case and you were aware of patent problems and filing errors that all relate to your referral of PR and their referrals and therefore fall back as liabilities of yours, are not all the problems directly attributable to your referral of PR. In protecting the shareholders from damages caused to Iviewit by your referrals and their subsequent referrals, what actions have you taken or are you taking to protect the shareholders from further harm?
54. Are you aware that Iviewit and co-signed by Crossbow Ventures CEO Stephen Warner, have filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Patents alleging fraud upon the United States Patent & Trademark Office which indirectly or directly connotes fraud upon the Iviewit shareholders, against the attorneys that all stem from your referrals? Are you aware of Bar complaints against any attorneys that are the result of your referral to Iviewit or their subsequent referrals? Are you aware of any others actions Iviewit has taken in regards to protecting its patents from damages caused by your referrals? As a responsible party for your referrals what actions have you taken or supported Iviewit in, in correcting these errors that may have catastrophic harm or loss to every shareholder of Iviewit?
55. Are you aware that Iviewit patents are currently being revived and put into a six month hold while allegations against the attorneys involved in the potential fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Offices are investigated?
56. What type of help are you willing to offer to fix mistakes and correct errors caused by attorneys you referred to Company? Have you made any offers of any kind to help the Company since discovering these errors that you claim under deposition to posses liability for your referrals actions?
57. Are you aware that the Company is currently investigating claims that patents were assigned to a Company that Mr. Wheeler, your referral, may hold a possible 75% interest in, and that under audit request, records to prove the ownership interest of Iviewit Holdings, Inc. with the majority of the shareholders interest in this Company were never provided?
58. Describe the outcome of the Iviewit audit from the moment it was expressed that Erika Lewin, your daughter and another referral of yours to the Company, had possibly misled auditors, what assurances were sent that she had not, and was it related to issues in the corporate record?
59. Review the EXHIBIT () Arthur Andersen letter, and describe the state of the tax returns and why they are perceived wrong and why it is perceived that your firm is not in possession of the necessary documents or why they have not been filed properly.
Since the shareholders are now in potential loss of the patents, loss of investment, and loss of an estimated 17 Billion dollars of revenue over the life of the patents EXHIBIT () Lamont revenue projections, provide details of all insurance coverage you have possessed since 1998, for all hats you wore at Iviewit (Patent counsel, general counsel and advisory board member) and define the parts that would provide protection to the shareholders in the event liability is determined to be due in any part to you or your firm? Provide all policies from 1998-2004 and further define the coverage amounts. A copy of the policies and claim forms would be appreciated as well.
Proskauer Rose LLP, (“PR”) - Christopher Wheeler, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Provide the exact time and place and how such introduction happened between yourself and Gerald Lewin regarding Simon & Eliot Bernstein.
2. Provide the exact time that you contacted both Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao regarding Eliot & Simon Bernstein and inventions created by Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario.
3. Where was Kenneth Rubenstein employed at the time of your contact with him on behalf of the Bernstein’s concerning inventions discovered by Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario?
4. Are you aware of a Conflict check done by PR in regards to the Bernstein’s or any Iviewit entity and define any possible conflicts of interest you would have if one were done?
5. In your deposition both you and Kenneth Rubenstein in his deposition were unclear and uncertain if a conflicts check was done, now that you have time to research the records, provide copies of such conflicts check done by your firm?
6. Provide copies of all original signed retainers in your possession for any Iviewit company. Do you maintain the originals for inspection? Did you get a retainer from Eliot and Simon Bernstein before any company was formed by yourself and your firm and how did you bill for services initially, such as the many meetings held at your office before any corporate formation. Was your office used as the original meeting place for almost all meetings before corporate formation? Do you maintain the original notes of the meetings?
7. Provide billing records both paid and unpaid for any Iviewit entity, clearly marking paid versus unpaid in regard to any Iviewit company
8. Provide billings for Iviewit Corporation and describe who this Company is in detail and why it is not listed in the corporate structures provided to shareholders and investors in Iviewit and other interested parties.
9. Provide billings for Iviewit, Inc. Describe Iviewit Inc. what happened to this Company and were any NDA’s or any licensing or other deals made with this Company? Have all assets and interests in this Company been transferred to current companies?
10. Describe your meetings with Hassan Miah and when they occurred and what inventions were discussed and what Mr. Miah requested either directly or indirectly through his attorney Richard Rosman from your firm.
11. Describe every meeting and the date you contacted Gerald Stanley of Real 3D. Was a NDA signed in your offices and maintained by your firm weeks before you scheduled disclosure meetings with R3d?INTEL/SGI/LOOKHEED MARTIN and if so what technologies did Mr. Stanley see and what was his reaction? List all parties present at such meeting?
12. Describe the details, and all participants involved in your meeting with Real 3D and who attended such meetings from PR, Iviewit, Goldstein Lewin & Co., Real 3D, and all notes, receipts, and records you maintained. Is it typical for PR to send a real estate attorney to a technology disclosure meeting? Include all NDA’s you maintained from the participants. Describe the outcome of the meeting and what technologies were discussed. Describe the patent counsel you secured prior to this meeting that were supposed to telephonically attend the disclosure meeting, and where they present or why were they not present. Did you make sure that Iviewit disclosures of inventions were protected before setting up the meeting for disclosure of the imaging and video technologies with Real 3D? Was Kenneth Rubenstein contacted to attend this meeting? Was Raymond Joao contacted to attend this meeting? Did any patent counsel attend this meeting scheduled by you with your referred contact at R3D.
13. What relationships or license deals did you or the Boca Raton office handle for Iviewit and Real 3D what companies were these deals done with? Does the Boca Raton office at the time maintain a technology department that specialized in technology licensing. It appears that Rocky Thomson prepared the license deal for R3D, perhaps a license that could tie Iviewit to, Intel chips, Silicon Graphics, Inc. products and Lockheed Martin products for royalties. Describe why you choose an attorney that does not specialize in technology licenses to prepare a technology license with a referred lead of yours personally. Was a further license deal with R3D promised by your firm and worked on by your firm? What happened to such license when R3D suddenly was purchased by Intel.
14. How did you meet Mr. Stanley of Real 3D? Were you prior involved in any Companies with Mr. Stanley. Describe the nature of the relationship with whoever referred you to Mr. Stanley.
15. Describe your relationship or your firms with the following individuals at Boca Research or its Board of Directors past and present:
a. Robert Ferguson
b. Gerald Stanley
16. Was PR in any way whatsoever involved in the handling of the Iviewit patents?
17. Describe your relationship with Brain Utley and how you introduced Mr. Utley to the Company. Please review EXHIBITs () () and state any confirm or deny your knowledge of each statement made in the resumes. Please describe when you initially contacted Mr. Utley regarding Iviewit. Describe the nature of the business Premier Connections, Inc. that you set up for Mr. Utley, did this company ever apply for any patents or have any patent interests whatsoever that you are aware of?
18. Are you aware of Mr. Monte Friedkin, Mr. Utley’s prior employer and the circumstances leading to the closure of the business Mr. Utley ran into the ground for Mr. Friedkin and what the circumstance were that led to Mr. Utley’s termination involving patent misappropriations? Did you discuss this with Iviewit in your introduction of Mr. Utley?
19. Did you run a background check on Mr. Utley before recommendation? Did you ever run any background checks for Iviewit, if so, when and whose request.
20. Did you get any written waivers regarding any patent malfeasances caused by Mr. Utley in his past employment to protect Iviewit from similar occurrences?
21. Did you and Utley disclose his past employment correctly on the resume you submitted for his employment?
22. Provide details of your relationship personally and professionally with Charles Cross of Wachovia Securities, Inc. and your introduction to Iviewit of Mr. Cross and what transpired from this referral.
23. Provide details of your relationship personally and professionally with Ross Miller and your introduction to Iviewit of Mr. Cross and what transpired from this referral.
24. Provide details of your relationship personally and professionally with Cris Brandon of Huzienga Holdings/Investech and your introduction to Iviewit of Brandon and what transpired from this referral. Provide all documentation for this transaction and outline all dates and details of the investment and where the money went initially and subsequently. Describe the outcome of Mr. Huizenga’s review of the patents by their patent attorney and who this was and where the meeting took place to review and who attended such meeting. Describe what happened when Huizenga Holdings/Investech decided to make no further investment in Iviewit, what led to this decision, who attended the meeting and describe the place and time and all correspondences that followed of any sort.
25. Provide details of your brothers relationship with Cris Brandon, did you disclose this relationship to the Board or officers of the Company? What is your brother’s name and address?
26. Have you had any conversations with Huzienga Holdings in the last four years, if so please provide details of with whom and for what reasons.
27. Provide detailed information and all records relating to any involvement of PR or yourself with Visual Data Corp.
28. Describe your involvement with Goldstein Lewin & Co. regarding the misrepresentation of Gerald Lewin regarding VD and his firms’ relationship. Attach all correspondences.
29. Provide details of your relationship personally and professionally with any partners of Sachs, Sax & Klein, P.A. and Furr & Cohen P. A. & Bart Houston.
30. Did you ever have involvement with Brian Utley in his failed Involuntary Bankruptcy against Iviewit. Did you provide legal references or funds for Mr. Utley’s endeavor?
31. Provide all information, dates, times, billings for your meetings with Hassan Miah, Gerald Stanley and Real 3D. Describe the nature of the meetings and the conclusions reached. Were you present when Hassan Miah claimed that the video invention was the “Holy Grail”? When asked by Gerald Stanley of Real 3D the value of the technology what did Rosalie Bibona state the values of technologies to be worth?
32. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
33. Provide a company by company breakdown of all stock issued for each company while the corporate books were in the possession of PR and while Goldstein Lewin & Co. over saw the books and records of the Company.
34. When were the corporate books transferred by PR and to whom and upon what authority? Was that person an officer and were signed inventory and proper transference rules followed?
35. Who issued the shares of the various companies and delivered those shares.
36. Iviewit Corporation - Why are the records or information relating to this Company in which PR has sent corporate formation documents, billed under, and assigned Trademarks and perhaps other intellectual properties too missing from PR correspondences regarding corporate structure given to auditors and investors
37. Iviewit, Inc. - It is represented in the corporate book that PR received shares of this Company, did they? If so, provide details. How many Companies was PR issued shares of stock in?
38. Have you ever used the Iviewit technology or introduced it to any other person or entity for the licensing or use of the technology? If so, please provide all details relating to Non Disclosure Agreements and describe the outcome and if to the best of your belief that entity is currently using any form of the Iviewit technologies.
39. Provide all details relating to all meetings and correspondences with Huizenga Holdings/Investech and describe your relationship both past and present with any member of the Huizenga group. Describe the nature of each meeting you attended with Huizenga organization, who was present and what the outcome was.
a. Did you ever ask Eliot Bernstein to remove his father from the Board of Directors due to a meeting at Huizenga Holdings? Provide all information regarding this conversation, which was present on the call and what rationale was there?
40. Are you aware of patent disclosure meetings held at your Boca Raton offices with Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee, and Jude Rosario? Who was involved in such meetings you scheduled, from your New York patent offices, Boca Offices or any other person involved at any disclosure meetings? Are you in possession of taped meetings held regarding video patent disclosures that were given to Gloria Berfeld your secretary for deposit into the PR safe as you represented in your deposition that you maintained such preliminary patent documents and inventor materials at your offices for safe keeping.
41. A problem the Company is grappling with to answer to its shareholders is where all this original patent disclosure material in your safe has gone? The Company, nor its succeeding counsel, have ever found these materials from you, your firm, Kenneth Rubenstein & Raymond Joao. Provide a detailed accounting for any patent documents maintained by Porksauer Rose LLP at any offices and detail and provide records for the transfer of any related patent portfolios. Provide names of any PR partners, associates or employees who have ever received any patent related documents of Iviewit and where the contents are?
42. Did you ever transfer patent documents to anyone? Provide details and any correspondences that took place leading to such transfers? Provide disclosure documents signed or any other correspondences that accompanied the transfers.
a. Did you transfer all such patent and other proprietary documents to R3D/INTEL for review by their counsel? Provide all details of this transfer including any mail receipts or other correspondences regarding the transfer? Who was counsel for Iviewit in negotiations with R3D, patent and corporate counsel.
b. See EXHIBIT () whereby you are transferring the entire patent portfolio to Mr. Rubenstein, who claims under deposition that he does not know the Company or its affiliates or inventors, and what was the reason Mr. Rubenstein was receiving such documents. Describe any potential conflicts you see that Mr. Rubenstein whose patent pools PR now oversees as a client could be one of the main benefactors of Iviewit video scaling technologies and was receiving the Company patents if he was not the Company’s counsel ever, as you and he maintain under deposition and to respective State Bar Associations.
c. Describe each and every meeting or call in your billings both paid and unpaid, in which Mr. Rubenstein is involved in any way, who may also have been present and further why he is the only PR partner to work for free on the Iviewit accounts out of approximately twenty partners, although he is mentioned throughout a several year period talking to inventors, investors, and clients on Iviewit’s behalf?
d. Describe why in the PR lawsuit filed against the Company by PR, PR wrote to the judge in the case that Kenneth Rubenstein had nothing to do with Iviewit and therefore was being harassed as we asked for his deposition? Did Mr. Rubenstein in this case further admit to having had conversations and other correspondences far in excess of a mere referral regarding Iviewit? Did Mr. Rubenstein further suggest under deposition that he did have contact with Iviewit employees and others?
43. It is your representation in your deposition that you became aware of new technology in video, prior undisclosed to you, until a meeting you scheduled with R3D/INTEL with a number of top technologist whereby the patent counsel you scheduled to be there was not present (Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao) to represent Iviewit under disclosure with R3D/INTEL engineers and patent experts, and that Rubenstein and Joao were attempted to be contacted for several hours as you had our group drive to Orlando from Boca Raton in two cars.
a. When we arrived at R3D without your scheduled patent attorneys present was the Company concerned about risks of disclosure of certain inventions without patent counsel confirming that all the inventions we thought were patented over the last months might not have been filed by Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao? Did you claim that you were certain, although when the Company requested the three patents that should have been filed months earlier they received only one that all inventions were covered and we need not worry about disclosure even if the patents had not been filed? Did Simon Bernstein, Gerald Lewin and other members of the Iviewit team feel uncomfortable disclosing any inventions we had not yet received as confirmed filed by your patent attorneys?
b. Several hours throughout the disclosure of the imaging technology with R3D engineers, did Iviewit not take several sidebars to try to contact our missing patent counsel (Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao) to confirm that all three patents had indeed been filed as the Company had been represented for months? Further, without such confirmation was the technology disclosures for the video and combined video/imaging invention never disclosed at this meeting in which you had set up to disclose such inventions? In what role did you play at this meeting and how were you making representations regarding the patents and inventions as counsel for the Company in your real-state role for PR?
c. When Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein were found after the meeting by you, did you inform the Iviewit group that they had not filed such patents as was represented to the Company for months prior? Explain what you did in response to such news and was it not Mr. Rubenstein’s opinion that since the United States was first to invent that there was no need to worry or have worried about disclosing without filed patents.
44. Did you arrange to have the inventors, Bernstein, Shirajee and Rosario meet at your offices the following day, again with New York counsel Rubenstein and Joao to again disclose what had months earlier already been disclosed? Was this meeting arranged to make sure and review the two remaining unpatented inventions that your firm had failed to file with Mr. Joao and Rubenstein for filings immediately, as R3D had already been transferred highly proprietary information regarding these inventions and the CEO Gerald Stanley, had prior to this meeting reviewed under NDA in your offices such inventions?
45. List every attendee from both Iviewit and its professionals at the R3D/INTEL meeting and did you obtain NDA’s for each member of the R3D/INTEL/SGI/LOCKHEED MARTIN individuals who attended through R3D?
46. Had you ever seen or had knowledge prior to the R3D meeting that video technologies had been invented by inventors Shirajee, Bernstein and Rosario?
47. Were video technologies of Iviewit ever displayed at the R3D meeting although patents were not yet secured by your patent counsel and the process was undisclosed?
48. Did continuation of video disclosures continue with R3D after the disclosure meeting set up by you at your offices with your New York patent attorneys and was it then represented that video and video imaging patents?
a. Were video technologies of Iviewit ever displayed at any meeting held at your offices, although patents were not yet secured by your patent counsel and the processes were unprotected yet represented by patent counsel and yourself as having been filed?
b. Provide the exact date that PR patent department began and its evolution into controlling the MPEGLA, DVD and other patent pools that have direct correlation to the inventions of Bernstein, Rosario, Shirajee and Friedstein. Provide as much evidentiary correspondences and verification to any claims made concerning the initial billings with any of these organizations. Were these patent pools prior managed through MLGS and how did PR acquire the account?
c. Did you ever mention or relate to anyone concerning Iviewit the affiliation of Kenneth Rubenstein to the patent pools your firm now oversees or that he oversees individually?
d. Did you ever mention or relate to anyone potential royalties that would result from the payout of licensing monies to Iviewit shareholders from patent pools which Rubentein oversees and singularly controls the decision of what patents will be included?
49. What role does Mr. Rubenstein play in the patent pools he oversees? How is income of any form derived by these pools for PR and any affiliates, subsidiaries or other entities in any way related to PR and its partners, associates, or employees?
a. Describe how the Iviewit video scaling mechanisms and zoom imaging technologies in your limited technological knowledge as you claim under deposition, may have application in any patent pool that utilizes images or videos, how R3D/INTEL and other clients or entities you referred Iviewit too, may use the Iviewit technologies as you know them.
50. List every NDA maintained by your offices and have date obtained, the Iviewit entity signing and who signed for Iviewit, person signing and any entity listed for the signing party.
51. List every business plan you have ever possessed for Iviewit and provide accurate accounting for each recipient PR sent a copy of such plan too under your direction.
a. Did you ever review business plans as the one in EXHIBIT () whereby Brian Utley sends such Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum to the largest investor in the Company for due-diligence, whereby Kenneth Rubenstein is listed as “patent counsel” for Iviewit. Provide all copies of the Wachovia Business plan that you authored or billed for review or any other PR member worked on.
52. Was it not your sworn deposition testimony and statements to the Florida Bar and 15th Circuit Civil Court that PR did no patent work whatsoever for Iviewit?
a. In reference to EXHIBIT (), please describe the opinion work done by PR for this opinion? Was this opinion letter written because Hassan Miah’s (former CEO of Xing later sold to Real Networks and founder of the Intel/CAA multimedia lab) attorney Richard Rosman, Esq. had asked to email Rubenstein to get his opinion and Rosman who had brought in representative founders from Earthlink (Sky Dayton & Kevin O’Donnell) for investment review alongside Miah wanted a written opinion from PR’s Kenneth Rubenstein?
b. As author of such astounding opinion for the Iviewit technology, provide all such billing records for all patent attorneys for PR who researched and reviewed the technology to make such claims, what materials they had reviewed as this opinion comes directly in response for Miah’s request for Rubenstein, our patent counsels to opine.
c. As a real-estate attorney, are you licensed or registered with the USPTO to opine on patent opinions for your firm or would you need to write such opinion after review with PR’s patent counsel?
i. How many and to whom were copies of this opinion sent by your offices and provide accurate reporting of all transmissions of any form.
ii. Why did PR real estate issue a technology opinion and not patent counsel author the letter since it is a legal opinion that typically requires a registered patent attorney to make opinion on and Kenneth Rubenstein was asked to opine from the patent department? Did you have any conversations with Rubenstein regarding the opinion?
d. What is the term “novel” to you, to your limited technical and patent expertise and how does this term apply to your real-estate practice?
i. Is it within your scope of law to render legal opinion on patents as you mention no names other than PR? How many technology patent applications and inventions have you opined for you in your carreer as a real estate attorney? Provide copies of all past letters.
53. Was the Iviewit D&O policy ever directed to your offices instead of Iviewit? Provide all D&O policies which PR helped Iviewit prepare for or filed with Iviewit? Why was PR office listed on the policy for sending information to and then later forwarding it to Iviewit? Provide all copies of D&O or any other coverage Iviewit had during the periods 1998-2004.
54. Provide a list of all policies covering PR for errors and omissions, liability coverage, malpractice coverage, coverage for its partners who maintain Board positions and any other policy that may afford shareholders relief from the time period of 1998-2004. Provide policies for every carrier and benefits covered.
a. If your offices received communications directly from the D&O carrier or sent communications directly to the carrier, provide copies of all correspondences? Did your firm aid in the selection of the D&O coverage for Iviewit and all of its companies? It appears from letters sent by management to the carrier that your offices on 8/2001 were receiving all correspondences on the policy, this is several months after your suit against Iviewit, explain how Iviewit was not in possession of this information and PR was? See EXHIBIT () whereby it appears that the Company has no possession of any of the D&O policies or knowledge of such policies as they are diverted and maintained by your offices. Considering that the claims being alleged by the Company’s acting management and shareholders are of a serious nature with both civil and criminal remedies if they prove true, provide details of how the D&O policy that you aided in purchase and controlled the flow of policy information to Iviewit far after you had quit as corporate counsel.
55. Explain why Donald G. Kane is distraught over the transfer of funds into Iviewit with an investor group (led by Tiedemann/Prolow) that you brought to the Company and had months of billings for transactional work in closing? At your deposition you stated you were unsure of the number of investors involved and the amount of the transaction (yet the biography you submitted stated that you were a transactional attorney which normally requires absolute knowledge of the transactions you perform) and now that you have had time to review your notes and closing documents provide complete detail and documents which according to EXHIBIT () you transacted Iviewit securities for? Were the documents completed prior to wire transfer of the monies? Who signed the documents and who approved them?
a. Did Mr. Kane and other Board members ask you to attend subsequent Board meetings to explain the transfer and potential liabilities to the Board and shareholders caused by this transaction?
b. Did you ever attend subsequent meetings to explain the liabilities that this transaction with your referred friend Bruce Prolow may have put the Officers & Directors in a situation of exposure to liability?
c. Were you asked by Eliot Bernstein, Donald Kane and other members of the Board to explain the Prolow transaction and provide signed documents?
d. Who is Donald Kane? When did you first have contact with him, where was he employed and provide all communiqués or meetings you may have attended with him.
e. How did you address or remedy Mr. Kane’s concerns, as counsel for Iviewit at the time and why is Mr. Kane very uncertain about what he is “hearing about management”, referring to Mr. Utley who is a referral of yours with a questionable background in this letter?
f. Who is Alan Epstein, Esq., when did you meet him, if ever, describe all meetings and provide all communications you had with Mr. Epstein. Was Mr. Epstein ever in the PR offices for displays of Iviewit technologies on “Proskauer Rose secured servers” who attended these meetings?
56. Did you arrange for technology disclosures in your offices for members of the Huizenga Holdings organization or any affiliates? Did you secure NDA’s for everyone personally in these meetings, if so provide all information regarding such meetings to your referral and any affiliates? What
57. Almost a year after the Prolow loan was in place, P. Stephen Lamont met with Mr. Prolow who at that time claimed not to have a signed warrant, and requested another to be provided, the Company. Why did Prolow not have one and neither was one contained in the corporate records or the records PR turned over to Iviewit by court order, which was supposed to be all records of PR. Months after the court ordered production request had been purported done, you found more documents in your possession in you private office, according to your statement when turning them over to Iviewit counsel Steven Selz, and in it were yet more incomplete documents for this transaction. Describe the contents of all documents found in your offices not turned over during the court ordered time period and what each document was doing hidden away in your private office?
a. Did you turn over the patent files and tapes and other original disclosures meetings that you testify under deposition you keep in your private personal safe in your office?
b. Is it common practice for the real-estate department and its attorneys, to maintain highly confidential original patent disclosures and other original patent drafts, etc. in their private safe in their offices?
c. Why were documents stored in your offices? In your deposition you state that Eliot Bernstein wanted you to maintain them at your offices in your safe-keeping, explain the circumstances and why you accepted such responsibility.
d. Are you aware of any break and entry reports by Eliot & Candice Bernstein to the Police department and were you investigating such issues for Iviewit and the Intellectual Property maintained at the Bernstein’s home?
e. When Raymond Joao sent the patents to Eliot Bernstein’s home and Eliot Bernstein called you to tell you that the package had been unsealed prior to delivery and that only one of the three patents in the package sent by Joao had arrived, did you ask Bernstein to seal the package in plastic with all contents including the patent filing for fingerprinting that you would have done? Did Bernstein deliver this material in such condition to your offices? Where are the contents of this package and what were the results of your investigation?
i. When it was discovered that only one patent was sent, is this what led to failure to disclose further inventions to clients such as R3D in the following days we waited to hear back from counsel that they had filed only one?
ii. Did you disclose this information to the Company before or after the disclosure meeting you attended at R3D?
iii. Was it represented that the one patent covered all three inventions? Did you not represent that after talking to counsel, the Company should immediately file separate and distinct patents to clearly delianate the inventions?
iv. Did you immediately arrange for inventors to meet at your offices? Did Gloria Berfeld, your personal assistant receive the taped disclosure and where was it kept? Do you maintain possession of such taped disclosure?
v. Your offices sent disclosure documents to patent attorneys regarding such taped meeting, who took notes to transcribe the tapes and do they accurately reflect the information disclosed? Whom did you transfer such documents too?
58. Provide all depositions and court documents relating to the PR v. Iviewit lawsuit and what the outcome was. Why did you sue Iviewit when you maintained the position to the Florida Bar that Iviewit was a failed .com? What Companies did you sue and was this ever changed? Provide the billings, paid and unpaid for each of these Company’s?
59. Did you sue any Company’s that held patent interests?
60. How many Board meetings did you attend as counsel and as an Advisory Board member and provide all notes and records you authored, maintained, distributed by you or by any member of your firm. Likewise, provide same for those sent to you by anyone including Brian Utley or any other Board member. Provide dates and times and include billings from both paid and unpaid invoices for any Iviewit or related company?
61. Where meetings held at your offices between 1998 and 5/99. If so, provide a list of all meetings held at your offices for such meetings? In the attached EXHIBIT () Gloria Berfeld drafted a sheet showing all meetings held at your offices, can you explain the gap from 1/99-5/99 and point to billing records whereby all meetings in your offices appear on those sheets for meetings in that missing period. Since meeting the Bernstein’s until corporate offices were found, were all Board meetings held at your offices with your staff maintaining notes and records? If so, please provide all such documents and notes and who attended the meetings to record such notes.
62. Describe your relationship or your firms with the following individuals at Boca Research or its Board of Directors and what conversations or meetings you had with them regarding Iviewit and the outcome of each and any forms of communications you may have had with them.
a. Robert Ferguson
b. Gerald Stanley
63. According to your deposition statements, you state that you are unaware of the corporate structure and how many companies you structured and that you would need to reflect on your notes and other materials to know what or why you set up this multitude of Companies. Since such time you have had time to review your notes and records, provide a detailed account of each an every transaction you had an oversight role in corporate formations.
64. Review EXHIBIT () PPM or Business Plan and describe if the role for yourself and the role of Kenneth Rubenstein and the biographies submitted are true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Was a Wachovia PPM sent to you on occasion for review and input, was this copy ever sent to you or PR by anyone, did you bill for services for Private Placement Memorandum, if so how many hours over what period utilizing how many employees?
The following will be a series of questions regarding certain clarifications of the record of your sworn deposition statements.
65. Describe the statement below in relation to the letter you billed for and authored in EXHIBIT () an opinion letter written on PR stationary and signed by you in your capacity as real-state attorney and are you aware of any liabilities that writing such a letter being a non-registered agent of the United States Patent & Trademark Office could cause your firm. Would you safely say that your liability carrier covers you for patent opinions of this nature?
[pic]
66. Having had time to reflect and look at your notes and be 100% accurate state whether proper procedure was followed in regards to Iviewit as a new client. Did you immediately secure a retainer and run a conflicts check? If so, provide copies of all such signed PR documents and do you maintain originals for inspection? If no retainer was signed immediately, when was one signed and had any patent disclosure prior taken place?
[pic][pic]
67. When you met the Bernstein’s there was no Iviewit at the time until you later formed it, provide the entity or individuals a conflict check was run on and under what name the file PR maintains for billing, etc. was opened under. Did Gerald Lewin contact you to see if you had patent counsel for his clients Simon & Eliot Bernstein and the inventions discovered by Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee & Jude Rosario?
68.
[pic]
69. in your deposition answer below you state that you “think” and “approximately” regarding the dates you were introduced to the Bernstein’s. Can you provide exact time and dates now that you have had time to review your information?
[pic]
70. Lewin states in his deposition testimony above that he was charged with finding patent counsel for the Bernstein’s and that is why he contacted your firm, not for the formation of the company, can you explain the discrepancy and why if the Bernstein’s were looking to patent technology they would make their first order of business corporate formation if they needed to have the technology evaluated for patentability?
[pic]
71. Clarify all statements made in the next deposition statement you make and describe the policy changes to retainer agreements and the implications it could have to not have a retainer with a client. Could you get a statement from your insurance carrier outlining their position on such representation without retainer and could you provide how your past or present firm policy could handle liabilities resulting from such arrangements. Did your insurance carrier allow you you to operate without securing retainers for your clients, does this pose any special unlimited risks to the carrier if terms of the relationship are not in writing. Describe such risks and liabilities.
[pic]
72. It appears that you operated with the client for approximately 6 months with no retainer, describe any liabilities this may pose for your firm, especially considering invention disclosures were made and thereby it appears that no protections were in place for your representation and define how your insurance carriers would cover liability that results from this?
[pic]
73. Now that you have time not to speculate but maintain precise and factual information, provide the answer to the following question as all Iviewit shareholders and management have been unable to provide answers or have any sense as to why all these companies were opened and the inter-relation of each was established. Provide all Board notes or correspondences regarding each entity and the documentation that supports it.
[pic]
74. In your deposition statement below you state that Rubenstein did no work on the Iviewit patent. Refer to EXHIBIT () whereby Brian Utley sends a copy of the management and board from an excerpt of a Wachovia Private Placement document, co-authored, billed and disseminated to by your firm, to an investor referred by you who invested several million dollars in the Company, and in such plan it states that Rubenstein “is the patent attorney for Iviewit” and how this statement differs from the statement below. Did Ken Rubenstein work at PR when you contacted him; you seem to be confused in your deposition statement below. Do you know and can you provide supporting evidence of the exact date Rubenstein transferred to PR and the first time you contacted him wherever he initially was? When was your, or your firms first phone call to Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel in relation to Iviewit and provide supporting evidence.
[pic][pic]
75. It seems that you billed for the formation of all corporations for Iviewit and its related entities. List every corporation PR formed for any reason, in every state, and the purpose and the number of hours billed and number of attorneys involved in the corporate formation of each. Provide all Board minutes approving such work? Please include all minutes and billings for any work on Ilearnit, Imedia, or Internet Train that you were involved with.
[pic]
76. In this next series of questions, it appears that you appear confused again, with regard to Ken Rubenstein. Why would Ken need more information to determine patentability if Ken was not involved and you had not spoken to him? Concerning Rubenstein it appears that you seem confused as to his role with Iviewit and PR stated to the Court that he was being harassed when asked to be deposed for deposition and in fact refused to produce him, why if Rubenstein is counseled for one second would this be harassment? Are you aware that Rubenstein is claimed as having been the reason for several investors investing in the Company?
[pic]
[pic][pic][pic]
77. Your next statement appears to be a lie, are you still sticking to your deposition testimony to the following? Provide a complete description of EXHIBIT (), is this a patent opinion authored by you? If yes, explain your directly conflicting statement under deposition. How did you come to contact Rosman? Did Eliot Bernstein contact you to tell you that Hassan Miah and later his attorney Richard Rosman wanted an opinion of Kenneth Rubenstein as he knew him from the MPEG patent pools and wanted his opinion? EXHIBIT () contains the chain of email regarding Hassan Miah’s request to speak with Rubenstein and Alan Epstein’s letter implicates that he was seeking a similar opinion from PR on their opinion of the patents. Is it still your position that you were not contacted by Bernstein regarding the patentability letter you authored and disseminated?
[pic]
78. Describe in your opinion letter where you refer to the technology as a portal? You claim below in deposition that you are not sure what the technology was, how then could have you written such opinion on a technology you are not clear regarding?
[pic]
79. Describe your statements below in regard to the opinion you tendered and how you could not be an expert on technology you opined with no other references to any other PR partner or outside expert? Further, since your firm co-authored, reviewed, billed and disseminated business plans for shareholders and in almost every plan it mentions zoom and pan inventions and full screen video inventions, how is it that you cannot recall these technologies when all shareholders perceived that this is what they invested in? Finally, you claim that you are unaware of any other inventions, yet again throughout the business plans, in patents filed for the Company by Rubenstein and his referred sources explain how you failed to notice that patents were filed for zoom & pan imaging on a digital camera and remote control video? Are you aware that your referral Utley with a past steeped in patent malfeasance regarding misappropriation of inventions, filed for a patent in his name with the title zoom & pan imaging on a digital camera? Were you ever made aware that Raymond Joao was filing patents in his own name, and were you self charged with the job of investigating this claim for the Company? What were the results of such investigations?
[pic] [pic] [pic]
80. If you have no retainer agreements with any other company than Iviewit LLC (“to the best of your knowledge”) for legal services or billings, describe how you sued companies that you had no retainer with and held core Iviewit patents? Why are other companies billed if you only have a retainer with Iviewit LLC? Is it typical that PR have a client with oral retainers and does your liability carrier allow such practices?
81. Now that you have time to accurately reflect on the issues asked below, provide clear answers to every question in which you were uncertain about. Provide answers to how you could have billed some entities and not others without a retainer agreement, and if you had been instructed by the Board to only bill the operating Company. Did you ever express to the Board that you had set the Companies up so that in the event of a lawsuit the Companies holding the patents would not be sued or would be protected from suits? If so, why did you sue Companies with patents, was this in the best interest of the shareholders? You state that no Florida companies were formed by PR, would you like to change your deposition testimony to reflect how many Florida corporations were formed. Was the Board aware of similar named companies being set up in which you may be a 75% stockholder of the Company, does this Company have the same name as the Company with the majority of the shareholders? Does the Company you are in have any rights, titles or interests to the patents? Are you aware that Arthur Andersen during an audit could not confirm shareholders interests in the Company you are a part of? Do you find it ethical that in a company that you formed to accept the stock granted you by Iviewit with a small minority group of shareholders has interests, is the Company holding patents that should lie with the Company with the shareholders? Can you explain the transaction with all Board notes and approvals for the Company you are in, Iviewit Technologies, and how it was incorporated approximately thirteen days before it changed its name from Iviewit Holdings, Inc. Further, explain and provide all board notes and minutes pertaining to the Board approval of , Inc. changing its name to Iviewit Holdings, Inc. one minute after the Company you are in changed its name to Iviewit Technologies, and show how the Board had approved the Company you are in Iviewit Technologies, Inc. having patent interests versus the Company Iviewit Holdings, Inc. with the rest of the shareholders and investors. At the you and Mr. Utley set up this duplicate corporation for yourself explain how Eliot Bernstein was listed as the Chairman, Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary and was this Eliot’s role in all other companies at the time of incorporation? Did you have Board approval for this designation for Eliot and provide all details and records of the transaction.
[pic] [pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
82. In the next deposition statement you claim that PR took stock in Iviewit, was there a partners meeting or any special committee to approve such a stock deal? You say there were no agreements, is this typical and customary practice of PR? Before 1998, how many stock interests did PR have in client companies, how many does it have today? Now that you have time to reflect on your stock ownership what Company prior to June 1999 did you own stock in? What happened to that Company? How many companies were in existence for Iviewit at the time and what were their names? Do you have the stock that was issued to you prior to June 1999? Do you have record of the receipt for stock and for the return of such stock?
[pic]
[pic]
83. You describe below a Cris, would this be Cris Brandon whose name you cannot recall? Describe the relationship between Cris Brandon and your brother if one exists and how long you have known Cris Brandon. Have you spoken to Cris Brandon since leaving your positions at Iviewit?
[pic]
84. In your deposition you state that you formed companies and held meetings for the Company before they had offices at your offices. You attended all Board meetings per your statements and your bills, in light of that and your knowledge of corporate governance describe your statements below. Brian Utley did not arrive until months after companies were formed by PR and you are stating that minutes of board meetings were kept and the meetings were held with you present and billing and no board notes were kept?
[pic]
85. After a review of your notes because your memory was consistently poor at the deposition answer the questions below that you could not recall at deposition. Namely, did you call Ken Rubenstein after the meeting with Huizenga or any meeting with or for Huizenga? Expand on “very few” be specific to time, date and billing time for those entries remaining in the bills with Rubenstein named for any instances in either, paid, unpaid or missing bills.
[pic]
86. In regard to the Huizenga meeting below that is being discussed whereby Huizenga hired patent counsel, could you expand on the attendees of the meeting and where it was held. Did you arrange for the meeting to take place at PR offices with NY patent counsel for PR? Were the inventors present?
[pic]
87. In the next series of questions at your deposition it appears that you again are confused about your facts. First, you state that in regard to Crossbow Ventures you attended 3 or more meetings with Alpine and a moment later you claim one, please review all of your materials and answer with precise detail and records to support your claim and give a single answer to the question.
[pic] [pic]
88. In your deposition, you state that you were the lead counsel for the Iviewit accounts, in light of that, provide an explanation for the following deposition testimony and now that you have all your materials, list in detail the answer to every question. Produce all disappearing bills and show all invoices for any payments of bills that disappeared. Is it common for PR attorneys to refer to paid bills as disappearing bills? List all investors and amounts paid in detail with all pertinent information for any Iviewit investment while PR was attorney for Iviewit.
[pic] [pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
89. In regard to the Prowlow loan discussed below provide all details for this transaction. Do you know Bruce Prolow or Carl Tiedemann and if so provide complete details of any personal or professional relationship with them. Did you introduce Mr. Prolow for investment? Did you handle his transaction? How much did you personally and PR bill for these services. Did you complete the transactional documents? Do you have the original transaction documents for the Prolow loan? You state that Prolow had a group? Who was in this group and how much did each participate in the transaction? Are you aware that employee eyewitnesses have stated that management lead by your referral Utley and his referral Reale were purported to have stolen a large suitcase of cash that they claimed came from an investor, Bruce Prolow was the name they believed was told to them? Are you aware that stolen equipment found in Utley and Reales possession had been taken to a distance learning company that Prolow was involved in and that you had attempted to do a technology license with Iviewit? Are you aware that after a year, Iviewit called Prolow for copies of his transactional documents and he claimed he was missing some? Are you aware that Board member Donald G. Kane II. was disturbed that money had transacted from Prolow without Board approval or review of the documents and without review by Crossbow Ventures? EXHIBIT () shows that Kane was concerned about management, what concerns do you think Kane refers to regarding Utley, your referral? Provide all details in any form for this transaction. Provide accounting information that you posses and how was this loan reported for taxes.
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
90. In this next series of questions you again fluctuate in your account of your involvement with Crossbow Ventures whom you brought to the Company about how many times you met with representatives of Crossbow. Provide a detailed billing breakout for every billing entry for Crossbow Ventures showing how many hours of billing for each Proskauer attorney, a detailed account of the meeting and whom was present.
[pic]
91. Earlier in your deposition you stated that were not familiar with the technologies and that you were not that familiar with the names of the inventions and how they worked. Provide an explanation for how you attended all Board meetings at your own discretion and how if you were at every Board meeting since the beginning and were at technical disclosure meetings from the start and this continued for three years, how you failed to grasp such concepts? If you did not understand the inventions, how could you raise capital from your friends, who did they rely on for invention opinions and how could you co-author, bill and disseminate business plans and Private Placement Memorandums, and finally bilk some $800,000 from the Company for General Corporate Legal work as you claim and sued Iviewit for? It appears from this next series of answers at your deposition that you somehow skip a year in your testimony. In the beginning, you talk of the first two months 1/99 and 2/99 and then suddenly you speak of 3/00, is this correct? It would appear that obviously things started to ramp up and your attendance was ever present from the time Miah called it the “holy grail” and R3D/INTEL signed agreements that you handled, when Huizenga came in with investment and you authored the technology opinion letter. All of those events occurred in 1999 and yet you say you really did not appear in the picture until 3/00, recite the ENTIRE timeline starting from the FIRST Lewin contact through 3/01, show total billing hours for each partner and project quarter by quarter.
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
92. In this next series of questions, keeping in mind that you authored an opinion on the “novel” aspects of the product, explain how you did not offer any opinions to Huizenga and Alpine? Did they receive copies of the opinion? You state and we quote that the only opinion you could have given to Huizenga, R3D, Alpine and hosts of other people you involved was “What you see is what you get. Look at – this is what we have, and this is what the Company intends to do.” Provide a comparison of what you stated in your opinion letter that was authored by you on behalf of a request to Kenneth Rubenstein and how it differs from the opinion you were limited to giving in your deposition.
[pic]
[pic]
93. In the next deposition statement you claim a lack of knowledge regarding Iviewit technology in regards to digital cameras and the applications directly correlated to zoom and pan imaging on a digital camera. Are you aware that similarly in Brian Utley’s deposition he states similar lack of knowledge regarding the use of the technology on digital cameras and yet in the Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum and hosts of other investor related documents the use of Iviewit technology on digital cameras is discussed, provide an explanation? Are you aware that in direct contradiction to Utley’s deposition, your referred friend of ten plus years Utley who has a history of patent misappropriations and fraudulent resumes, has a patent in his name titled “Zoom and Pan Imaging on a Digital Camera” and it was not disclosed to the Company that such application was in his name? Did Utley ever inform you that he was applying for this application and the application of the technology to cameras that he and William Dick who have had prior undisclosed patent malfeasances, whereby you had full knowledge of such malfeasances according to Utley’s deposition, and did you not purchase such first camera of zoom and pan imaging on digital camera with Utley? Review the Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum for any references of digital cameras and describe what is being referenced and how much PR billed for the preparation of such plan. Provide a detail of the applications for camera technologies that was discussed with R3D/INTEL at meetings you were present at. Give complete and accurate information with regards to the camera companies R3D/INTEL was working on at the time you brought the Iviewit inventions to them. Provide what Company the R3D/Intel agreement is held by and who the shareholders are of such Company, is PR one of them? What Company was the R3D/INTEL agreement originally signed for and who were the shareholders of that Company? Was PR one of them? Who signed each agreement and why was it changed from the Company it was originally in? Describe the Companies history of patent assignments, who signed them and when, what companies hold patent rights currently and who the shareholders are in each Company.
[pic]
[pic]
94. This next statement in any context seems to make utterly no sense or nonsense or outright insanity, provide an explanation of the lack of logic that applies to the statement so that shareholders may understand how Brian Utley was in control of the Company while not involved with the Bernstein’s or Iviewit? Whom gave him charge? Did you request a read of your deposition, did you make changes to this statement?
[pic]
Since the shareholders are now in potential loss of the patents, loss of investment, and loss of an estimated 17 Billion dollars of revenue over the life of the patents EXHIBIT () Lamont revenue projections, provide details of all insurance coverage you have possessed since 1998, for all hats you wore at Iviewit (Patent counsel, general counsel and advisory board member) and define the parts that would provide protection to the shareholders in the event liability is determined to be due in any part to you or your firm? Provide all policies from 1998-2004 and further define the coverage amounts. A copy of the policies and claim forms would be appreciated as well.
Proskauer Rose, LLP – Robert Kafin, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. When were you contacted regarding the Bernstein’s or Iviewit entities.
2. What nature, discussions and conclusions reached in the conversations.
3. Describe your relationship and time of meeting Kenneth Rubenstein, were you involved in the hiring of Mr. Rubenstein.
4. Where you involved in any conversation between yourself and any partners or members of Schiffrin & Barroway. Was Mr. Leon Gold involved in any meetings with Schiffrin & Barroway. On what dates were you involved with any discussion with SB in regards to Iviewit. Do you have or does Mr. Gold have any prior relationship with any past or present members of the firm SB.
5. Were you ever involved with any third party discussions regarding Iviewit and/or its inventions. Please provide names, dates and all correspondences regarding such contact.
6. Are you aware of a conflict check being done and do you maintain records of such Conflicts. Do you copies of retainer documents procured by your firm for any Iviewit entities or for the Bernstein’s.
7. If no retainers or conflicts were procured from 1997 through September of 1999 with either the Bernstein’s or Iviewit entities, is it common practice of the firm to be taking patent disclosure documents and other materials from clients with out these typical and customary documents.
8. Describe your relationship with the following individuals at Boca Research or its Board of Directors:
a. Robert Ferguson
b. Gerald Stanley
9. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
10. Review EXHIBIT () PPM or Business Plan and describe if the role for yourself and the role of Kenneth Rubenstein and the biographies submitted are true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Was a Wachovia PPM sent to you on occasion for review and input, was this copy ever sent to you or Goldstein Lewin & Co. by anyone?
Proskauer Rose, LLP - Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Provide the exact time and place that Christopher Wheeler contacted you regarding the Bernstein’s and inventions discovered by Bernstein, Shirajee, Friedstein and Rosario.
2. Have you ever spoken or corresponded with Eliot Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee or Jeffrey Friedstein? Provide all correspondences of any form.
3. Where were you employed when Mr. Wheeler called regarding the Bernstein’s'?
4. What was the exact date and provide any records regarding your involvement of Mr. Raymond Joao with the Bernstein’s and inventors. Did you keep notes of your conversations and correspondences regarding Mr. Joao?
5. What is your past relationship with Mr. Raymond Joao? Provide dates.
6. Please provide the exact date and time that you transferred to PR patent department. Describe the prior patent department at PR. Did any other members of any other firms transfer to PR with you from any other firms?
7. Are any patent pools that you are involved with now clients of PR provide the date that these pools became clients of PR.
8. Are you in possession or were you ever in possession of Iviewit patents? It is clear from the billing records and multiple correspondences with major Iviewit clients and investors, that you had more than a referral to Raymond Joao role with Iviewit considering you have an Advisory Board role, are a stock holder in Iviewit, opined and influenced investment, and have patent pools under your control that stand to be the single largest benefactor of Iviewit video and imaging technologies. Iviewit technology appears to be utilized in almost every video related pool you oversee as a core technology, such that without it MPEG video would go to it’s previous level prior to Iviewit technology in low bandwidths. At the time anything less than a full T1 line would be 4-8 frames of postage sized video with major motion and audiosynch problems. Describe the state of video at low bandwidths prior to 1998 and the limiting factors known at the time. Motion and full screen video had previously been undiscovered in this bandwidth range and the Company relied upon your advise as our counsel and our advisor who had reviewed the patents making up MPEG at that point, that if these technologies were “novel” and improved transmissions that you would include them in your patent pools. They appear to be included for use across a broad spectrum of MPEGLA companies and products, explain to the shareholders how you could be unaware of the use and lack of payment of royalties for such use, in patent pools you oversee?
9. In your deposition you were unsure of your review of the patents which you maintain copies of and have opined for, with now ample time to have reviewed them and in your self-proclaimed role as counsel for MPEGLA with the job of singularly reviewing patents for inclusion into such pools, provide a written statement as to your opinion if the Iviewit inventions. After review of the Iviewit patents in your possession are they currently being deployed as backbone to the transmission of video by MPEGLA or any other patent pooling organization you or your firm have interests in.
10. Have these patent pooling organizations ever had approval from the Department of Justice or an opinion of counsel, as to there not being a form of anti-competitive behavior? If MPEGLA utilizes Iviewit technology and you are a shareholder and advisor, describe all ways the shareholders including PR would benefit from such inclusion? If you are in possession of the Iviewit patents and are listed as counsel in Private Placement memorandums with Wachovia, authored and disseminated by PR, LLP and if MPEGLA were using Iviewit technology can you define the harm this would cause the Iviewit shareholders including PR. If Iviewit is excluded from the pool show how this may benefit perhaps only PR and how PR would inure benefits through its patent pools it oversees and derives revenue from? Do any patents you control in MPEGLA or any other organization utilize such technologies for licensing?
11. After review of the Iviewit patents in your possession, explain how the Iviewit technologies may apply to wireless devices such as video phones and imaging devices such as digital camera’s and camera cell phones. Do any patents you control in MPEGLA or any other organization utilize such technologies for licensing?
12. Do you own a digital camera with digital zoom and pan? Does this resemble Iviewit technology for zoom and pan and has been referred to throughout business plans and websites that you received or surfed over a three-year period?
13. When you first logged into Iviewit’s website (aka CYBERFYDS) (see attached login response) in 1998 did you see video and imaging technologies? Did you have conversations with Eliot Bernstein and others as to how to set up your computer to review and evaluate such technologies? When was the first time you ever viewed Iviewit technologies describe your reaction? Why were you counseled by PR in determining if PR should accept stock in Iviewit and did you make any decisions with the partners to accept such 2.5% stock? Are you aware that Christopher Wheeler, Esq. who set up the accounts with Iviewit for transfer of stock to PR claimed that it was not common practice of the firm prior to accept any such client stock, but that based on your opinion of the technologies as “digital electricity” and you comments that it applied to all forms video and imaging as other industry experts later confirmed, swayed the firm to accept the offer of stock, in lieu of delaying billings?
14. Are you aware that Mr. Wheeler negotiated the bill stating that he was also going to accept payments at later periods in anticipation of Iviewit collecting royalties from MPEGLA and others, as soon as you put the patents into the pools you oversaw and they began paying royalties? Mr. Wheeler estimated that since you had already reviewed and opined for the firm, that it was merely a matter of a few weeks whereby the patents were drafted and filed and accepted into the pool?
15. Are you aware of a partner letter Mr. Wheeler drafted for circulation regarding Iviewit technologies? See attached EXHIBIT () and define if any of your clients now using MPEG or any other form of video technologies may benefit from Iviewit technologies on the attached list of PR clients now using MPEG technologies which infringe upon Iviewit’s processes? Review the NDA lists that Mr. Wheeler maintained for Iviewit and in regards to all PR referrals define how these Company’s may benefit from the Iviewit technologies and if they are currently utilizing processes learned by Iviewit. Concerning any other company that PR maintained NDA’s over provide the same information as above.
16. After review of the Iviewit patents in your possession, provide information how in any application of the Iviewit technologies, in which you, your firm, or any patent pool or other organization you are involved with may have a conflicting interest with Iviewit technologies. Explain how Iviewit technology may provide any form of benefit to you, your family, your firm, the Companies involved in each pool (provide a list of all Companies in each pool that may be infringing upon ideas you learned from Iviewit and how they may benefit from not paying royalties to Iviewit and its shareholders and how they pay benefits to PR.
17. Similarly, at the high end of video compression such as HDDVD and other a forms of high-end compression, explain how Iviewit’s 75% lower bandwidth consumption than previous MPEGLA standards, and a corresponding 75% lower processing power required may benefit all forms of video?
18. Name all forms of compensation you, your family or your firm derive from any patents, patent pools or any other businesses that are PR clients that benefit from the Iviewit processes that have any relation to your firm.
19. How many patents has the PR patent department written since it’s inception, how many pre 1998 and how many post?
20. Were you ever an Advisory Board member or represented as patent counsel to any Iviewit investors or potential investors. Did you ever speak to any investors or officers of Iviewit? If so, please provide a detailed account of your contact.
21. Review all bills for all Iviewit entities and at any point that your name appears; describe the nature of the meeting, who was present and what was discussed? If documents were transferred to you provide copies of all documents transferred to you?
22. See EXHIBIT () and describe why your name is listed to Crossbow Ventures as patent counsel for Iviewit. In your response to the New York Bar you quote Brian Utley as having stated that he never used you as an advisor or patent counsel. Explain the discrepancy in this document.
23. Several Board members have written statements pointing to you as the reason for their investment in Iviewit, could you describe why these people feel that you were essential to their investment in Iviewit.
24. See EXHIBIT () which is your statement to the Court in the matter of PR v. Iviewit and explain how you have never had involvement with Iviewit and were being harassed.
25. Describe your relationship with Gregory Thagard of Warner Bros. and all conversation with Mr. Thagard concerning Iviewit. Are you aware of Mr. Thagard’s 13 or more patents held in DVD technology that make up a large part of the critical patents that are held in the DVD patent pool that you oversee?
26. Did you ever opine regarding Iviewit technology to any party? See attached EXHIBIT () and define if not yourself, whom authored such opinion for PR.
27. Did you ever have discussions regarding Iviewit inventions with any Iviewit inventors.
28. Describe every time your name is mentioned in any Iviewit paid or unpaid bill for any Iviewit entity and the exact nature of the call and your time billing for these calls.
29. Describe any meetings held at the PR New York office regarding Iviewit patents and who attended the meeting and what was discussed. Were you or any other patent attorney that you know involved in any meetings with any outside investor patent attorneys at your offices?
30. Are you aware of a Conflict check done by PR in regards to the Bernstein’s or any Iviewit entity and define any possible conflicts of interest you would have if one were done.
31. When receiving disclosures for Iviewit patents and maintaining records of the Iviewit patents did you see possible conflicts and what steps did you take to protect Iviewit from any potential conflicts you or your patent department had or any patent pools that may now be infringing upon the Iviewit technologies that you oversight roles in.
32. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
33. Review EXHIBIT () PPM or Business Plan and describe if the role for yourself and the biographies submitted are true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Was a Wachovia PPM sent to you on occasion for review and input, was this copy ever sent to you or PR by anyone?
Proskauer Rose, LLP/ Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolf & Schlissel, P.C. - Raymond Joao, Esq.
And
Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolf & Schlissel, P.C. – Lewis Meltzer, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Where were you employed when Mr. Wheeler or Mr. Rubenstein called regarding the Bernstein’s or any Iviewit entity? Describe in detail with exact dates the nature and substance of all calls or meetings with any PR attorney or employee.
2. What was the exact date and provide any records regarding your involvement with Kenneth Rubenstein with the Bernstein’s and inventors of Iviewit technologies Eliot Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein and Zakirul Shirajee.
3. Detail all travel to Boca Raton providing exact times and receipts for your meetings with Iviewit inventors listed above and include Jeffrey Friedstein and when you were aware of his status as inventor. Provide all people you met with either telephonically or in person in your tenure with Iviewit.
4. What is your past relationship with Kenneth Rubenstein, Christopher Wheeler or Robert Kafin.
5. Please provide the exact date and time that you transferred to the Meltzer firm. Describe the prior patent department at Meltzer at the time you joined. Did any other members of any other firms transfer to Meltzer with you? Did you work with Kenneth Rubenstein at any firm ever?
6. Detail all patents held in your name. Provide exact time of filing and of any modifications to any patents held in your name. Describe all provisional filings, pending filings, abandoned filings and patents either US or any International applications anywhere in the world. Where Conflicts checks done by MLGS and if so what conflicts were put into writing. Was a conflict waiver obtained in writing by you or your firm regarding patents previously held by you, modified during your involvement with Iviewit and/or applied for after 1997?
7. Provide a description of all inventions disclosed to you by Iviewit and any/all patents (provisional and pending US or International) you filed to protect such inventions. Provide all records in your possession or your firms’ possession regarding the Iviewit patents and any assignments you partook in on behalf of Iviewit and the entire flow of the assignments from you or your firm to any parties involved in getting the patents assigned.
8. Did you ever remove from the patent office any Iviewit filings or abandon any filings for Iviewit.
9. Did you attend any meetings with any investor patent counsel for Iviewit at the offices of PR, if so describe the nature of the meeting and who was present. Provide all receipts for this meeting and the conclusions reached. Describe what investor prompted such meeting and why such meeting was held at PR offices versus your own firm.
10. Explain the circumstances for your termination from the Iviewit companies and how your records were transferred to succeeding counsel. Did you destroy and records upon your departure, if so, detail why such records were destroyed and who authorized such destruction.
11. Provide all records, including original retainers, maintained currently by your firm.
12. Were you provided with CD Roms from Iviewit, if so, how many and where are such CD Roms.
13. Provide an explanation for the attached EXHIBIT () that has a date of 1900 on it. Where was this document transmitted from and were other documents so dated.
14. Provide an explanation of the blacked out date on attached EXHIBIT (). Why is this date blacked out and where is the original document?
15. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
16. Review EXHIBIT () PPM or Business Plan and describe if the role for yourself and the role of Kenneth Rubenstein and the biographies submitted are true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Was a Wachovia PPM sent to you on occasion for review and input, was this copy ever sent to you or Goldstein Lewin & Co. by anyone?
Where to - Brian G. Utley
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. When did Wheeler regarding Iviewit and/or the Bernstein’s initially contact you.
2. What roles did you take with Iviewit? What were your duties from 1999-2001 and your responsibilities in all capacities? Whom did you report to and describe each and every officer of the Company and how they were referred and selected by the Board of Director
3. Review the attached EXHIBITs ()() and confirm or deny the accuracy of each and every statement contained therein that were circulated to the Board, Officer, Advisory Board members and Investment Banks for private placement, and if there any inaccuracies please provide in depth detail of such inaccuracies.
4. Describe in detail your employment with Diamond Turf Equipment and state any inventions that were learned and applications applied for while you were employed at Diamond Turf. Did you have any disputes with Diamond Turf over such inventions if so provide in depth explanation of such disputes.
5. In a sworn statement to the Virginia Bar on behalf of William Dick you make claim that you notified Eliot Bernstein of the events that caused the closure of Diamond Turf. Describe then if any waivers were taken in writing and if any other Board members or officers were notified of the causes for your termination and closure of Mr. Friedkin’s business you ran.
6. Was this information adequately represented in your resume provided by both you and Mr. Wheeler to the Board, Officers and shareholders. Did Mr. Bernstein whom you had notified per your sworn statement help you or Mr. Wheeler in the preparation of your resume?
7. Describe every invention that you made or contributions you made to any invention learned at Iviewit and applications made on your behalf while at Iviewit or after your tenure with Iviewit. With whose authority did you put your name onto Iviewit inventions and did you further notify and get written acceptance by all other inventors to have your name added to any inventions. Did you direct patent counsel, and if so whom, to add your name to any Iviewit inventions. Are you the sole named inventor of any Iviewit technology, if so, who authorized your taking patents into your name. Did you notify the Board or Investment group or anyone else of these patents taken in your name.
8. Who owns any inventions that were applied for in your name, who is the assignee, applicant, attorney of record past and present on any inventions in your name. In regards to patent application 60,233,344 please provide records and correspondences regarding this application from the USPTO or any other correspondences relating to this application.
9. Name, with number, any application for patents taken by yourself or in conjunction with anyone since 1997 to present. Provide all attorneys of record past and current.
10. Provide information regarding your entire relationship with Mr. William Dick and all patent applications that Mr. Dick worked on your behalf and where you were employed at such time that any applications were applied for. Did you disclose that patents written by Mr. Dick and yourself were the cause of the loss of Mr. Monte Friedkin’s business when you introduced Mr. Dick to Iviewit. Did you, Mr. Wheeler, or Mr. Dick ever obtain written waivers for Iviewit in regards to these events to protect Iviewit from similar events occurring. Provide all written evidence of such disclosures and whom it was disclosed to.
11. Describe your meetings with Iviewit inventors, Zakirul Shirajee, Jude Rosario and Eliot I. Bernstein, and when were disclosures of Iviewit inventions made to.
12. What inventions did you discover with Jeffrey Friedstein and did you obtain written consent of Mr. Friedstein and Mr. Bernstein to add yourself to patents created by them.
13. Who authorized this addition of your name to patents and were the attorneys involved apprised of your contributions in writing and were all formal steps taken to notify the Board of your status as an inventor on inventions invented without you.
14. What inventions did you invent with Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee or Jude Rosario, detail all times and places of your contributions to these inventions with the inventors. Did you receive written consent from every true inventor to add yourself onto such patents? Did you provide written consent of all true inventors to patent counsel and if so who.
15. Describe all assignments made of inventions whereby you had any involvement with the assignments or directed attorneys to file such assignments and which company’s patents were assigned to.
16. Describe all inventions in your name from IBM Corporation, did Mr. William Dick have any involvement with these patents. Did you have the consent of IBM to write such patents with your name as inventor? Were all patents assigned properly to IBM.
17. Provide three references of your supervisors at IBM with name, address and phone.
18. Were there any disputes with IBM leading up to your termination with IBM.
19. Provide your prior relationship with Mary Viadero and Martha Manteconn, provide dates and times you met them and if you had any prior work experience with them. Provide current address for each of them? Were they aware of your past patent applications that led to the closure of Diamond Turf?
20. Have any of your family members applied for patents?
21. List your employment since leaving Iviewit?
22. Are you aware of the contents of the briefcase of cash referenced in the attached EXHIBIT (?) and from what investors it came, where it went, where it was deposited.
23. Describe the technology transfer you attempted with Internet Train or Imedia and what technology you were aware of in Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
24. Describe all details and who authorized the opening of the company Iviewit Holdings, Inc. that changed its name to Iviewit Technologies, Inc. and who the shareholders were of that Company. How did technology transfer into this company? Why did Wayne Huizenga, Jr. not join this Company with other investors from Iviewit LLC? Why did Iviewit LLC members join this Company?
25. Were you in charge of the corporate minutes for Board meetings and where were such corporate records maintained?
26. Were you present at a meeting at the New York offices of PR and if so what were the circumstances leading up to the meeting, who attended the meeting and what was the outcome of such meeting? What investor prompted the meeting and what was the outcome of the investors’ investigation into the patents? Did the investor ever invest further funds and if not why?
27. Describe all patent applications ever held by Premier Connections, Inc. and were any learned while at IBM. Did you ever assign patents to IBM, where they originally held by IBM?
28. In your deposition for Iviewit v. PR please describe in greater detail the following.
29. Did you ever refer to Kenneth Rubenstein as an Advisor or patent counsel for Iviewit. Please see the attached EXHIBIT showing your fax to investor Crossbow Ventures, whereby you sent a Wachovia Private Placement document whereby Mr. Rubenstein is listed not only as an Advisory Board member but Iviewit patent counsel. Please describe the differences in your depostion whereby you state that Mr. Rubenstein was never used by you as patent counsel or an advisor.
30. Are you aware of when the Wachovia Private Placement document was altered to remove Mr. Rubenstein from the plan, whom authorized the changes, was Wachovia noticed in writing of the change, was Crossbow Ventures notified of the changes that may have had an impact on their investment. What happened to all copies of the Wachovia business plan that had this reference to Mr. Rubenstein as patent counsel that you distributed.
31. Did you destroy any copies of the Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum that had reference to Mr. Rubenstein as patent counsel?
32. Was Chritopher Wheeler ever involved in the review of the Wachovia Business Plan with you or any member of Iviewit or PR, did Mr. Wheeler bill for such reviews?
33. Who introduced Iviewit to Wachovia?
34. Why are patents being assigned into , Inc. by Foley and Lardner? Who authorized this?
35. Why are patents being assigned into Iviewit Holdings, Inc. and what Iviewit Holdings, Inc. by Foley and Lardner and MLGS by you and what Iviewit Holdings was this , Inc./Iviewit Holdings or Iviewit Holdings, Inc./Iviewit Technologies Inc.? Who authorized this?
36. Did you sign assignments from Iviewit LLC to any other Company.
37. In your deposition testimony you state that no assignments occurred when you were President and COO of the Company. Many patent records indicate that almost all assigments occurred during your tenure. Explain the descrepencany.
38. Describe for the Officers and Directors your contribution to each and every patent your name appears on and what contributions you made to these patents and how you replaced original inventors with yourself or why you are listed as sole inventor? What documents were submitted to the patent office to correct these errors.
39. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
40. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
41. Review EXHIBIT () PPM and describe if the role for yourself and the role of Kenneth Rubenstein and the biographies submitted are true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Was a Wachovia PPM sent to you on occasion for review and input, was this copy ever sent to you or Goldstein Lewin & Co. by anyone?
Foley & Lardner - William Dick, Esq. & Barry Grossman
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Provide the exact date and time you were contacted by Mr. Utley concerning his employment with Iviewit. Provide all records or billings for this initial contact. Had Mr. Utley ever prior contacted you regarding the inventions of Iviewit?
2. Provide details of your relationship to Mr. Utley in regards to Diamond Turf Equipment Company and the events that led up to the closure of Diamond Turf and the patents you filed for in Mr. Utley’s name. Provide detailed information regarding those patent applications and if you knew that writing such patents into Mr. Utley’s name for inventions learned while he was still an employee of Diamond Turf was acceptable by you. Did you and Mr. Utley have the permission of Diamond Turf to write such patents without knowledge of the Company’s owner, did you receive any written waivers?
3. Upon meeting Iviewit, did you represent the past patent applications you wrote into Mr. Utley’s name regarding his Diamond Turf employment and notify the Board or officers of the Company that these patent applications had led to Mr. Utley’s termination and the closure of DTE? Did you get a written waiver or provide the Officer and Directors information regarding these past patent issues with Mr. Utley?
4. Have you ever applied for any other patents, or your firm, in the name of Brian Utley or any relative of his?
5. Did you ever speak to investors regarding Iviewit?
6. Did you ever bill for Iviewit patent work through Foley and Lardner?
7. Were you aware of missing files sent to Foley & Lardner from Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel.
8. Were you aware, or did you authorize Douglas Boehm and Steven Becker to write patent applications into Brian Utley’s name or add Mr. Utley to patent applications already invented upon his introduction to the Company?
9. Did you retain Foley and Lardner in regards to Iviewit? Do you have the original signed retainer you secured and the Conflicts check run for Iviewit? When was your last day with Foley & Lardner?
10. How many times did you meet with Eliot I. Bernstein and other inventors of the Iviewit technologies? How many phone calls and other meetings did you have with Brian Utley regarding Iviewit?
11. When Foley and Lardner added inventors to Iviewit patent applications were the proper steps taken with USPTO to add inventors? Were you adivised initially of patents being written without all original inventors.
12. Define your relationship with Christopher Wheeler? Did the patent applications for Brian Utley get written into Preier Connections and did you know about Mr. Wheeler’s relationship with the formation of theat entity.
13. Did you have any problems at IBM corp leading to your departure? What was your last date at IBM corporation. Provide three references at IBM currently who can attest to athe deatails you provide regarding your employment and departure from IBM.
14. Regarding patent 60/233,344 appearing on the Foley Dockets sent to BSZT, written into Brian Utley’s name, please provide all details and records regarding the filing of this patent applicaition as it appears that the patent applciation is not the property of Iviewit or it’s rightful inventors.
15. Please provide all details of this application and who is listed on the application as applicant, inventor, attorney of record past and present, assignee, date of filing, title.
16. Why are patents being assigned into , Inc. by Foley and Lardner?
17. Provide details regarding any taped conversations in your possession or your firms possession relating to Iviewit and provide transcripts for all taped meetings in which all parties gave authorization and consent to being taped.
18. Is it your firms policy to tape meetings and if so do you get consent in writing prior to the beginning or end of the the taping. Are these consents part of the record of each meeting taped.
19. As you were retained by Iviewit for your oversight role, answer each and every question for Steven Becker and Douglas Boehm the two attorney’s you brought in to execute the strategies initially given to you by the Company and it’s inventors. In reviewing the patents done by your underlings did you ever notice any errors or areas of concern prior to filing?
20. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Foley & Lardner - Steven Becker, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. What direction were given by William Dick regarding the Iviewit patents?
2. Did you or your firm run a conflicts check and do you or the firm posses the conflicts check and original retainer document for Foley & Lardner.
3. When did you first meet the inventors of the Iviewit technologies, Eliot Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee and Jeffrey Friedstein? Provide exact dates and all correspondences and travel receipts. Describe who attended the meetings and the outcome of the meetings and directions you were given by Iviewit.
4. Were you made aware that Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein had left off original inventors Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee and Jeffrey Friedstein in the original provisional filings and were you were charged with correcting such errors? Did you follow proper procedure for adding inventors left off the applications in order to add them back to the provisional filings and the subsequent pending filings filed by you and your firm. Did you get written consent from all inventors listed to add them back?
5. Were you made aware of inventor fraud claims by the Company in regards to Mr. Joao and Rubenstein’s filings? Did find any errors whatsoever with Raymond Joao’s work and what corrective steps were taken to fix these errors. Did these errors pose significant risk to Iviewit, what problems did you see with regard to missing subject matter and did you notify the USPTO of these findings.
6. When was the first time you requested files Ramyond Joao’s files and were all files properly transferred to your firm? Are you aware of claims by Raymond Joao of destroying pertinent parts of his files?
7. Who authorized you to add Brian Utley to patents created before his arrival at Iviewit? Did you receive written verification of Mr. Utley’s involvment from the prior original inventors to add Mr. Utley to these inventions?
8. When did you become aware and how, that Raymond Joao and MLGS failed to send all pertinent documents to Foley & Lardner?
9. Regarding patent 60/233,344 appearing on the Foley Dockets sent to BSZT, written into Brian Utley’s name, please provide all details and records regarding the filing of this patent applicaition as it appears that the patent applciation is not the property of Iviewit or it’s rightful inventors.
10. Please provide all details of this application and who is listed on the application as applicant, inventor, attorney of record past and present, assignee, date of filing, title.
11. Why are patents being assigned into , Inc. by Foley and Lardner?
12. Describe in detail the time and place of all meetings with representatives of Wachovia regarding Iviewit and the dates and times of all letters sent to Scott Bowman regarding the Iviewit companies and inventions. Provide all original correspondences and records of transfer of such documents to Wachovia or any other parties.
13. Provide all patent dockets supplied to the Company from Foley and Lardner from 1/2000 through 6/2001 or transmitted to any third parties.
14. Provide a detailed account for the Officers and Directors of the attached EXHIBIT () and why such errrors occurred and what remedies were taken to repair such errors, and further did you bill the company for errors clearly your fault?
15. Provide details regarding any taped conversations in your possession or your firms possession relating to Iviewit and provide transcripts for all taped meetings in which all parties gave authorization and consent to being taped.
16. Is it your firms policy to tape meetings and if so do you get consent in writing prior to the beginning or end of the the taping? Are these consents part of the record of each meeting taped?
17. Were you ever noticed that James F. Armstrong was an inventor and if so was Mr. Armstrong ever put on the patents?
18. What were the circumstances surrounding your departure from Foley & Lardner and when was your last day with the firm?
19. Why are their some patents with Brian Utley name on them that are almost identical patent applications to the ones created by the original inventors and further why are no patent applications that you completed with all the original inventors listed on it?
20. Were you told that Zakirul Shirajee, Jude Rosario & Eliot Bernstein were the original inventors for most of the patents? Were you informed that Jeffrey Friedstein was also an inventor of an original invention?
21. In statements made to the Virginia Bar on behalf of Mr. Dick, you and Mr. Boehm contend that plenty of time was given to inventors to review the patents prior to filing. For each patent filed, identify the date and time the inventors were given the applications in every instance and how they were delivered to each inventor and what comments were sent back by each inventor and when such changes were incorporated into the filings and sent back to the inventors for approval.
22. Were all patents submitted with all inventor signatures on declarations and oaths? If not, why? If signatures were obtained at a later date, please identify the exact date the signatures were obtained and filed?
23. Were all patent applications assigned at filing to the proper companies? Who signed the assignments and when were they filed if not with the original applications?
24. After the Company found two sets of patent books in Mr. Utley’s possession fraught with errors, including math errors and wrong inventors, a series of taped meetings was held on 7/31/00, 8/2/00 and 8/4/00 in which Board members (Simon Bernstein, Eliot Bernstein and Maurice Buchsbaum) expressed concerns over fraud on the shareholders in regards to missing signatures that you claimed were in process but not yet obtained. Provide accurate details of the frauds discussed and what liabilities those frauds could have possed to Officers, Directors and shareholders? Provide details regarding the actions you were charged to complete to prevent the frauds and what letters and opinions were requested of you to provide the Company with to alleviate any potential risks to the Officers and Directors for your failure to have proper inventors and assignments. Were opinions ever drafted to the Company regarding the risks associated with these errors and identifying the potential risks you were asked to address?
25. Mr. Dick was to be notified of all of the allegations of fraud and was it not his opinion the Company sought to rectify the problems, did you notify Mr. Dick of problems and conversations and what remedies did he take or direct you to take regarding the fraud charges and opinions of your firm to protect the Officers and Directors from such crimes?
26. What corrective actions were taken in regards to ensuring that all proper inventors were on the applications and proper assignments were obtained to protect the shareholders interests were taken?
27. Do you maintain original copies of the taped meetings? If so, please provide unedited copies of exact transcripts and copies of the tapes for review. It is clear from several letters sent by your firm in response to these meetings that tapes were reviewed before sending the letters that followed, identify each and every person who reviewed such tapes and any copies that were made subsequently.
28. In a letter sent by your firm to Mr. Eliot Bernstein it is claimed that he over reacted to the fraud upon the shareholders and that shareholders did not need to be notified, identify exactly what over reaction to the charge of fruad meant and why it was your firms opinion that shareholders not be advised of such fraud?
29. What was Mr. Wheelers role in any of these meetings and define what he was charged with investigating?
30. The taped meetings contained hours of review of the math errors discovered the day before filing when Eliot Bernstein took the patents from Mr. Utley as he claimed there was no time to review and he needed to sign blank documents without reviewing the patents, had you ever prior sent Mr. Bernstein copies of these patents for review? Had he made any changes prior? When he took the patent applications from Mr. Utley he was utterly dismayed at the filings as they were entirely wrong, fruaght with math errors, title errors, inventor errors and other such content errors and after hours of review with you it was determined that the patent applications were corrected to the best that limited time allowed for. Did all those changes make it into the filings and if not why? Explain how much time was left between the filing and the deadline to file with the USPTO? Is it typical and customary practice of your firm to give an inventor several hundred pages of patent applications hours before filing deadlines for an initial review when months had passed to prepare your work product?
31. In the tapes it is found that you have been sending many patent documents to Brian Utley in regards to patent applications the Company was unaware to hotels and other unidentified places for his review and that no other inventors are copied on these and the emails for these correspondences were not filtering through the Company domain. Identify each and every transmission of any invention related document that was sent to Mr. Utley at any other fax machine, email address or address that was not part of the Company.
32. In the taped meetings you are given direct orders that any documents and particularly any invention documents were to be carbon copied to Mr. Bernstein from that point forward? Was this order followed by your firm for all documents from that point forward? Were any patents filed in Mr. Utley’s name after these meetings and if so were all of these documents copied appropriately?
33. In the taped meetings you were directed to send James F. Armstrong all patents for his review, was this directive ever followed?
34. Describe the errors discussed in the meetings with Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubensteins work and what liabilities these errors posed and what corrective actions you were charged with making to their filings to minimize the exposures already cuased. Were Joao’s filings ever corrected to minimize these risks, did you notify the USPTO of these errors and take proper steps to notify the OED that applications had been filed missing inventors and other content related problems that you were going to remedy?
35. How many inventions ideas were submitted by Mr. Utley as invention ideas of his own for you to file?
36. Were inventions abandoned by your firm and if so please indicate which inventions, who authorized the abandonment and provide numbers for each abandoned application.
37. Describe your review of the Joao/ Rubenstein applications that were sent to Wachovia bank as part of their due dilligence. Had assignments been made to the proper entities at that time?
38. In a letter from your firm to Martha Manteconn you ask her to repalce parts of the patent binders. Provide the documents that were replaced and the replacement parts.
39. As you were a team with Mr. Boehm and Mr. Dick, provide answers for any questions in each of their sections that may differ from those of your own if you have any knowledge of those questions.
40. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Foley & Lardner - Douglas Boehm, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. What direction were given by William Dick regarding the Iviewit patents?
2. Did you or your firm run a conflicts check and do you or the firm posses the conflicts check and original retainer document for Foley & Lardner.
3. When did you first meet the inventors of the Iviewit technologies, Eliot Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee and Jeffrey Friedstein? Provide exact dates and all correspondences and travel receipts. Describe who attended the meetings and the outcome of the meetings and directions you were given by Iviewit.
4. Were you made aware that Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein had left off original inventors Jude Rosario, Zakirul Shirajee and Jeffrey Friedstein in the original provisional filings and were you were charged with correcting such errors? Did you follow proper procedure for adding inventors left off the applications in order to add them back to the provisional filings and the subsequent pending filings filed by you and your firm. Did you get written consent from all inventors listed to add them back?
5. Were you made aware of inventor fraud claims by the Company in regards to Mr. Joao and Rubenstein’s filings? Did find any errors whatsoever with Raymond Joao’s work and what corrective steps were taken to fix these errors. Did these errors pose significant risk to Iviewit, what problems did you see with regard to missing subject matter and did you notify the USPTO of these findings.
6. When was the first time you requested files Ramyond Joao’s files and were all files properly transferred to your firm? Are you aware of claims by Raymond Joao of destroying pertinent parts of his files?
7. Who authorized you to add Brian Utley to patents created before his arrival at Iviewit? Did you receive written verification of Mr. Utley’s involvment from the prior original inventors to add Mr. Utley to these inventions?
8. When did you become aware and how, that Raymond Joao and MLGS failed to send all pertinent documents to Foley & Lardner?
9. Regarding patent 60/233,344 appearing on the Foley Dockets sent to BSZT, written into Brian Utley’s name, please provide all details and records regarding the filing of this patent applicaition as it appears that the patent applciation is not the property of Iviewit or it’s rightful inventors.
10. Please provide all details of this application and who is listed on the application as applicant, inventor, attorney of record past and present, assignee, date of filing, title.
11. Why are patents being assigned into , Inc. by Foley and Lardner?
12. Describe in detail the time and place of all meetings with representatives of Wachovia regarding Iviewit and the dates and times of all letters sent to Scott Bowman regarding the Iviewit companies and inventions. Provide all original correspondences and records of transfer of such documents to Wachovia or any other parties.
13. Provide all patent dockets supplied to the Company from Foley and Lardner from 1/2000 through 6/2001 or transmitted to any third parties.
14. Provide a detailed account for the Officers and Directors of the attached EXHIBIT () and why such errrors occurred and what remedies were taken to repair such errors, and further did you bill the company for errors clearly your fault.
15. Provide details regarding any taped conversations in your possession or your firms possession relating to Iviewit and provide transcripts for all taped meetings in which all parties gave authorization and consent to being taped.
16. Is it your firms policy to tape meetings and if so do you get consent in writing prior to the beginning or end of the the taping. Are these consents part of the record of each meeting taped.
17. Were you ever noticed that James F. Armstrong was an inventor and if so was Mr. Armstrong ever put on the patents?
18. In statements made to the Virginia Bar on behalf of Mr. Dick, you and Mr. Becker contend that plenty of time was given to inventors to review the patents prior to filing. For each patent filed, identify the date and time the inventors were given the applications in every instance and how they were delivered to each inventor and what comments were sent back by each inventor and when such changes were incorporated into the filings and sent back to the inventors for approval.
19. As you were a team with Mr. Boehm and Mr. Dick, provide answers for any questions in each of their sections that may differ from those of your own if you have any knowledge of those questions.
20. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Tiedemann Investment Group - Bruce Prolow & Carl Tiedemann
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Provide details of your professional and personal relationship to the following individuals and firms and any partners or employees of such firms; Christopher Wheeler, Brian Utley, Crossbow Ventures and PR, Imedia, Ilearnit and Internet Train.
2. Describe how and when you hired Brian Utley & Michael Reale for employment and in what capacity he was hired? As a Board member of Iviewit did you take appropriate steps when hiring Mr. Utley such as reviewing his non-competes and employment agreement with Iviewit and discuss and get waiver in writing for such hiring of Mr. Utley by the Board. Did you properly notify the Board of your hiring of Mr. Utley for a company in which you had interests in?
3. Were you aware that Iviewit equipment had been stolen by Mr. Utley and Reale that ended up being utilized in a distance learning company that you maintained interests in?
4. Provide all details of the distance learning companies that you, Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Utley devised, whereby Iviewit technology would be transferred to companies formed or already formed in which Iviewit Board members had not authorized or been distributed documents relating to such schemes? Did you notify the Board of your intentions with these companies and did you secure board approval for drafting such technology transfers, corporations being opened or other transactional documents.
5. Are you aware of any technology of Iviewit’s currently being used by any company’s that you or Tiedemann/Prolow or any affiliates, subsidiaries or related companies are currently using Iviewit technologies. Provide all information relating to any company that may be using Iviewit technology.
6. What are the circumstances surrounding Utley’s departure from any Company you have interests.
7. Refer EXHIBIT () whereby your name is mentioned in regards to the briefcase of cash that was removed from the Iviewit property, along with highly proprietary equipment of Iviewit’s.
8. What was the total amount of investment of any Tiedemann/Prolow or affilates or other investors secured by you in Iviewit? Do you maintain all transactional documents regarding the investment in Iviewit, provide all records of this transaction, all signed documents and correspondences relating to your investment. Provide all bank records showing all investments from you, your firm or any third parties that co-invested with you.
9. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman LLP - Norman Zafman, Thomas Coester & Farzad Ahmini
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe when you first met Eliot Bernstein, Ross Miller and Maurice Buchsbaum and what was the initial meeting regarding.
2. Please describe who referred Iviewit to your offices and what they referred you to do.
3. Were you apprised of problems regarding prior counsels work product, including the discovery of patents that had been written into Brian Utley’s name without authorization by the Company?
4. What corrective actions were taken to fix the patents, did you abandon patents and upon whose authorization?
5. When choosing patents to file did Crossbow, a secured lender, have any input into what was filed?
6. How much money did Crossbow pay directly to BSZT?
7. Describe your relationship with Irell and Manella and each partner that you discussed Iviewit technology with?
8. Please provide all patent portfolio documents produced by your firm in chronological order.
9. Were you aware that inventors and content appeared deficient and what corrective actions were taken?
10. Were you commissioned to remove Brian Utley, rights title and interests in any patent his name appeared on and correct such patents to rightful inventors; Zakirul Shirajee, Jude Rosario, Eliot Bernstein initial patents and Jeffrey Friedstein for a singular patent. What documents did you send to the inventors and what documents were signed by Eliot Bernstein on behalf of Brian Utley?
11. Please refer to EXHIBIT and explain in the letter why Brian Utley’s Power of Attorney is necessary and why is his employment agreement necessary?
12. What do the shareholders and officers and director have to “hope” the Paris Conference Treaty will accept for Brian Utley to have power of attorney, what documents were being filed?
13. Explain the differences point by point for any changes in your portfolio from 2001 2002 2003 docket?
14. Refer to the EXHIBIT () showing your patent information versus what is on file with the USPTO please describe all descrepancies in detail and who authorized each and every change?
15. Explain how inventors are left off patents that they had previously been on?
16. Explain why the inventors were not corrected according to Company directions by Aidan Foley, Ross Miller, P, Stephen Lamon and Eliot Bernstein.
17. Why does Brian Utley remain on patents and prior to abandoning any patents in Brian Utley’s name it was the Company understanding that all rights, titles and interests would be corrected first, due to the possibility that the application later be revived or other patents filed claiming priority to such provisional applications in Mr. Utley’s name?
18. Did you notify the USPTO OED regarding the problems with the inventors and content problems you were informed of? Did you report that Mr. Utley had taken patents in his own name that did not appear on the Company dockets and were only found to be on dockets produced by your firm.
19. The Company provided you with records in its possession prior to your receipt of Foley and Lardners documents that were transferred with all originals of Foley and Lardner and MLGS, at that point the Company records did not contain any references to patents 60/233,341 and 60/233,344. While hired to audit the work of Foley & Lardner did you find these patents that had previously not been in the possession of the Company?
20. Please describe the Company reaction upon receiving your portfolio with previously undisclosed patents. In reviewing Foley and Lardner’s work did you discover that patent 60/233,341 the Company had no rights, titles or interests in this application. If so, please identify why it appears as an Intellectual Property asset of the Company and how did you plan on returning rights that were not the Company’s, You advised the Company to assign the rights titles and interests in this patent application back to the Company and then abandon because it was covered within other applications already on file. How did you intend to take any action on a patent that the Company had no rights, titles or interest to? Please see the patent office correspondence regarding their inability to provide any information regarding that patent application you listed as an asset of the Company.
21. Why were you asked to cease and desist all communications with Crossbow Ventures. When listing the assignee of the Iviewit patent portfolio were you aware of any assignments to Alpine Ventures, if so, why are your dockets not reflecting such assignment.
22. When were you first requested to file a response by Stephen Lamont and Eliot Bernstein stating that inventor fraud and other content related fraud had been committed both upon the USPTO and foreign patent offices?
23. What were the concerns of Lamont and Bernstein in relation to continuing to answer office actions on applications that perhaps could not be overcome due to the fact that content was missing from the original inventions and inventors and assignments did not appear to be correct, and we had lost filing dates that we had determined could cause liability and loss of inventions? Were you requested to file such statements with the respective offices to put the applications on hold until all such issues could be rectified?
24. Did you state that filing such response would lead to “red flags” that could possibly cause future problems with licensing deals? Did the Company not care about “red flags” and ask again for the patent applications to be put in suspension while all issues were corrected for the current shareholders to be protected and rightful owners of the patents they invested in.
25. Were some patents not assigned upon your taking over the Iviewit patent portfolio?
26. Did you file patents in Brian Utley’s name in Japan? If so, please describe what patents were filed, why they were filed and when they were filed? Why when Utley was to be being removed from patents did we file more with his name on them?
27. Did you file a Japenese filing with a patent document that had blanked out dates and did the Japanese office respond with a request for clarification? If so, was one ever provided?
28. We have received recent information that instead of two Japenese applications were filed? Provide information regarding all three filings, who approved of these filings, who paid for these filings and the differences in the three filings.
29. When did you send Iviewit original files to Christopher & Weisberg, P.A., and upon whose order and from whom did you send them? Provide all correspondences, mail receipts, and inventory signatures for all items transferred by you? Was Krishna Narine or any other Schiffrin & Barroway partner or employee involved in this transaction in any way?
30. When did you receive back Iviewit original files from Christopher & Weisberg, P.A., and upon whose order and from whom did you receive them? Provide all correspondences, mail receipts, and inventory signatures for all items transferred by you? Was Krishna Narine or any other Schiffrin & Barroway partner or employee involved in this transaction in any way?
31. When did you send Iviewit original files to Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP, and upon whose order and from whom did you send them? Provide all correspondences, mail receipts, and inventory signatures for all items transferred by you? Was Krishna Narine or any other Schiffrin & Barroway partner or employee involved in this transaction in any way?
32. When did you receive back Iviewit original files from Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP, P.A., and upon whose order and from whom did you receive them? Provide all correspondences, mail receipts, and inventory signatures for all items transferred by you? Was Krishna Narine, Esq. or any other Schiffrin & Barroway partner or employee involved in this transaction in any way?
33. When did you resign as Iviewit counsel and file such with the USPTO and on what date did the patent office relinquish your Attorney of Record. Provide all information for every patent that you maintain on your docket.
34. On what date do you claim to have sent original Iviewit files and all other invention data spawning the firms of Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein, Wolf & Schlissel, P.C., Foley & Lardner and PR covering the periods 1998-2004, in regard to approximately 23 US and International applications into two small fed’x boxes? Provide all details of the correspondences to and from your firm relating to the transfer of any original files at any time that you held them.
35. How were such original files documented and did you receive a signed inventory from each person.
36. Did you send an inventory list to be signed for acceptance?
37. Does such inventory account for original invention materials, whether they were paper or any other forms of data that were sent to you by the other three law firms that sent you their original materials according to claims made by Raymond Joao to the New York Bar, and William Dick to the Virginia bar attorney to the state bars of New York both Foley & Lardner and MLGS sent their entire files and in some cases retained no records not even their original signed retainers, etc.
38. If you did not get a signed release verifying all such original patent documents and other invention dating materials than you cannot state that the contents of such boxes ever reached the destination? This would pose serious risks to the shareholders of Iviewit if the original documents for the patent inventions and all other original software, CD Roms containing source codes, original trademark works, tapes, original invention notes, attorney notes and all other forms of verification of certain dates and events? Since being notified by the Company that they could not find such records, what efforts have you made to secure such documents and other forms of media that you may lost?
39. The Company has asked for copies of your records and you responded that you maintained only a limited set of documents?
40. Did you have written authorization of the Company to send the files to the Corporate address?
i. Are you in receipt of a letter to direct all correspondence from the patent offices or other communications for Iviewit or Eliot Bernstein to Caroline P. Rogers, Esq. until further notice at her physical address? What was the date of that letter and did you ever get any notice to change such correspondence address for all documents?
ii. Did you receive several emails from the Company to keep Caroline P. Rogers, Esq. in receipt of all correspondences between our firms at her mailing address?
41. Had the Company sent you a response they wanted filed with the USPTO and foreign patent offices claiming inventor fraud and other content and date problems with the patents? Was this ever completed by your firm?
42. When you became aware that the Company, with only hours, minutes, to a filing deadline in Europe contacted the foreign affiliate of BSZT and notified them to file the response in the foreign offices since we could not reach your offices or get return confirmation that you had sent it in, how did your firm react?
43. Why did the London patent offices of Martyn W. Molyneaux of Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP cease doing business days after the filing this claim of fraud upon the patent offices and to Iviewit Company’s and could you provide a list of the whereabouts of each and every member of that patent department since your retaining that firm?
44. The Company asked that you have all documents from any/all affiliates you worked with or retained on the Company’s behalf for patent filings abroad provide copies of all documents, have you since complied or contacted your affiliates to have them comply with such requests?
45. At the time you purport to have transferred the Company files, had the Company notified you at this point that complaints were under way both at the patent office with OED Director Harry I. Moatz and at foreign patent offices through Martyn W. Molyneaux of Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP and Federal and State Agencies and that the Company wanted your firm to send either originals or copies to several of the Federal & State Agencies involved in all the alleged crimes and certain claims of inventor fraud and therefore assignment fraud against the USPTO and other foreign agencies, as the Iviewit Iofficers, Directors and shareholder.
William Kasser
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Provide dates of your employment with Iviewit and the titles you held and who authorized any changes in title?
2. Describe your past and present relationships with the following individuals and firms:
3. Gerald Lewin & Goldstein Lewin & Co.
4. Christopher Wheeler, PR
5. Crossbow Ventures and all partners or employees
6. Are you aware of the circumstances surrounding the termination of Brian Utley, Raymond Hersh, Michael Reale and any malfeasences caused upon the Company by them?
7. Are you aware of stolen equipment that was transferred to Bruce Prolow’s company by Brian Utley and Michael Reale, what actions did you take to secure the property back to the Company?
8. Were you aware of employees claiming that Michael Reale and Brian Utley had attempted to steal off with a briefcase of cash and proprietary computer systems.
9. What accounting measures did you take to find out if cash was missing from the Company coffieurs? Did you notify the police or any other agencies of your knowledge of such alleged crimes.
10. Who did you notify of the crimes you had become aware of and what actions were discussed to recover the stolen money and equipment?
11. Once equipment had been recovered by the police what directions did you give Anthony Frenden to find out what the computers had been used for and where they had been taken, what were the conclusions reached after analyzing the hard drives?
12. Were you authorized and if so by who, to release Michael Reale and Brian Utley from criminal charges in relation to the theft of property estimated at $80,000.00?
13. Had you ever been voted into an officer role of the Company?
14. How did you book the Tiedemann/Prolow investment and did you have full transactional documents relating to this investment? Did you investigate the books to determine where the briefcase of cash allegedly stolen from the Company from the Prolow transaction had gone? Did you contact Gerald Lewin or Goldstein Lewin to find out how this transaction had been accounted for and if any cash withdrawals could be located?
15. At the time of discovery of these crimes did you have full books for all Iviewit entities in your possession and current tax returns and financial statements for all companies? If so how were they transferred to your possession and do you maintain records of all such transactions.
16. Reference EXHIBIT () which a letter authored by you and explain in detail what fraud appears to have been committed and how Goldstein Lewin was involved in such transaction and who the fraudulent financials were circulated too.
17. Upon learning that 6 laptop computers were missing and hundreds of thousands of dollars of software had been stolen you wrote Stephen Lamont and Eliot Bernstein that you had filed subsequent police reports regarding these items, including the missing cash. Provide all details and agencies that you reported these crimes too and what the outcome of such investigations you are aware of. Do you have the case number for this complaint and what detectives were notified?
18. Does you or your spouse have any prior relationships with Chrsitopher Wheeler or any other PR employee, have you or any family member ever received compensation directly from PR, LLP?
19. Does you or your spouse have any prior relationships with Gerald Lewin or any other Goldstein & Lewin Co. employee, have you or any family member ever received compensation directly from Goldstein Lewin?
20. On what authority did you receive Company records from PR and what documents did you maintain in your personal possession after your termination from Iviewit?
21. When requested to turn over documents such as Corporate books found to have been transferred to you by Christopher Wheeler without Company approval did you turn them over or write letters that you were hijacking them until ransome of an estimated $250,000.00 was paid in exchange for them?
22. As a non-officer of the Company what rights did you have to personally possess such corporate documents and provide accounting and inventories that you signed when taking possession from PR of such corporate records?
23. Have you turned every document or any other item that was owned by Iviewit to Iviewit? When turning docuemnts after being contacted by an attorney for Simon Bernstein did you properly account for all items in your possession and did you get a signed iventory as requested?
24. Did you pile the Iviewit Equipment in your possession and Iviewit records in your driveway for pickup?
25. Are you aware of any document destruction by former employees of Iviewit or Christopher Wheeler or any other member of Proksauer Rose.
26. Were you aware that Brian Utley had attempted to abcond with Iviewit patents?
27. Did Christopher Wheeler attempt to transfer all patent documents in their possession to you and what correspondences with management followed and what directions were you given.
28. Did you find any missing investment documents or loan documents from any investors upon your review of the corporate records?
29. Did you have any part in filling out responses to the PR v. Iviewit law suit or the Involuntary Bankruptcy proceeding filed against the Company? When did you notify the Board or Officers of such law suit and bankruptcy proceedings?
30. Are you aware that Brian Utley threatened the life of Eliot Bernstein and what actions were taken to protect Mr. Bernstein and his family? Did you aid Mr. Bernstein in his relocation efforts?
31. When reviewing the PR and Foley & Lardner billings did you discover any errors? Did you further attempt to negotiate away all of the patent billings with PR?
32. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Raymond Hersh
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
2. Explain why you state in the attached EXHIBIT () to AA auditors that Erika Lewin is “miffed” at the implication that she misled auditors. Attach all AA correspondences in your possession relating to any audit conducted on behalf of the Company and its shareholders outlining the outcome of each audit. Provide all documentation submitted to such auditors.
3. Have you ever used the Iviewit technology or introduced it to any other person or entity for the licensing or use of the technology? If so, please provide all details relating to Non Disclosure Agreements and describe the outcome and if to the best of your belief that entity is currently using any form of the Iviewit technologies.
4. Explain why Raymond Hersh send inaccurate and misrepresentative information of the corporate structure to AA in his response to their requests.
1.
Goldstein Lewin & Co. - Erika Lewin
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
2. Explain why Raymond Hersh states in the attached EXHIBIT () to AA auditors that you are “miffed” at the implication that you misled auditors. Attach all AA correspondences in your possession relating to any audit conducted on behalf of the Company and its shareholders outlining the outcome of each audit. Provide all documentation submitted to such auditors. Provide ALL correspondences with AA and all work papers submitted in the audits.
3. In your hand written Corporate Structure EXHIBIT () please provide in depth explanation to the relationship between the Companies and define all missing Companies from your structure and the interrelationships that exist with them and how the structure evolved over time.
4. Provide whom this letter was circulated to and who helped in the preparation of such document.
5. Provide the dates that you joined Iviewit as the Principle Accounting Officer and Controller? Describe your duties for the Company? Did you maintain the checkbooks, general ledger, interim and year financial statements, operating and capital budget, receipts and expense reports?
6. Have you ever worked for Goldstein Lewin & Co. and if so describe in detail the dates and positions held?
7. When you met Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Jude Rosario, did you know they had invented technologies together? Please describe in depth the technologies discovered, as you understood them.
8. Have you ever used the Iviewit technology or introduced it to any other person or entity for the licensing or use of the technology? If so, please provide all details relating to Non Disclosure Agreements and describe the outcome and if to the best of your belief that entity is currently using any form of the Iviewit technologies.
9. Please provide all books and records in your possession or the possession of Goldstein & Lewin Co.
10. Did you handle the personal finances of Eliot Bernstein and tax reporting for it? If so, please provide Mr. Bernstein under separate cover all records relating to his personal accounting that may be in the possession of you and or Goldstein & Lewin, Co.
11. Describe your employment history providing exact dates of every position in any Company.
12. Describe your conversations and work products performed in conjunction with Mara Lerner Robbins.
Michael Reale
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Please provide a detailed account of your employment history with an exact time frame for each and every position held at every Company?
2. Did you ever leave Iviewit’s employment and then later rejoin Iviewit? Please describe the details of this departure and where went and what positions you held in the interim.
3. Are you aware of document destruction or forgery that took place regarding any of the Iviewit companies while you were employed?
4. Describe your relationship with the following individuals at Boca Research or its Board of Directors:
5. Robert Ferguson
6. Gerald Stanley
7. Have you ever used the Iviewit technology or introduced it to any other person or entity for the licensing or use of the technology? If so, please provide all details relating to Non Disclosure Agreements and describe the outcome and if to the best of your belief that entity is currently using any form of the Iviewit technologies.
Proskauer Rose LLP - Donald E. “Rocky” Thompson
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Have you ever had a Florida Bar complaint filed against you? If so, please describe the details and outcome of such complaint.
2. Were you present at a patent disclosure meeting at the Boca Raton offices of PR whereby the meeting was halted due to an open cell phone found in the pocket of Gerald R. Lewin who had left the room when disclosures began yet left a cell phone with an open connection on.
3. What steps did you take to ensure inventors Bernstein and Shirajee that they would be able to recoven in privacy the disclosures taking place with your New York offices?
4. Are you aware of tape of such meeting being delivered to Gloria Berfeld, Mr. Wheeler’s secretary?
5. What role did you play in handling the transactional documents for Mr. Bruce Prolow?
6. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Proskauer Rose LLP - Gregg Reed, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP - Andrew Barroway, Esq., Richard Schiffrin, Esq. & Krishna Narine, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe prior relationship with Isa & Mitchell Welsch and provide details of exactly when Mitchell Welsch first brought Iviewit to your attention?
2. Provide all information regarding Iviewit sent to you by Iviewit or UBS Painne Weber’s Mitchell Welsch?
3. Are you aware of the relationship between Mitchell & Isa Welsch and Iviewit both personally and professionally and were you informed of the signed and executed agreement between them in the event that a Schiffrin & Barroway deal was procured by them?
4. Provide all information regarding every call to PR before your firm signing a Letter of Understanding with Iviewit. Who was present at these calls, what was discussed and what were the conclusions reached?
5. Did you represent to any Iviewit representatives or Isa & Mitchell Welsch that you had contacted PR and determined after the conversation that was not authorized by any member of Iviewit, that settlement in the PR v. Iviewit case was obtainable and that the amounts would be in excess of seven figures at minimum and that therefore you were signing the attached Letter of Understanding EXHIBIT () between Iviewit and its subsidiaries?
6. Describe any past or present relationship to the following and any conversations with such individuals or firms and provide all correspondences, phone records showing such conversations:
a. Mark W. Gaffney
b. Jeffrey A. Klafter
c. Leon Gold
d. Robert Kafin
e. PR
f. Christopher Weisberg
g. Selz & Muvdi Selz, P.A. - Steven Selz, Esq.
7. Provide all details and records for meetings that you attended either telephonically or in person on behalf of Iviewit and the directions you gave as counsel for the Company, the outcome of the meetings, what was discussed and the conclusions reached with the following:
a. Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP
b. Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman LLP
c. Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq.
d. Flaster Greenberg P.C.
e. Greenberg Traurig, P.C.
f. Bauch & Michaels
g. Selz & Muvdi Selz, P.A.
8. Provide all details records regarding the settlement with PR for no consideration to Iviewit and a full release of PR including the release of attorney client privileged information, especially in regard to providing no protection for Iviewit Intellectual Property to protect the shareholders.
9. Provide the exact time that the settlement offer was delivered to P. Stephen Lamont, Eliot I. Bernstein, Simon L. Bernstein and parties not involved in the law suit had been included in the settlement? What was the timeframe offered to Eliot Bernstein and Stephen Lamont to sign settlement document before the impending trial the following day?
10. Did Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initially negotiate the settlement document whereby they were main benefactors of any negotiations in regard to their Iviewit stock holdings under the LOU? Did SB negotiate initially on behalf of P. Stephen Lamont & Eliot Bernstein as representative signors for the Company in the settlement document? Did SB represent Eliot Bernstein individually and as an inventor in the settlement document and where you authorized by Mr. Bernstein to negotiate for him individually and as an inventor? Did SB represent P. Stephen Lamont personally while the negotiating the settlement offer and where you authorized by Mr. Lamont to do so? Did SB represent Simon L. Bernstein while negotiating the settlement document and were you authorized by Mr. Bernstein to negotiate on his behalf? Did SB represent Iviewit in the settlement negotiations? Did SB represent SB’s interests in the settlement document?
11. Upon delivering the copy to Mr. Bernstein and Lamont of the settlement for no consideration for Iviewit and full release of PR, why was Mr. Bernstein requesting counsel for all parties that had prior not had any representation in the settlement negotiations on their behalf? Did you then secure counsel for Iviewit, for P. Stephen Lamont, Eliot Bernstein, Simon Bernstein and your firm, if so, please provide the counsel you retained and if not, please explain why these parties remained not represented.
12. What the concerns of Corporate counsel Steven Selz, Esq. who was retained through your payments to him regarding the settlement and corporate governance issues, issues regarding confidentiality and the lack of protection provided the Company and the issues of releasing PR from attorney client privileges? Issues regarding the potential liabilities of releasing PR from patent liabilities caused by them and the potential loss of protection for the shareholders? Did Mr. Selz advise you that it would be in the best interest of shareholders and Officers and Directors to retain patent counsel to evaluate this potentially massive exposure to the shareholders and officers and directors?
13. Where you knowledgeable that at the time of signing such settlement that the Company was not in good standing and the officers being asked to sign such releases were acting officers not capable such release on behalf of the Company?
14. What were the concerns of Flaster Greenberg, P.C. when you retained them for Eliot Bernstein personally?
i. Was there concern as to why Mr. Bernstein was signing individually and exposing himself to personal liability by so including himself.
ii. Was there concern that individuals not party to the law suit were being included for Iviewit in the release but not mutually releasing the individual partners at PR, LLP?
15. Once you determined that settlement could not be reached in time, the time period being 12:00 pm when it was presented to Lamont and Eliot Bernstein to 6:00pm which was the threatened time frame set PR or else trial would begin at 8:45am the next day, due to the many complicated issues presented by counsel for Iviewit and Bernstein, and further the fact that with only hours to sign, several parties had not even been notified of such document, was it not your decision that the Company then proceed to trial the following morning?
16. How was the trial cancelled and were you notified that the trial had been cancelled the next morning? Who authorized any cancellation of the trial? Are you aware that attorney Steven Selz, Esq. and Eliot Bernstein went to the courthouse to show up for the trial that had been cancelled by someone?
17. When did you then give orders for attorney Steven Selz, Esq. whom had been paid in full by your firm under the rights granted you and your obligations under the LOU/Retainer and did you then tell Mr. Selz and the Court that you would be Attorney of Record for Iviewit going forward at the trial which was then to be rescheduled in a week or so? Did you write Mr. Selz and the Court that Mr. Selz was authorized to leave the case after two years of preparation, as your firm would be representing the Company at trial as authorized by the Company under the LOU/Retainer?
18. After Mr. Selz prepared his withdrawal, did you simultaneously submit a withdrawal requesting to be removed as Attorney of Record in the case and state the reason as being that Steven Selz, Esq. would be representing the Company?
19. Did Judge Jorge Labarga have knowledge that under the LOU/Retainer that you were performing under, that you had obligations to provide counsel or act as counsel in the PR v. Iviewit case? In your withdrawal as counsel, did you leave the Company with no counsel?
20. Are you aware that the Company was then given a short time period to find replacement counsel that was your obligation under the LOU/Retainer to provide and did you provide such counsel for Iviewit as obligated to. If not, why?
21. What was the result of the failure of Iviewit to have counsel in this case?
22. Were notified of your failure to perform under the signed and binding LOU/Retainer and what steps have you taken to comply with such Demand Letter see EXHIBIT (). Have you performed on any of your obligations since such notice and have you reported such liability as contained in the Demand Letter to your insurance carrier? If so, please provide details and copies of the filings with your carrier.
23. Did you request Mitchell Welsch to have Eliot Bernstein replace P. Stephen Lamont as Acting Chief Executive Officer to sign the Letter of Understanding and Settlement documents?
24. Have had any conversations regarding Iviewit with Isa or Mitchell, or any third party regarding Isa & Mitchell Welsch & Iviewit since your breach of contract and failure under the LOU/Retainer, if so provide all details and records and correspondences regarding such conversations.
25. Have you or any partners of your firm or family members ever received any for of compensation from any member or affiliate of PR, LLP?
Christopher & Weisberg, P.A. - Alan Weisberg, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. When were you first contacted regarding Iviewit by Schiffrin & Barroway and/or any other party?
2. Describe your previous relationship with Schiffrin & Barroway both personally and professionally? Provide all details, correspondences, and phone records regarding all call, meetings, or conversations with party involving Iviewit.
3. Have you or any partners of your firm or family members ever received any for of compensation from any member or affiliate of PR, LLP?
4. When did you receive Iviewit original patent documents and upon whose order and from whom did you receive them? Provide all correspondences, mail receipts, and inventory signatures for all items transferred to you?
5. Did you have any conversations with Krishna Narine, Eliot I. Bernstein and P. Stephen Lamont regarding the retention of your firm by SB and were arrangements made based on your relationship with Krishna Narine for legal representation of Iviewit as patent counsel for Iviewit and what terms were discussed for your engagement and payment.
6. Provide all details regarding your canceling your engagement with Iviewit and who gave orders to stop working on the Iviewit account?
7. Were any pertinent filing dates approaching when you stopped acting as patent counsel for Iviewit and had you notified the patent office that (a) you were Iviewit’s counsel and (b) you were no longer going to be Iviewit counsel? What patent applications were you charged with filing as Blakely Sokoloff Zafman and Taylor was turning over such filings to your firm for filing? Were these two filings due within a 24 period of your termination and refusal to continue working as Iviewit patent counsel.
8. When did you send the Iviewit original files back to Blakely Sokoloff Zafman & Taylor and upon whose order and from whom did you send them? Provide all correspondences, mail receipts, and inventory signatures for all items transferred by you?
Proskauer Rose LLP - Mara Lerner Robbins, Esq. & Gayle Coleman, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe each transaction you preformed work on in regards to Iviewit corporate structure, patents, audits, stock issuance or corporate affairs.
2. Were you ever aware of any problems with the Iviewit patents?
3. Were you ever aware of any problems in the corporate books or patent portfolio’s?
4. Did you perform audit work for Arthur Andersen and Ernst Young? If so, please describe the outcome of such audits and provide all correspondences and work papers.
5. Did you know Zakirul Shirajee, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein were inventors of Iviewit technology who created such technologies together.
6. Provide all information relating to work that you may have preformed with Raymond Joao or
7. Eliot Bernstein
NON-CULPABLE PARTIES
Directors, Officers, Advisory Board, INVESTORS and Outside Professionals or Consultants
If you are in this section of parties involved with Iviewit, the Company management, at this time, after review of all documents has NO documents or evidence leading to your involvement in any alleged malfeasances. We are asking that any questions posed to you and any information you may possess be copied and sent with your signed, sworn statements to the Company and that upon reviewing such responses, the Company will offer a limited waiver in regard to the current Company lack of evidence involving you at this time. We ask that all materials and statements be forwarded to Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq. as a carbon copy to the address listed below:
Cornell Partners
Attention: Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq.
1949 Cornell Avenue
Melrose Park, IL 60160
Martyn W. Molyneaux, Esq. - Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Maurice Buchsbaum
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Ross Miller, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe when and how you became involved with Iviewit from your first meeting through your employment.
2. Who introduced you to Iviewit and describe your past relationship with them.
3. Describe all meetings correspondences and personal and proffessional relationships regarding Iviewit with the following people and firms.
4. Christopher Wheeler
5. PR
6. Maurice Buchsbaum
7. H. Hickman Powell
8. Stephen Warner
9. Crossbow Ventures
10. Sachs Sax & Klein
11. Furr & Cohen
12. Did you provide Sachs Saxs and Klien with answers to querstions stemming from the law suit between PR and Iviewit. Did you hire Sachs, Saxs & Klien on behalf of Iviewit and did you notify the officers and Board that such law suit had been filed against the Company. Provide all documents regarding your involving Sachs, Saxs & Klien.
13. Are you aware of any personal relationship between Spencer Sachs & Christopher Wheeler?
14. Did you hire either Sachs, Saxs and Klien to represent Iviewit in an Involuntary Bankruptcy filed against the Company by Brain Utley, Michale Reale, RYJO (Ryan Huiseman) and Raymond Hersh?
15. Provide retainers for the retention of these law firms that you engaged, provide the exact time you were notified of these law suits?
16. Did Eliot Bernstein contact you regarding the law suits claiming that he had been notified by members of Warner Bros. that suits and bankruptcys were in process against the Company and question how such actions could have not been expressed to management or the Board?
17. Did you inform Mr. Bernstein that you had not notified anyone, except Bill Kasser of this law suit and involuntary bankruptcy.
18. Who filed the original answers in these cases on behalf of the Company and did you review and approve or author them?
19. What was Bill Kassers title at the Company when you came in as interim CEO?
20. What was Raymond Hersh’s title when you came in as interim CEO?
21. Why was Brian Utley terminated from Iviewit and why was the Boca Raton office closed and moved to Los Angeles.
22. Were you aware that Brian Utley threatened the life of Eliot Bernstein and what course did you recommend to Mr. Bernstein for himself and his family?
23. Did you ever become aware that documents and equuipment were being altered by Utley, Wheeler, Reale or others?
24. Did you ever become aware that Brian Utley and Michale Reale had stolen equipment and monies from the Company? What actions did you take as interim CEO to recover such equipment and monies?
25. Where you aware that investment from Bruce Prolow was missing complete signed documents and what actions did you take to protect the Company?
26. Did you become aware of Brian Utley writing patents into his own name or adding himself to patents with the aid of Iviewit counsel Foley & Lardner without Company knowledge?
27. Did you review the PR billings for innacuracies and what did you find?
28. Did you meet or ever talk with BSZT and what was the nature of the calls? Was it disclosed to BSZT that possible inventor fruad and content fraud had occurred?
29. Did you become aware that Goldstein Lewin & Co. had failed to provide tax returns and other documents to Arthur Andersen in an audit?
30. Provide all Board meeting notes from Board meetings that you attended and copies of all Board notes sent to you?
31. Were you aware of license deals being structured with Irell & Manella for the use of Iviewit technologies and was this information conveyed to Crossbow Ventures?
32. What dollar amount did you tell Board would be invested for Crossbow to gain security interest in the patents and was it conveyed to the Board that these secured interests were a mechanism to protect shareholders from actions against the Company by Wheeler, PR, Utley and other creditors? Did you sell such secured loans for Crossbow to the Board of Directors?
33. When did Powell leave the Board of Directors and had Simon Bernstein already notified you that it was highly unethical for Mr. Powell to sell secured loans while maintaining a Board seat? Did you then act as representative for Crossbows secured loans once Mr. Powell left the Board?
34. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
Crossbow Ventures™
H. Hickman Powell, Stephen Warner, Renee Eichenberger, Matthew Shaw & Ravi Ugale
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. List all dates you held any position with Iviewit. Describe the circumstances regarding your departure from the Board and provide your letter resignation.
2. Describe how you met Iviewit and what role you played in making Iviewit policy decisions.
3. Describe all loan transactions you were involved with for Crossbow Ventures/Alpine and the date of each transaction and the amount of loan.
4. Provide all transactional documents for every loan?
5. Were you a Board member when Alpine secured loans with the Intellectual Property of the Company? Define how you sold these secured loans to the Board, what promises were made and the rational behind a security interest?
6. What is your relationship professionally and personally with the following individuals: Maurice Buchsbaum, Stephen Warner, Renee Eichenberger, Matthew Shaw, Christopher Wheeler and Bruce Prolow. Include any relationship with your firms and these individuals.
7. Provide all Board minutes sent to you or your firm.
8. Provide all stock certificates held in any Iviewit Company with your firm.
9. Provide information regarding the financial reporting done in complaince by Iviewit management and accountants for your firm and include any information for requests for audit information that came or did not come timely.
10. Provide all documents and correspondences between any attorneys and your firm with regard to Iviewit and any information gathered from the Company’s and it’s attorneys and accountants in due diligence for your investments.
11. Do you know the following individuals and what their roles were with regard to Iviewit? Provide detailed information including any expense reports in regard to any meetings with the following:
a. Jude Rosario
b. Zakirul Shirajee
c. Jeffrey Friedstein – Goldmnan Sachs
d. David Colter – Warner Bros
e. Gregory Thagard
f. Douglas Chey – Sony
g. Kenneth Rubenstein
h. Raymond Joao
i. William Dick
j. Raymond Hersh
k. Aidan Foley
l. Lawrence Mondragon
m. Bruce Prolow
12. Provide all information regarding the Intellectual Review done on behalf of Crossbow/Alpine and what attorneys were used and what attorneys were contacted. Provide any/all documents relating to this review.
13. Do you or your firm maintain copies of the Iviewit patents?
14. Why did Alpine invest approximately four million dollars in Iviewit Holdings, Inc. and attempt to take assignmenet for Intellectual Property in Iviewit Technologies, Inc. Were you aware of any Intellectual Property in Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
15. Did you ever meetings in any way personally or telephonically with Kenneth Rubenstein opining on the Ivieiwt patents?
16. Did you ever receive business plans with Kenneth Rubenstein listed as Iviewit patent counsel?
17. Describe your involvement or knowledge of Zeosync and did you attempt to induce Warner Bros. Representatives who had traveled to West Palm to meet regarding Iviewit to invest in Zeosync. What happened to Zeosync and what was the nature of their busines, how did you get involved in the Company and would it have posed any conflicts with technologies of Iviewit.
18. Describe your trips to California and the representatives you met with and clients of Iviewit you met with. Was it conveyed to you that MovieFly a five studio movie download project would utilize the Iviewit processes as the core technology driver for the delivery of such movies.
19. Did David Colter make statements that WB was using Iviewit technology across a broad array of products including DVD’s and Broadcast transmissions as well as all websites owned and operated by WB?
20. Describe the meeting at Sony Pictures with Douglas Chey. Was it further confirmed that Sony would be using Ivieiwt technologies for MovieFly and other hardware and software applications? Were digital camera’s discussed that would utilize the Iviewit process.
21. Can you state and provide all documents for the exact amount of loan for the Tiedemann/Prolow investment and any effects it may have had on your loans to the Company. Were apprised of this transaction prior to the transfer of funds? Did you know that fund had been transferred without Board approval or review of the loans from Prolow?
22. Describe the accounts of Jack Scanlan and what status reports were forwarded to your firms for review, what did these reports indicate.
23. When did you become aware that Brian Utley had written patents into his own name and added himself to patents that he did not invent?
24. Were you apprised that Brian Utley had threatened the life of Eliot Bernstein?
25. What actions did the Board and your firm take to remove Mr. Utley, Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Dick and others involved in the patent malfeasences and other management related crimes?
26. Were you aware that Michael Reale had attempted to bribe and steal money from Iviewit?
27. Were you aware that Brian Utley had stolen highly proprietary equipment from the Company and diverted to Mr. Prolow’s distance learning Company?
28. Were you aware of the circumstances leading up to Mr. Bernstein relocating his family into a hotel for safety and not returning to Florida for several years?
29. Were you aware of any management document destruction or other media destruction?
30. Did Aidan Foley meet with Crossbow/Alpine to discuss his meetings with major studios and present revenue projections based on his discussions with these Studios.
31. Did Aidan Foley meet with Crossbow to prepare for meetings for an AOLTW investment of $20 million dollars in the Iviewit Company’s, did you instead disuade Mr. Foley to prepare a bankruptcy plan whereby Crossbow would be the ultimate benefactor of the technologies and effectively wipe out all other shareholders? Was this discussed with the Board or any other management prior to your meetings with Mr. Foley and Mr. Mondragon.
32. Did you attempt to intercede with AOLTW’s investment group and have conversations with them to gain insight into the investments they were contemplating making. Did you directly contact Mr. Colter to get anmes and numbers of the investment group handling the Ivieiwt investment and what were the outcomes of these inquiries.
33. Do you know Heidi Heidi Krauel of AOLTW investments? Do you know of John Calkins of WB investments?
34. Did you tell David Colter that Crossbow Ventures would back Iviewit throughout the investment review of AOLTW and assure him that funding would not cease so that he would have confidence in approaching senior management with the knowledge that Iviewit was a solidly financed Company with very secure funding sources.
35. Did you attend meetings at Warner Bros. whereby it was determined that Iviewit would take over the entire encoding operation of WB and were you given longterm projections for the encoding of the entire WB & Sony movie libraries using Iviewit processes?
36. Did you assure David Colter and others that financing for Iviewit would continue so that WB turning over their encoding lab and terminating their employees who had prior handled such operations would be funded so as not to cause any loss of time or abilities to provide content across their differnet media sources?
37. Were you advised that AOLTW/WB, Sony and Paramount were in various stages of legal documents to draft licenses for the use of Iviewit technologies? Did you attend meetings with Irell and Manella law firm regarding the structure of license agreements and encoding agreements with major studios?
38. Please review EXHIBIT () by David Colter to AOLTW/WB investment groups that states that Iviewit’s greatest threat appears to be Crossbow Ventures and that they have acted in bad faith. Define what Mr. Colter may be referring to in this letter and your interpretation of the meaning.
39. Explain for what amount of investment you think Crossbow Ventures was entitled security interests in the patents and did you claim to the Board that these interests were to protect the shareholders from threatened actions by Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Utley or any other creditors? Did you claim to the Board and directly to Simon Bernstein that in no way would Crossbow Ventures use the secured interests in what you termed a “Machiavellian plot to steal the technologies” from the shareholders?
40. When did you first become aware of a law suit against Iviewit by PR?
41. When did you first become aware of an involuntary bankruptcy against Iviewit? Did you ask Iviewit management (Aiden Foley, Lawrence Mondragon or Ross Miller) to counsel Furr & Cohen, Bradely Shraiberg regarding the outcome for Crossbow Ventures if such Bankruptcy was successful? Whose attorney was Furr & Cohen’s, Iviewit or Crossbow Ventures?
42. Did you ever contact Iviewit’s patent counsel Blakely Sokoloff Zafman & Taylor? Please describe all conversations with this law firm and the outcome of the conversations. Were you asked not to contact this firm? Did you pay this firm directly to act on the patents in ways that Crossbow Ventures had determined were in its best interests? Was the money loaned to the Company and are there transactional documents to support this transfer? Had Board members or Officers approved of this transaction?
43. Did you request that BSZT send entire Iviewit files to Crossbow Ventures as you had paid for their services and therefor felt that the files were the property of Crossbow Ventures?
44. Please describe the entire Crossbow Ventures deal with DiStream Interactive and the transfer of securities in Iviewit to DiStream. Give the exact dates that the securities were purchased from Iviewit and the exact day that they were transferred?
45. Are you aware of patents written by Royal O’Brien or others at DiStream that are replicas or similar in nature to the Iviewit patents?
46. Did you tell the West Plam Beach Post that Crossbow Ventures had sold the Company Iviewit? Who did you notify at Iviewit?
47. Did you recommend Ross Miller to the Iviewit Board and what relationship does Crossbow or any partner of Crossbow have with Ross Miller. Did Ross Miller transact the secured loans on behalf of Corssbow Ventures.
48. What decisions were made by Crossbow with regards to the Iviewit patents?
49. Did you get advised by Eliot Bernstein to cease and desist contact with any Iviewit clients or investors bases upon your dealings with iviewit’s clients or potential investors? What led to such cease and desist letter? What conversations or actions did Crossbow Ventures take that initiated such letter, who was contacted by Crossbow Ventures?
50. Did you transfer proprietary and confidential trade secrets and patent applications to DiStream Interactive?
51. Describe all conversations relating to Iviewit with the West Palm Beach Post and what was discussed in regards to retracting your earlier cliams of selling a Company that you did not own?
52. Do to conflicting information, what were the securities transferred to DiStream and what interests did you gain for such transfers?
53. Describe your termination from Iviewit in any capacity and the events and reasons leading up to your termination. Provide information on every position you have maintained since your departure.
UBS/Paine Webber Inc. - Mitchell & Isa Welsch
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe your personal and professional relationship with Schiffrin & Barroway LLP. When was the first time you presented the Company Iviewit for investment and legal service to the firm?
2. Describe the deal structure that you controlled between SB and Iviewit?
3. Describe your personal deal with Isa Welsch and Iviewit, how did you stand to gain from the SB/Iviewit relationship?
4. What is the relationship between you or your father, Marvin Welsch with any past or present member of the law firm PR? Were any persons known to you or your father, ever contacted at PR, LLP, regarding Iviewit?
5. Have you had any contact with any members of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP regarding Iviewit matters since 8/5/03 and if so provide all correspondences and phone records.
6. Did Iviewit request that you return all property to Iviewit on 8/13/03 and report your involvement with SB/Iviewit to your direct report and if complied with please provide details and copies of all correspondence. If you did not comply, provide deals as to your reasons for noncompliance.
7. Have you or your father, or any other family member ever received any compensation from any member or affiliate of PR, LLP?
Eliot I. Bernstein
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Simon L. Bernstein
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Provide all information, dates and times included for your meetings with Hassan Miah, Gerald Stanley and Real 3D. Describe the nature of the meetings with each and the conclusions reached. Were you present when Hassan Miah claimed that the video invention was the “Holy Grail” of Internet video and what did you take this to mean?
2. When asked by Gerald Stanley of R3D the value of the technology at a meeting held in the Orlando offices of R3D, what did Rosalie Bibona state the values of technologies to be worth? Did Mr. Wheeler arrange this meeting for disclosure assuring the Company that all the patents for imaging and video were secured? At the meeting was any patent counsel Mr. Wheeler arranged to have present telephonically namely Kenneth Rubenstien and Raymond Joao present for one minute of the entire day of meetings with their engineers and patent counsel? Was Mr. Wheeler “selling” the Iviewit technology to his referral at this meeting and opining on behalf of his patent counsels review?
3. Describe your understanding of the relationship of Kenneth Rubenstein to Iviewit. Please refer to the Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum EXHIBIT () whereby Mr. Rubenstein is listed as an Advisory Board member and as patent counsel for the Company. Was it your understanding as Chairman of the Board (“COB”) that the information contained in the PPM is true and correct?
4. Are you aware of the patent pools overseen by Rubenstein such as MPEG and were you ever assured royalties if the Iviewit patents were essential to MPEG and palced in the pools he oversaw?
5. Did you ever attend meetings with Wheeler whereby he made opinions on the technology to any third parties or introductions of his for investment or use? Did you ever hear Mr. Wheeler opine as far as Rubenstein’s role as patent counsel and advisor to the Company.
6. When were the first checks you paid for investment into Iviewit and how did Christopher Wheeler and Gerald Lewin arrange for initial monies to be invested?
7. When did you meet Wheeler in regards to the inventions and were you under the impression that he was hired to patent the technologies with his firm and that it was further his firms suggestion to use both Kenneth Rubenstein and his partner Raymond Joao to file the patents properly?
8. Describe if as Chairman of the Board you were aware that PR charged approximately seven hundred thousand dollars for corporate general work and expended only one hundred fifty thousand for patents between all patent counsel with the bulk of that patent work repairing and correcting flaws in the patents?
9. Did you attend meetings with Foley & Lardner, Christopher Wheeler, Maurice Buchsbaum, James Armstrong and Eliot Bernstein wherein problems with patent filings of Foley and Lardner were expressed, problems with Raymond Joao’s work were exposed, problems with mathematical equations existed in filings or problems with missing inventors existed and patents were not assigned properly. Do you recall in such meeting talking about potential shareholder and Officer & Director liabilities being discussed due to the assignment and inventor issues? Were you aware that the Company and yourself requested an opinion expressly relating to the potential liabilities from Foley and Lardner errors, Rubenstien/Joao errors and was Christopher Wheeler present and did he make claims to investigate any problems of Joao’s work and Foley’s work in relation to the shareholders and investors? Do you recall representing problems for shareholders such as Donald Kane and Huizenga and Mr. Wheeler assuring us that any problems would be resolved and any liabilities addressed to the Company? Did you receive such opinions on the liabilities from any of these firms?
10. When did you become aware that Brian Utley was an inventor of Iviewit technologies including naming himself as sole inventor or co-inventor on patents invented by Shirajee, Bernstein and Rosario? If you were noticed, by whom and when were you informed and what was represented to you? Did Eliot I. Bernstein ever represent that they had discovered Utley adding himself to patents he did not invent and were you under the impression that succeeding counsel was removing him from the patents he did not invent?
11. Did Eliot Bernstein inform you that he and James Armstrong recovered patents Mr. Utley had not been showing the inventors or Company whereby he was listed as an inventor replacing other true inventors? When were you notified and what actions did you take as COB to protect the shareholders, did you think succeeding counsel was correcting these issues at the patent office?
12. When was the first time you saw Iviewit technologies from your son Eliot I. Bernstein? Whom did he describe as the original inventors of such technologies? Are you familiar with any of the following original inventors, Jude Rosario and Zakirul Shirajee? Were others, such as Christopher Wheeler and Gerald Lewin aware of Shirajee and Rosario status as inventors and present at meetings with them?
13. Did Gerald Lewin and Christopher Wheeler accept stock in Iviewit and what was your understanding of the relationship between their firms and the Company? Did Wheeler have to take such offer to his partners for approval?
14. Was it represented to you initially by Wheeler (who recommended Utley to be CEO of the Company), by William Dick, or Utley that Utley and Dick had prior caused a certain S. Florida businessman, Monte Friedkin, to lose a business over patent misappropriation issues, causing the Company to be closed at his immediate prior employer to Iviewit, Diamond Turf Equipment? Please read EXHIBIT () Mr. Utley’s resume and is this a true and correct copy of his resume as sent to you by the Company? As COB of the Company would you have hired Utley, Dick or Wheeler if you had prior knowledge of patent problems that caused closure of another business, would you have taken any form of protection for the shareholders?
15. Were you present at almost all Board meetings as COB and did you keep notes or were you sent notes by anyone, if so, whom? Please provide all minutes in your possession?
16. Describe the corporate structure that PR developed for the Company, were you aware of what companies held the patents and if so explain why the patents are represented as being in those companies?
17. Describe your reaction to finding out that Raymond Joao was an inventor with his own patents?
18. Are you aware that Wayne Huizenga, Jr. sent a patent attorney to the New York office of Proskauer Rose LLP to meet with Brian Utley, Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein and if so, are you further aware of the problems that were found in that review? Was Huizenga’s attorney so dismayed at the state of the patents that he refused further investment in the Company?
19. Were you present at a meeting with Gerald Lewin and Christopher Wheeler at Huizenga whereby Huizenga refused a second investment in the Company? Do you feel that it was any fault of your own for their failure to invest, did you get into a verbal disagreement with any Huizenga representative and if so what was the nature of the disagreement.
20. Were you informed that Cris Brandon had contacted Eliot Bernstein and told him there were serious problems with the patent review conducted by Huizenga Holdings?
21. Were you further informed that Eliot Bernstein was contacted by Gerald Lewin, Brian Utley and Christopher Wheeler whereby they blamed you for having lost the Huizenga investment at the meeting because of your argument with senior management at HH? Did Eliot Bernstein further inform you that Lewin, Wheeler and Utley had demanded that you resign as COB and that Eliot Bernstein replace you as COB?
22. Did Wheeler attempt to have Utley as CEO of the Company and if so did you vote for his being CEO of the Company and if not, why?
23. Did you as COB ever impose a monthly spending limit on Utley in regards to the excessive legal billings being generated with his friends Christopher Wheeler at PR and William Dick at FL? If so, what monthly amount did the Board agree on and did the Board vote it on?
24. Where were all initial Board meetings held and were Christopher Wheeler and Gerald Lewin present at all or most as Board members or advisors. Had you ever seen the video technology, prior to the full day meeting you attended at R3D for disclosure of the technologies? Did you find out that day that Kenneth Rubenstein and Raymond Joao failed to file patents for such technology timely and that there were no patents filed for the video technology as prior represented to the Company before the meeting? Do you recall stopping the meeting to verify that patents had been filed by calling Joao and Rubenstein who were supposed to be present telephonically but were mysteriously missing all day until after the meeting when Wheeler contacted them and informed us that he was wrong and patents had not been filed? Did you prevent Eliot Bernstein and others from disclosing Iviewit inventions at that meeting due to the lack of protection offered to the shareholders?
25. Was the video technology displayed at the meeting but the process left undisclosed?
26. Are you aware of the disclosure meeting that followed whereby an open line cell phone was discovered in the jacket pocket of Lewin who had been asked to leave the Company disclosure by the inventors and that it forced the inventors to stop disclosure until new arrangements could be made?
27. When did you become aware that Raymond Joao’s work had flaws that could lead to patent problems because of his failure to properly define the invention to inventors disclosures? Was Raymond Joao terminated for this and replaced by Utley and Wheeler referral Foley & Lardner?
28. Did Christopher Wheeler opine on behalf of his conversations with Kenneth Rubenstein regarding the problems with Joao’s work product and that all problems could be corrected?
29. Were you aware that Eliot Bernstein was dismayed that the true and correct inventors had been left off the patents?
30. Was it your understanding that Zakirul Shirajee and Jude Rosario were to contribute as consideration for their stock their rights in the inventions as Wheeler recommended for Eliot Bernstein to do?
31. Was it expressed to the Company that Rubenstein and Joao stated that foreigners could not be listed as inventors on US applications and that to get them added we would have to have PR get them admitted to the US as citizens? Did PR then undertake the task of getting them to become citizens and bill for such services?
32. Did it later come to the attention of the Company by other counsel that in fact foreigners of any status could be on patent applications and were we apprised by Wheeler that if this were the case he would immediately have Joao and Rubenstein add them to the patents?
33. Was it your understanding that Jude Rosario and Zakirul Shirajee were being added back onto the patents?
34. Are you aware of meetings that took place with Raymond Joao and the inventors of the Iviewit inventions whereby Joao came to Florida to meet with them and take further disclosures for patent filings?
35. As COB describe your oversight role of management?
36. When did you first become aware that Brian Utley had stolen equipment and might have stolen a briefcase of cash with Michael Reale? What protections for the shareholders were taken? Are you aware of a police report filed by William Kasser and Ross Miller?
37. Describe the Board meetings in which lender Crossbow Ventures began taking security interests in the patents? Was it represented by H. Hickman Powell that the secured interest was being taken to protect shareholders from possible suits from the firing of Utley, PR and FL and other creditors when they closed the Boca Raton facility and fired all senior management and past patent counsel for cause?
38. What were the causes of Mr. Utley’s termination? Had you ever been advised by anyone that Utley threatened your son Eliot Bernstein and that he would not be returning to Boca Raton, and called his wife and had her immediately pack up the children and move to California whereby the lived homeless at the St. Regis Hotel in Century City California until housing could be found. Was it Crossbow Ventures suggestion to fire Utley and Wheeler and any management or legal counsel they had retained and move the headquarters to California to a small office that had just opened in the Warner Bros. building and seek immediate replacement of management and new patent counsel? Were you in favor of this plan in light of the information concerning management that all related to Wheeler and Utley malfeasances and did you think this was the best strategy for shareholders considering the circumstances, in particular the securitization of the loans with the Intellectual property?
39. Did you ask Powell if the one million five hundred thousand loan that security would be taken with, could in anyway be used by Crossbow Ventures to take possession of the patents away from shareholders if they decided to foreclose with bad intentions versus the good intentions of protecting the shareholders from possible ramifications of Utley and Wheeler actions against the Company in response to any law suits that might have resulted?
40. Did Powell respond that it was not a Machiavellian plot of Crossbow Ventures to steal the technologies?
41. Did you further request that all shareholders and all loan holders receive equal secured interest in the patents? Did you get the Board to vote on this protection for the shareholders and was it ever accomplished to the best of your knowledge?
42. Where you ever made aware that Sony, Warner Bros., Paramount Pictures and others were in varied stages of licensing and encoding deals and that one particular project Moviefly-MovieLink a five studio digital downloading project was underway that would be using Iviewit video and imaging technologies?
43. Aidan Foley was retained as CEO of Iviewit once management had been fired, Foley had formerly been CEO of Kodak’s technology company Cinesite. After calls with top studio executives whom Iviewit was working with at Sony, AOLTW/WB and others, did Foley prepare a revenue projection for the download movie project and other Iviewit revenue streams and do you recall the numbers projected?
44. Did you attend any meetings with Aiden Foley when he and Larry Mondragon came to Florida to meet with Crossbow Ventures at their request. Was the meeting to talk about the business plan that would be being given to AOLTW/WB for investment of potentially twenty million dollars? Are you aware that Wachovia, Crossbow Ventures, and others had already spoken with AOLTW/WB executives and the Company’s process was being utilized in numerous ways throughout the AOLTW/WB domains of broadcast TV, DVD creation and scores of other areas as attested to by WB executives?
45. Are you aware of the fact that instead of a business plan to take to AOLTW/WB as Crossbow had promised representatives of AOLTW/WB that they were backing Iviewit throughout the negotiations and had already funded a million and half dollars for the California operation which had become the new headquarters for Iviewit?
46. Are you aware that Crossbow Ventures then directed Aidan Foley and Larry Mondragon to prepare a bankruptcy for Iviewit instead, after having already went to California and learned from Iviewit clients and counsel of the licensing and investment opportunities that were being formed? Was it your belief that Crossbow Ventures had then instead had a Machiavellian plot whereby they would do a pre-packaged bankruptcy with management to wash away the shareholders and emerge debt free without the shareholders and steal off with the patents as sole secured lender, and then go back to such clients of Iviewit and license the technology? Were you for or against such actions for the shareholders? Describe the effect such a plan would have had on the founding shareholders?
47. Please see the attached EXHIBIT () () (the WB letters from Colter to others) and explain why similarly AOLTW/WB describes Crossbow as having bad intent for the Iviewit shareholders and why AOLTW/WB management is dismayed that they had revealed all uses and many future uses for the technology directly to Crossbow Ventures, and further Crossbow was aware of the possibility of a twenty million dollar investment in the Company that had already been in review by top investment people at both WB and AOLTW, that a partnership had already been formed whereby Iviewit was processing WB video using the Iviewit process, a licensing deal was being negotiated for the use with top studios and suddenly Crossbow Ventures had instead prepared a bankruptcy?
48. Per Aidan Foley this plan was authored directly by Mondragon and Foley under the request of Crossbow Ventures, what was your reaction when a plan for BK was the only option new management and Crossbow had developed only days before meetings were to take place with AOLTW whereby they had anticipated a business plan with Crossbow Ventures providing capital and co-investing alongside WB with the shareholders of Iviewit. Why does Colter in his letters state that WB executives were thought to have been involved in the pre-packed bankruptcy idea? Was WB involved in the plan to the best of your knowledge? Why does Colter refer to the negative impact to shareholders that he knew and cared about and that he is dismayed as this plan was never revealed to them and he had mud on his face with the management now from WB and AOLTW, as Crossbow had promised them they were funding the Company throughout the investment review?
49. When Crossbow Ventures ceased funding far short of the intended one million five hundred thousand dollars and forced Iviewit to lose their corporate headquarters and fail on their WB and other accounts and licensing deals, further attempting to taking possession of the Iviewit patent assets, what was your reaction and what protection and notification did you as COB do on behalf of the Iviewit shareholders?
50. Describe how Crossbow’s actions have affected the shareholders and what you have been doing alongside acting management as former COB during all of these events?
51. Were you aware that Crossbow Ventures came to California and had their representatives meet with Iviewit clients WB & Sony and patent licensing counsel Irell & Manella LLP who had been retained for approximately X dollars.
52. Have you been aiding the continuation of the investigations by P. Stephen Lamont and Eliot Bernstein into all of these matters? If so, how, including any personal financing of Eliot Bernstein while he attempts to regain the patents to the proper inventors and shareholders. Have you been notified by E. Bernstein and Lamont of a counter-complaint filed but never tried in the PR v. Iviewit suit, please see Exhibit (). Are you aware of their efforts on behalf of the shareholders in state bars actions in Florida, New York and Virginia? Are you aware of their efforts to bring charges against former management and counsel in Federal complaints with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in W. Palm Beach Florida, the Boca Raton Police Department in conjunction with the SEC, Federal actions with the United States Patent and Trademark Office with Office of Enrollment Director Harry I. Moatz.
53. Are you aware that Lamont and Bernstein have filed charges of fraud upon the United States Patent and Trademark Office against Iviewit former counsel Kenneth Rubenstein, Raymond Joao, William Dick, Douglas Boehm, Steven Becker and Alan Weisberg on behalf of the Iviewit shareholders?
54. Are you aware that the patent office is working directly with Eliot Bernstein and P. Stephen Lamont to suspend all applications for Iviewit, until such charges and errors can be investigated by the USPTO to determine the alleged the charges?
55. Did you allow Eliot Bernstein the use of your personal credit card to secure records missing from the patent files of the Company directly from the USPTO so that further investigation could be conducted by the Company into the malfeasances recently uncovered by the patent office?
56. Did you hire Christopher Wheeler initially at the suggestion of Gerald Lewin and was Lewin self charged with finding your family patent counsel to protect the patent ideas? Did Lewin suggest PR? Did Wheeler state that he had the perfect patent counsel, Kenneth Rubenstein at their New York offices? Did Christopher Wheeler recommend Raymond Joao to file on behalf of Kenneth Rubenstein, Rubenstein as overseer of the patents, as he normally did not file patents as stated in his deposition
57. Describe every meeting and the dates you met with Gerald Stanley, CEO of Real 3D. Was a NDA signed in PR offices with Mr. Stanley and were you present at a meeting Mr. Stanley arrived at Mr. Wheeler’s office for? Are you aware that Mr. Wheeler maintained an NDA for Mr. Stanley with all Iviewit NDA’s he maintained at the time? Was this meeting at Wheeler’s request and held a this offices with his friend Gerald Stanley weeks before you attended a disclosure meeting with R3D –(INTEL/SGI/LOOKHEED MARTIN) and if so what technologies did Mr. Stanley see and what was his reaction? Describe all parties present at such meeting?
Iviewit Acting CEO - P. Stephen Lamont
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. Describe the first time you heard of Eliot Bernstein and Iviewit and how you were introduced to them?
2. Had any Microsoft executives told you of the Company, if so, what were their names and titles?
3. Had you ever met or heard of Chuck Brunelas? What role did he have in securing a job for you?
INVESTECH/HUIZENGA HOLDINGS
Huizenga Holdings and Investech Holdings, LLC - H. Wayne Huizenga, Jr., H. Wayne Huiznega, Sr., Cris Brandon, Rick Rashod, William Schott, Eric Sims, Richard Handley, Robert Henninger, Richard Palumbo
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Marketing Entertainment Group of America, Inc.
Daniel Socolof
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. PIXELON – DESCRIBE ENTIRE INVOLVEMENT
SRO Consultants
Mike McGinley
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
McGhee Entertainment
Doc McGhee
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Warner Bros.
Chuck Dages, Gregory Thagard, Christopher Cookson, David Colter, John Calkins, Ted Leonsis, Stephen Case
and
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Sony Digital Pictures
Douglas Chey
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Selz & Muvdi Selz, P.A.
Steven Selz, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
1. How did you hear of Iviewit and Eliot Bernstein? What was the precise day that you met with Caroline P. Rogers, Esq. and what were you hired for to represent Iviewit for?
2. When you met with Eliot Bernstein was he fully aware of the circumstances of the PR case that Iviewit was involved with? Was Rogers fully aware of where the Company was in the case? Describe the case upon taking over, where was Iviewit in the law suit, what had been filed and by whom?
3. Describe what Eliot Bernstein conveyed to you initially regarding PR and pay particular to all information outside the scope of the billing issues that were before the Court. Upon receiving information from a variety of sources describe what other issues were exposed to you as far as patents, stolen patents, bogus resumes submitted to the Board by PR regarding a close personal friend of Wheeler, Utley, and were you informed that Caroline Rogers, Esq. had contacted Utley’s prior employer Monte Friedkin and found that the resume was materially in fact different than represented and contained false information regarding his background? Did Eliot Bernstein advise you of similar claims also conveyed to him by Utley’s former employer Friedkin? Was it further discovered that Utley’s prior employer had terminated for patent malfeasance and dispute, which forced the closure of his company Diamond Turf Equipment?
4. Were patent application copies presented to you with Brian Utley listed as a sole patent holder of certain technologies?
5. Was evidence produced that showed that Kenneth Rubenstein whom claimed harassment when you deposed him and wrote the following letter to the Court, see EXHIBIT () Rubenstein letter to the Court. Did you have completely contradictory information involving Rubenstein as more than a referral source for a singular introduction to another patent attorney Raymond Joao as he claimed? Did you receive billings which clearly showed Rubenstein in many occasions opining or being counseled by Wheeler and others regarding Iviewit? Did you receive copies of business plans and a certain Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum which listed Rubenstein as an advisory board member of the Company? Review EXHIBIT () Wachovia PPM and describe if this biography is exactly the same as submitted to you by the Company or if the first sentence is missing in Rubenstein’s biography to the plans you maintain? Have you ever seen EXHIBIT () and does it directly contradict deposition testimony supplied by Rubenstein and statements he made to the Court?
6. At what point in the case did Caroline Rogers, Esq. first request a counter-complaint be filed on behalf of Iviewit and when was it actually filed? How long did you review materials in drafting such counter-complaint and had you seen evidence evidencing the claims presented to the Court in the counter-complaint? Did many of the alleged crimes outlined in the counter-complaint take place prior to the PR law suit for money damages in a billing dispute? Did PR play a pivotal role in the counter-complaint charges and if so describe the claims against each of the partners that were alleged and what information had been presented to you? Did Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq. and P. Stephen Lamont supply information regarding the complaint and review and so modify the document in preparation for review and filing? Please describe the merits of the filing as you saw them when filing the counter-complaint on behalf of the client for such claims as were alleged? What happened when you filed the counter-complaint was it ever heard at trial, was it allowed into the case and if not, why? Did Judge Labarga review the evidence and make rulings? What did you convey did to Caroline Rogers, Esq., Eliot Bernstein and P. Stephen Lamont as the reasons the counter-complaint did not get admitted, had Iviewit counsel waived any rights prior or not submitted a counter-complaint at all.
7. Was an Iviewit trial ever scheduled, if so, what dates were trials scheduled to start? What day did trial ever start? Did you ever appear for a trial to find it cancelled?
8. What was the status of your bill at the time of your withdrawal as counsel for Iviewit? How long before your withdrawal as counsel was the trial being rescheduled for, when was the next court appearance after the unilaterally cancelled trial by PR
9. Describe SB deal and your relationship with the SB group? Did SB pay you and if so for what services? Did you review a settlement agreement for Iviewit with SB, if there were problems with signing the document in the 6-hour window originally posed by PR. How were you hired by the Company by SB and how did they ask you to leave the approximately two year case, days before trial was to be rescheduled and what reasons did you set forth in your withdrawal as counsel?
10. Who asked you to step down as counsel days before the trial and was a change of counsel instituted and was it SB’s intent to take over the case?
11. Describe the outcome of the trial and how Iviewit lost on a failure to retain counsel, had you ever been presented the SB/Iviewit deal, see attached EXHIBIT (). Was it your understanding that SB was going to act as lead counsel to litigate due to their failure to reach settlement with PR. When you were hired by the Company to review the PR settlement offer what corporate problems did you see doing the deal and the structure of the settlement offer, define its ability to protect the shareholders for whom you reviewed the settlement and any potential confidentiality issues that you were aware of. Were there issues of if officers could sign such a document without full corporate governance being fulfilled and further having an intellectual property review of the release done due to shareholder risks at releasing PR from all damages that may have occurred from any of the items listed in the counter complaint?
12. Did SB realize that there were far to numerous problems with the settlement document and then state that they were instead going to litigate PR?
13. Would you have quit the Iviewit account only days before trial with a fully paid bill if SB had not asked you to leave? Did Iviewit attempt to reach you to take the case after SB simultaneously withdrew as counsel stating that you would be taking over the case?
14. Did Eliot Bernstein come to your offices to pick up files of PR some 10 boxes from your offices so that he could try and find other counsel since you would not continue without upfront money that you were aware Iviewit did not have at that moment although SB had agreed prior to pay your fees for representation and you were aware of the signed and binding LOU/Retainer Iviewit had signed with SB. Did you inform Bernstein that the boxes were the property of SB. Explain why boxes copied by Iviewit and charged to Iviewit by Sir Speedy printing were the property of SB? Did you contact Krishna Narine, Esq. who claimed that the boxes were the property of Iviewit, why did Narine feel these were SB property and had already ceased representation of Iviewit and have no further need for such documents? With Court only days away were these files critical to Iviewit trying to get new counsel. Did you relinquish the files to Iviewit and did you have to secure a waiver from SB?
15. Provide an accurate account of all information and due diligence that SB preformed prior to trial, what records had they secured from you?
16. Have you ever, or your family received any compensation of any form from Proskauer Rose LLP or any affiliate directly or indirectly?
17. Have you ever, or your family received any compensation of any form from SB or any affiliate directly or indirectly?
18. Did you have a retainer with Iviewit? If so, please provide a true and correct signed copy. Did you have any other form of NDA with Iviewit?
19. Provide a copy of your paid and unpaid bill?
20. Were you supplied Iviewit proprietary and confidential materials? If so, where are such materials maintained?
21. When taking deposition testimony from all parties deposed where you present or counsel present for every deposition? Did you miss any that went ahead without Iviewit representation?
22. Were you aware that Eliot Bernstein in his deposition requested a read of his transcript before distribution and never received one? Was this deposition circulated and if so by whom, are you aware that Bernstein has ever been a read of such deposition? Do you maintain true and complete copies with exhibits for these depositions? Explain what a “read” of a deposition entails. Did Bernstein report this to you as soon as he found out that it was being distributed without even a copy being sent to him? What action did you take to notify the Judge?
23. Did you find that Kenneth Rubenstein had far more knowledge and involvement than his statements to the Court of harassment represented and non-involvement? Did you notify Judge Labarga that the deposition was in contradiction to his prior statements? What was the outcome? Were you notified and presented with evidence that completely refuted Rubenstein’s prior statements including references to him throughout the bill whereby he was counseled or counseling, including to investors, regarding Iviewit, although he had many hours of billing could you find a reason he did not bill for 1 minute of many hours of services rendered to the Company over a three year period?
24. Did PR ever deliver to your premises after production of documents had long been over, with additional documents? Where do you maintain such records and was there a document which clarely showed Mr. Wheeler transferring entire Iviewit patent binders to Rubenstein?
25. Did you find it strange that after being deposed documents suddenly appeared at your office from the Plaintiffs months after production? Describe the contents you received do you still posses a copy or the originals.
Kevin Lockwood
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Donald G. Kane, II.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Quintile Wealth Management
Kenneth Anderson
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Guy Iantoni
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
James F. Armstrong
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Clearview Networks
Aidan Foley
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Larry Mondragon
NEW MEDIA HOLDINGS LLC/Hirsch Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer Austen Mandelbaum & Morris
Alan Epstein, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Eric Chen
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
When did you first meet Eliot Bernstein and whom introduced you? Explain you relationship to Crossbow Ventures?
Caroline P. Rogers, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Mark Gaffney, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Jeffrey Klafter, Esq. -
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Intel Corporation - Larry Palley
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
and
Gerald Stanley, Former CEO Real 3D, Inc. acquired by Intel Corporation
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Boca Research, Inc.
Robert Ferguson
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Flaster Greenberg P.C.
Mark Garber, Esq.
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Arthur Andersen & Company SC
Ex-Partners
Any other Employee, Partner, Affiliate or other entity you or any relative may have interest in who received information regarding Iviewit technologies under Non-Disclosure Agreement or not.
Paraag K. Mehta
Tom Nelson
Mark Laurence Berenblut
John H. Coult
Brian L. Fox
Ken Sebock
Fernandez, Jorge
Marianna
Viche, Denise
Kenneth Anderson
Any AA former employees or partners who worked on any Iviewit or affiliate.
SHAREHOLDERS
If you are in this section you are considered a shareholder in any way and as such are entitled to the rights to know what has happened through the successive legal counsels, Directors, Officers, Advisory Board Members, Consultants, and Accountants that we have paid for and whom are also Shareholders in most instances. If you have previously been noted in other sections and you have information regarding these questions, please respond in writing by a signed and notarized statement of what information was made available to you, what pertinent information you may have or had in your possession, copies of any documents in your possession in any form. In your statements, if you have information on any of the questions for anyone on the correspondences then it would be required to respond with all pertinent knowledge.
Company makes no claims to these stock members having actual or perceived stock in the Company’s or patents they may have been led to believe. On information and belief, the Company and it’s current acting management have prepared to the best of our knowledge all stock transactions whether promised or written. Since the corporate records are missing full stock certificates and all records of their existence and any receipt of their existence, the Company refers to all stock transactions or mentions herein as highly doubtful information, whereby culpable parties who authored such documents may have had personal interests above and beyond the concerns of your shareholdings. The Company therefore suggests that you demand an audit of:
The Company’s business records including shares issued
Intellectual Property Review of any form, anywhere, regarding Iviewit inventions
Tax returns
Bank Accounts
After the Board of Directors, Advisory Board Members, Officers, Counsel, Consultants walked away from their fiduciary responsibilities to you the Shareholders, I, Eliot I. Bernstein individually and in any capacity for any entity herein or in any way related to Iviewit technologies or its affiliates and P. Stephen Lamont have taken steps to ensure your that these events have been well documented with Federal and State Agencies, since our learning of them. In acting as an officer of a Company whereby the Directors, Officers, Advisory Board, Outside Professionals and Consultants have abandoned your interests, I wish to express that I have informed many of them to the best of my abilities of many of the malfeasances for some time, and I am sure that each one will have an explanation for how they have been performing their fiduciary responsibilities for the shareholders as they were exposed and learned of many of the problems.
Estimate Shareholders
1999 Holdings
Eliot I. Bernstein
Simon L. Bernstein
The Joshua Bernstein 1999 Trust
The Jacob Bernstein 1999 Trust
Gerald R. Lewin & Barbara S. Lewin
Erika R. Lewin
Jennifer P. Lewin
James Osterling
James Armstrong
Guy Iantoni
Jill Iantoni
Andrew Dietz
Donna Dietz
Patricia Daniels
Bettie Stanger
Lisa Friedstein
Donald G. Kane, II
Brian G. Utley
INVESTECH Holdings L.L.C.
Emerald Capital Partners, Inc.
Emerald Capital Partners, Inc.
Iviewit Technologies
INVESTECH/Huizanga Holdings
New Media Holdings, Inc.
Proskauer Rose LLP
Zakirul Shirajee
Jude Rosario
iviewit Holdings, Inc. – On information and belief, missing all original records of transaction and Arthur Andersen also never gets confirmation of this transaction in an audit, upon direct request.
Holdings 2000
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Emerald Capital Partners, Inc.
Loans by Stockholders and Friends
Jason Gregg
Michael Reale
Mitchell Welsch
Ken Anderson
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Maurice Buchsbaum
Kevin Lockwood
Steve Sklar
Raymond Hersh (9)
Alan Young
Armstrong Hirsch Jackoway Tyerman & Wertheimer, P.C.
Tidal 4
Tidal 4
Andrew Dietz
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Happy Feet Living Trust
Heche Trust
Lauren Lloyd Living Trust
Tidal 4
Alanis Morissette
Scott Welch
Tidal 4
Provision for Employee Options
2001 Holdings
David Colter
Loans by Stockholders and Friends
Andrew Dietz
Tiedemann / Prolow II LLC
Ross Miller
Ross Miller
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
Alpine Venture Capital Partners LP
2002-2003 Promises
|New Debts 2002-3 | | | |
| | | | |
|Name |$ |% |Comments |
| | | | |
|Cash and Equiv | | | |
|Caroline & Geoffrey Rogers | |15% of all companies |Stock |
|Caroline |75000 | |Cash |
|Simon Bernstein |30000 | |Cash |
|Jeff & Lisa |6000 | |Cash |
|Lamont |1000 | |Expenses |
|Lamont | |6.5 |Emp Agreement |
|Lamont |410,000 |Calculate from |Salary – Less paid |
| | |employment contract | |
|Welsch |5000 | |See Agreement Lamont may |
| | | |have only been 1800 |
|Brett Howard |25000 | | |
|Anthony Frenden |20000 | |Salary |
|Eliot Bernstein |250000 | |Salary |
|Anthony Giordano |5000 | |Cash |
|Jack Scanlan |27000 | |Salary and Exp |
|Misty & Michelle Morgan |10000 | |Salary |
|Ted Bernstein |1000 | |Cash |
|Shirley & Simon Bernstein |12,000 | |Cash |
| | | | |
|Andrew & Donna Dietz |2500 | |Cash |
| | | | |
|EIB PERSONAL GRANTS FOR CASH OR | | | |
|EQUIVALENTS | | | |
|Molly Dekold |20000 | |Services |
|Ginger Stanger |20000 | |Loans |
|Joel & Robin Gonsalves |10000 | |EIB Loan Rent/Cash |
|Gregory & Gonsalves |2500 | |Loans |
|Cherrie Frazier, Crystal and Ashely |2500 | |Services |
|Gonsalves | | | |
|All Children of Joel & Robin Gonsalves |2500 | |Services |
|Bettie Stanger |5000 | |EIB Move |
| Paul Stanger |10000 | |Services |
|Michael & Nikki Stomp |20000 | | |
|Mitchell Zamarin |10000 | |Services |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|Total |34500 | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|Advisory Board Packages | | | |
|Gregory Thagard | | | |
|George DiBedart | | | |
|David Colter | | | |
|Stephen Verona | | | |
|Chuck Brunelas | | | |
|Did not see on cap table Scanlan |40000 | |Warrants - CPR he has |
| | | |contract |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|Employee Option | |2.5 | |
|Courtney Jurcak | | | |
|Tammy Raymond | | | |
|Matt Mink | | | |
|Misty Morgan | | | |
|Anthony Frenden | | | |
| | | | |
|RockItCargo Warrants 350 at 169 | | | |
|Ed Butler | |20 | |
|Joe Ryan | |20 | |
|David Bernstein | |20 | |
|Kevin Roach | |20 | |
|Barry Becker | |270 | |
Federal or State Agencies contacted regarding Iviewit
The New York Bar
Thomas Cahill
The 15th Judicial Circuit Court - The Honorable Judge Jorge Labarga
1. When was the Iviewit case first opened? Are you aware that Iviewit management had not told the Company that it was in a law suit until a WB executive pointed it out? Upon learning of the Iviewit v. PR case are you aware that Iviewit management immediately sought new counsel as when we approached prior counsel they suddenly claimed that the Company owed them money and they could not continue without immediate pay. Did you allow Iviewit attorneys to change counsel at this point in the case?
2. Did you enter into the case attorney Steven Selz, Esq. as Iviewit counsel?
3. When did you relieve Selz from attorney of record and are you aware of succeeding counsel SB’s entry as new counsel at Selz’s departure? Did you then allow both attorney Selz and SB to withdraw as counsel while both claimed that the other would be representing the Company?
4. How many trials were cancelled in this case and when and by whom were they cancelled? Were all parties notified?
5. Are you aware of the SB LOU/Retainer agreement whereby they had agreed to represent the Company in the PR case please refer to EXHIBIT () SB Deal.
6. Were you informed of this LOU prior to letting them go as counsel? If so, please detail with time and date that you first became aware of such LOU/Retainer?
7. After letting both counsels go, leaving Iviewit with no counsel how did you notify Iviewit? Did you ask Eliot Bernstein and individual and inventor to represent the Company before the Court and did he decline based on his conflicting position as inventor and Iviewit employee? Did you demand that he step forward to the podium and did you state that he was representative for the Company, and can an individual non-attorney represent the Company in any way with the Court in a situation to replace counsel? Are pro-se defendants allowed in corporate cases for if so I was grossly misrepresented by counsel, if so how could Bernstein succeed Selz and SB with no legal degree at this time? Did Bernstein not inform both representatives of PR and the Court with the name of P. Stephen Lamont the acting CEO of the Company and the Court would not allow him to be the representative if even he could as a non-lawyer make legal decisions. Was it then turned over to Bernstein to handle the case matters and filings from that point on? Did Bernstein provide several filings amongst them a request for removal from you as Judge on the case and did you rule on that filing??
8. If Bernstein could not plead pro-se how could he correspond at all with the Court on behalf of a Company that had no counsel? Should you have entered a default after allowing both counsels to abandon the Company with only days to find a new lawyer and nobody able to correspond or petition the Court. Did Bernstein ask for more time and you refused and granted a large law firm a default for Bernstein’s failure to replace counsel and grant no extension considering it appears that you may have let go of his counsel in err, especially in light of the SB LOU/Retainer?
9. Did you review the counter-complaint submitted by Selz? Did you realize that the alleged crimes were high crimes against Federal agencies such as the United States Patent & Trademark Offices and offenses that occurred far before the billing case began? Did you review any evidence in making your determination. Did it represent a problem that having knowledge of such alleged crimes against attorneys involved in the case that the actions should have been turned over for investigation prior to the billing case which in PR attorneys own words to the Florida and New York Bar was just a failed .com. In fact, if Iviewit were merely a failed .com would a two year billing dispute truly be worth anyone’s time.
10. Were you aware that Iviewit has patent pending technologies that have been estimated to be worth hundreds of million dollars to billions of dollars and that they had previously been termed “Holy Grail” inventions? Were you aware that H. Wayne Huizenga was an investor in the Company?
11. Are you aware that PR stated for attorney Kenneth Rubenstein that he knew nothing about the Companies and was being harassed and had no information and cited former President Brian Utley as his sworn witness that he was never patent counsel. Utley had recently been deposed and testified he never used Rubenstein as patent counsel or advisor are you aware that Rubenstein was found throughout a several year billing and was in possession of Iviewit patents and investors claim to have relied him? Please see EXHIBIT () Rubenstein statement to the Court pre-deposition and Rubenstein EXHIBIT () Wachovia plan sent by Utley to Crossbow, would this indicate that Rubenstein had misled the Court. Was the Court asked to re-depose Rubenstein who had begun to refuse evidence presented to him and answer questions between third parties that he influenced such as AOLTW/WB for the Company and then sent to your honorable Judge, clarifying
The Florida Bar
Lorraine Christine Hoffman, Eric Turner & The Chairperson for the 15C District
THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
THE BOCA RATON POLICE DEPARTMENT
THE SEC
THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
INVENTOR & NON-INVENTOR STATEMENTS
Statement for anyone named herein in any capacity
INVENTOR
Eliot
Zakirul
Jude
Jeffrey
Armstrong
NON-INVENTOR STATEMENTS
Brian G. Utley
Raymond Joao
ANYONE ELSE MENTIONED HEREIN WHO MAY HAVE ANY PATENT APPLICATIONS OR PATENTS, IN ANY ENTITY, OR FAMILY MEMBERS NAME THAT MAY LAY UPON CLAIMS YOU MAY HAVE LEARNED AT IVIEWIT, OR THAT YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF, IS REQUESTED TO COME FORWARD. PLEASE LIST EACH INVENTION YOU HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF AND WHOM MAY HOLD SUCH RIGHTS.
INVENTIONS INCLUDE, ANY KNOWLEDGE OF ANY INFRINGEMENT OF ANY KIND, OF ANYONE OR ENTITY OF ANY FORM, TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE IVIEWIT TECHNOLOGIES. INCLUDED FOR ANY COUNTRY, ANY PROVISIONAL PATENT APPLICATIONS, PENDING APPLICATIONS, PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS, ABANDONED APPLICATIONS OF ANY FORM, PCT APPLICATIONS, FOREIGN FILINGS OF ANY FORM OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THEIR RESPECTIVE PATENT SYSTEMS.
PRIOR ART. IF YOU HAVE INFORMATION OF PRIOR ART, PLEASE INCLUDE ALL PRIOR ART YOU ARE AWARE OF AND WHEN YOU LEARNED OF SUCH PRIOR ART. LIST TO WHOM AND DATE SUCH PRIOR ART WAS CONVEYED TO AND THE RESULTS OF SUCH PRIOR ART ACTS.
General questions for all
1. Have you or your firm, or any other family member ever received any compensation of any form from any member or affiliate of PR, LLP?
2. Describe your position at any/all other firms whereby you are a significant shareholder, advisor, partner, or any other relationship with any firm that in way relates to technology companies that may be benefactors in any way of Iviewit technologies and any knowledge you may have of infringers of the technology. Indicate all referrals you may have introduced the Iviewit companies to, whether they be for use of the technology, investment or any other reason.
3. Provide all copies in your possession of all business plans issued to you by Iviewit, all drafts and all Wachovia Private Placement Memorandums.
4. Describe your relationship to any/all of the above listed parties and any/all pertinent details as to the relationships in respect with your involvement to Iviewit.
5. Explain why Mr. Hersh accuses auditors of failing to provide work papers for auditors and how this led to inaccurate tax returns being filed.
6. Crossbow Ventures demanded audits and financial records in relation to their loans, describe the outcome of each demand in the letter attached and any/all correspondences and information provided to satisfy such demands. What was the outcome?
7. Tax returns are missing from the corporate records and upon review of the documents submitted by PR and Goldstein Lewin & Co. large gaps exist in the records. Provide all tax returns and work papers for the Company’s that you were involved with.
8. Gerald Lewin and Brian Utley are implicated in fattening up numbers in the attached EXHIBIT (_) provide detailed information regarding this transaction.
9. Employees have testified that upon termination Michael Reale approached them with a large silver briefcase of cash and attempted to bribe them to leave the Company and join him and Mr. Utley in a new adventure. Employees state that it was stated that the cash came from an Iviewit investor. Describe all circumstances involving this instance, where the cash came from, how much cash was in the briefcase? Where such cash was ultimately deposited or spent.
10. It was also relayed to employees that they would be compensated for giving information for the Iviewit processes and for information regarding which machinery was running the Iviewit proprietary processes and that further some of this machinery was taken from the premises and later returned under police investigation. Describe any/all equipment and software that you possess in any form, the exact details of where this equipment has been and under what authority you were allowed to take such equipment. If you purchased the equipment, please provide receipts, cancelled checks, and any agreements that were signed. What purposes were these machines used for, what companies were they transferred to?
11. In regards to a certain investment from Tiedemann/Prolow provide all transactional documents in your possession. Provide signed copies of the documents with all records of the transfer of funds. Provide your relationship with Mr. Prolow in any prior matters and how and when the Board authorized Mr. Prolow’s funds. Please provide all Board minutes and notes regarding this transaction that you either sent or were sent in regards to Mr. Prolow
12. Explain why Rod Bell, Esq. attorney for Crossbow Ventures was misled from auditing Iviewit Technologies for investment purposes and instead led to invest in Uview/Iviewit Holdings, Inc. by PR. Was there ever a Company named , Inc.?
13. Provide all prior involvement with Brian G. Utley in any/all past business relationships as it relates to your recommendation of Brian Utley to Board and Shareholders and other interested investment firms. Go through a line-by-line verification of Brian’s resumes and biography and confirm or deny each claim contained therein. We have provided two resumes for Mr. Utley for review as EXHIBITed in EXHIBITed in () In regards to Brian’s former involvement with Diamond Turf Equipment or Premier Connections, Inc. Explain any involvement in any affairs of these companies and describe what the outcome of his employment with each of these entities and the state of affairs upon Brian’s being fired or terminated or any other outcome you are aware of.
14. Explain your involvement with any patents written by Utley about his prior employment at the Companies named above and your involvement in any way with his patents or companies that led to his termination at Diamond Turf.
15. Explain and provide any documentation that would have been circulated to the Board of Directors regarding Mr. Utley
16. Your relationship in regard to the patents held in Utley’s name and how and why Mr. Utley is listed on patents and each and every contribution you are aware of that led to his being named as either a co-inventor or sole inventor on patents of the Company’s.
17. Provide a detailed account of your employment at any/all firms from 1997 to present with exact dates of transfer from each employer.
18. Have any investigators contacted you from any state or federal agency in regards to complaints filed by Iviewit. Provide dates and names of all investigators and the nature of the conversation.
19. Have any complaints been filed against you by Iviewit that you are aware of? Describe the outcome in accurate detail and provide all submissions received and sent in regard to every complaint.
Corporate Questions
Identify each of these companies, provide entire records in your possession for each Company, and define the inter-relationship of each Company and the shareholders of each Company. Define every assignment of every patent application to every Company that an assignment went to. Name the inventors listed on the application and any subsequent changes that were made. Are there any Companies that were formed that do not appear below, if yes, define and list all pertinent information. In each instance, provide Board meeting minutes that were sent to the Officers and Directors
General Corporate Questions
1. Describe all Board meetings attended by you and what was discussed and provide the minutes sent to you detailing whom sent them and if they are accurate to the best of your recollection. If you prepared the minutes or maintained them in the corporate record, provide all copies and any/all notes or tapes used in transcribing such.
2. Billing records
3. Tax returns
4. Shareholder tables
5. Investor correspondences
6. Provide copies of all stock certificates issued to you for any company and describe any stock issues issued to you in error and returned to the Company. Please provide all documents relating to any stock issues or cancellations including all returned checks.
7. Provide complete billing records for every company billed for by your firm both paid and unpaid.
8. Provide documentation of any nature regarding this Company and relation to the other companies
9. Detailed information Intellectual that may have been included in this Company in which the Company has no record or books as to existence other information from PR that certain intellectual properties of the Company are help by such Company
10. Why this Company is not to disclosed investors and auditors.
11. Iviewit, Inc. – Provide all information regarding the formation of this Company, where the shareholdings are and to whom they were issued, were the complete Corporate records are and why this Company is not to disclosed investors and auditors.
12. , Inc. – Florida
13. Is the benefactor of the IP referenced in the attached portfolio done by BSZT as sent to the USPTO
14. Provide all documentation and board meeting notes and all other correspondences regarding the changing of the name of this corporation to I.C., Inc.
15. Why this Company was not to disclosed to auditors and investors and inquiring minds alike
16. Iviewit LLC
17. Why IP property in this Company
18. All transactional documents relating to investment by Wayne Huizenga in this Company providing any prior investment that may have gone initially into other Company’s and ended up in Iviewit LLC. Checks and transactional documents pertaining to the Huzeinga investment in this Company and all documents as to how Huizenga transferred out of this Company, as no one else apparently did.
19. Regarding stock issuance to Jude Rosario and Zakirul Shirajee it was the Company’s understanding that they had contributed their patent rights for consideration of their stock, yet new records discovered show that a consideration of $625.00 was due instead.
20. How did this change in consideration occur
21. Was consideration ever contributed, send copies of all records and cancelled checks in regards to these stock issues.
22. What NDA’s and other agreements were help by LLC and what if any/all IP was held by LLC.
23. Where are the corporate books and when were they transferred from your possession and to who and by what authority
24. LLC
25. Describe the shareholdings and IP in this company
26. , Inc.
27. Why was this formed, who are the shareholders what holdings do these shareholders in each and every Company named or not named relating to investments by whatever shareholders are in this Company. Copies of all records, stock certificates and other pertinent records you maintained
28. , Inc. – Delaware
29. Is this the , Inc. named in the BSZT portfolio as having IP
30. Was it not the understanding of the Board that , Inc. would change its name to Iviewit Technologies to lose the .com stigma?
31. Iviewit Holdings, Inc. Delaware – Incorporated in 12/99 in Delaware
32. I.C. Inc., - Florida
33. Iviewit Technologies, Inc. formerly Iviewit Holdings, Inc.
34. Iviewit Holdings Inc. formerly , Inc.
35. Internet Train
36. Imedia
Patent Questions
1. Describe your knowledge of Eliot Bernstein, Zakirul Shirajee, Jude Rosario, Jeffrey Friedstein and James Armstrong and what role was represented to you about their status as inventors of the Iviewit technologies. Provide details such as exact date you met them and any disclosure conversation had with them. If you have taped conversations provide all tapes and transcripts in your possession and who authorized such taping and where all parties aware of such tapes
2. Describe the inventions held by Iviewit and what these technologies were being utilized for.
3. Describe all patents in particular stating date of disclosure, date of filing, entire history of assignments and to which corporate entity being specific to entities in cases were dual names exist. Provide all documents or copies in your possession of all documents relating to the patents, be it notes, cd’s, billings, telephone records, or any other data. If you no longer maintain these records, provide date, time and all records involved in the transfer of the documents and upon what authority you released the documents. Provide inventories for all records and who signed them.
4. Represent any patents that you may have seen with regard to the Iviewit technologies, were you sent copies, provide all copies in your or your firms possession or describe in detail whom they were transferred to and upon what date and provide all relevant materials in your possession documenting such transfers.
5. Detail any patents held in your name or any family member of yours name from the time of your involvement in Iviewit to present. Name all patents in your name that may have been held prior that were modified or changed since 1997.
EXHIBIT 1 - IVIEWIT COMPANIES
**RED COMPANIES INDICATE THAT SIMILAR NAMED CORPORATIONS EXIST
**BLUE DATES INDICATE NAME CHANGES
1/15/99
IVIEWIT CORPORATION – MISSING FROM ALL RECORDS
1/26/99
IVIEWIT, INC. – FLORIDA
5/21/99
, INC. – FLORIDA
6/11/99
LLC – DELAWARE
6/11/99
IVIEWIT LLC - DELAWARE
6/29/99
, INC. - DELAWARE
12/29/99
, INC. - DELAWARE
12/29/99
IVIEWIT HOLDINGS, INC. - DELAWARE
1/5/00
I.C., INC. - NAME CHANGES FROM
, INC. – FLORIDA
1/12/00 AT 9:00AM
IVIEWIT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
NAME CHANGES FROM IVIEWIT HOLDINGS, INC. - DELAWARE
1/12/00 AT 9:01 AM
IVIEWIT HOLDINGS, INC.
NAME CHANGES FROM , INC.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.